- This topic has 142 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 1 month ago by .
-
Posts
-
@Greg the article that you linked from FMM says the following:
“1. Work with some qualified music attorneys familiar with film and television work to develop some standard contract language to cover these areas and provide reasonable, fair royalties for composers in these circumstances.”
Unfortunately, Scott was never part of any contract negotiations with the producer. His intellectual property was given away, and his right to control the public performance of his works denied because of his deal with JP.
The real question, then, is was it worth it? Has Scott made enough money from other placements of THAT piece of music to cover his loss of royalties from this transaction? If not, he essentially gave away his property rights and the only winners are JP and the DVD producer. Reminds me of the story of Jack and the Beanstalk. As long as composers are willing sell the “cow” for a handful of beans, you can expect uncompensated placements to be commonplace.
I had a piece used in the show JAG a few years back, through a library. I received a sync fee for the program placement and a second payment when the show was was released on DVD. How times have changed…
I just sent an e-mail to JP and asked if they would like to respond. We’ll see…
Ian
While I agree with you that commitment to quality is key, I don’t think you can define quality based on live vs. samples. That is, if by “samples” you mean anything virtual and not live. We certainly know very experienced composers who make a living (including major placements in film and network) and use zero or near zero live performers.
But yes… mediocre tracks result in pennies earned. Quality is the one thing you can control. Now more than ever, it’s critical to up your game. If you can’t do it alone, network with other composers for collaborative efforts. Get your tracks in libraries that are not in the blanket market. No one said it would be easy.
😀
Ian…
I think you mean simplistic advice. If someone has an individual style, but writes electronica, exactly which “real performers” would you have them hire? I’ve already pointed out Zack Hemsey’s “Mind Heist” as a cue done with samples in his apartment that will make him nearly 7 figures.
I recently got paid the equivalent of a few hundred “placements” to produce an orchestral collection for an exclusive library…using samples. Samples only get better every day. You are simply missing the boat.
But…the real issue here, is that your “advice” isn’t particularly relevant to a discussion of the Jingle Punks business model.
First, I’m going to guess that you are from the UK. Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong. The library business is a world unto itself over there. You have different aesthetics, are governed by different rules and regulations AND real performers are a lot less expensive.
Now let’s look at the big picture.
1) The vast majority of writers on this forum are not professional composers. They barely make enough money to justify continuing. How, and why, do you expect them to hire “real performers?”
2) Many of the writers here are “artists” who write “songs.” They are in the licensing business, not the library business, as you most likely think of it, e.g. the KPM world.
3) It is nearly impossible for 99% of writers to get into a library that will pay for production costs.
4) Please tell us an area where the use of samples and/or hybrid orchestration doesn’t dominate? Please don’t say BBC documentaries.
5) The libraries themselves often ask for music that “sounds like.” How do you suggest that a writer develop his/her individual style when the mass market demands imitation rather than innovation?
6) Many professional writers throw cues into this arena (mass market) to generate another revenue stream.
Perhaps you have a skill set and greater financial resources than the writers whom you believe are “going about it all wrong.” Kudos to you. Be grateful, but please don’t look down on others for trying.
It could be they are overwhelemed right now with all the artists calling and emailing about this exclusive issue. It’s only about a week since this announcement. Maybe in a few weeks, when things calm down, things will return to more “normal”… We shall see. Breathe in… Breathe out…
The bottom line is, like it or not, JP’s business model is built around blanket license deals and they will do what they need to survive. And we all have free choice as to which libraries to put our music in. Their deal was non-exclusive up to now and their contract is fairly short term, meaning pulling tracks (if you choose to) is easy. No one’s been harmed and many of us had placements. Dissapointed, but not harmed…
I’ve always known that their model gives strong preference to their in house team as composers. But on the positive side, that opened lots of doors for the rest of us. They were able to build good relationships with the right people. If, for example, Jingle Jared custom composed a theme for a TV show and as a result of that was able to get a blanket licensing deal for the rest of the library, I’m VERY OK with that. In fact, happy about it.
I’m much more interested in what happens in the industry as a whole than what’s going on with JP.
😀
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.