- This topic has 19 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 1 month ago by .
-
Posts
-
Hi everybody,
I keep getting emails from Identifyy / Haawk, asking me to join them. This company deals with collecting royalties on behalf of composers/artists for music used on Youtube, Facebook and Instagram videos. I was wondering if this could somehow interfere with esclusive deals one may have signed with a library. Any thoughts? Thanks in advance.
This has been discussed many times here before. Try this link:
https://musiclibraryreport.com/search_gcse/?q=identifyy#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=identifyy&gsc.page=1
The search box is your friend. 🙂
“ Would you rather have a few dollars from an ad revenue system or a placement from Viacom / Bauer / Netflix / Marvel?”
The big content creators and broadcasters are pre-cleared, so don’t worry about that. And every big publisher I’ve worked with, that has placed my tracks with those big companies, also has their tracks in CID, with a company like this one.
Personally I sometimes make more from content ID in a year than I do from sync fees, and I get about 4 – 6 trailer placements a year.
Not an income stream you want to turn down unless you’re focused on royalty free licensing / micro-licensing.Mark Petrie thank you for sharing your thoughts and experience! As I’m not native mother tank I’m not sure if I understood this correctly. I’m not into micro licensing but deal with exclusive libraries.
Insl short your advice is to go on with Identifyy as music libraries and broadcasters will not have any issue with strikes as they pre clear all the music they use? Thanks in advanceEeer I meant native mother-tongue ?
“your advice is to go on with Identifyy as music libraries and broadcasters will not have any issue with strikes as they pre clear all the music they use?”
Sorry what I meant was that libraries should be using Content ID as another income stream… if you’re writing for libraries that will own the music (exclusive deals), then definitely DON’T register them Identifyy or any other Content ID company. The library should be the one to do that.
Also for non-exclusive deals, you have to watch out as some libraries won’t take music registered with a CID company. If you’re writing non-exclusively for ‘royalty free’ music / stock music companies, they often insist on you NOT signing your tracks up with CID. That said, there are non-ex RF libraries that are happy to let their composers do it, and have a simple system for white listing customers’ videos when necessary.
I just thought it was odd that that guy “Adam” – a library owner, would have such an outdated perspective on CID. It’s only an issue for clients that want to monetize or make their videos mostly ad-free. The big broadcasters and media companies are immune from this issue as they have separate deals with Google for their channels. Maybe he said that a long time ago? Content ID was a scary thing when it first came out but in recent years pretty much every mainstream library has embraced it as a significant extra income generator.
“If you’re writing non-exclusively for ‘royalty free’ music / stock music companies, they often insist on you NOT signing your tracks up with CID. That said, there are non-ex RF libraries that are happy to let their composers do it, and have a simple system for white listing customers’ videos when necessary.”
I had a recent conversation with Pond5 re CID. They are encouraging composers sign up with services like Identifyy. I read the same on Audiojungle’s website.
“just thought it was odd that that guy “Adam” – a library owner, would have such an outdated perspective on CID.”
It is indeed an outdated perspective, as CID protects both the licensee and the licensor. Yet, Artlist still markets itself with ads featuring content creators who look like a deer in the headlights, terrified of getting a copyright notice.
CID is here to stay and every serious, professional video maker/ youtuber / advertiser knows how to deal with clearing claims and so does ADREV and Identifyy. Basically the way forweard is every music producer should always FIRST release their production albums to DSPS (SPOTFY, APPLE, YOUTUBE), register the titles and ISRC codes at their PRO’s. Then upload that album to Identiffy, Soundmouse, TUNESAT, THEN, lastly shop the album with a publisher to represent your music to TV shows, films, marketing agencies, etc.
By operating this way you are claiming full ownership of the content first, as you should. Technology has come a long way to fully empower the original creator and limit middle men involvement. Take advantage of what empowers you and keeps you in total control of your intellectual property.
“Artlist still markets itself with ads featuring content creators who look like a deer in the headlights, terrified of getting a copyright notice.”
LOL! They deserve a medal of honor for manipulating music creators into the least fair and least favorable business model ever invented!
Thanks for your help. It is a somehow confusing subject. It seems that there isn’t a one size fits all answer to my question. Exclusive libraries are likely to not want you to be involved in CID and with non-exclusive it depends on a case by case basis. Maybe it’s better to ask them directly.
Thanks for your answer. Though I’m not sure I will ever go the RF route.
If you put your music in Identifyy/HAAWK, you will be locked into a three year contract with them. They won’t allow you to remove your music from Content ID unless you sell the copyright off.
The contract does not bother me but where are you getting the information from with this comment?
“They won’t allow you to remove your music from Content ID unless you sell the copyright off.”
Link please?
Whomever has your music registered with CID kind of has an upper hand advantage long term so I think you should upload to your account.
I’ve averaged about $2500 per quarter in the year and a half I’ve been with Identifyy. A friend of mine receives around $12K per quarter. There’s a not insignificant amount of money out there to be had.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.