Is this typical?

[daveydad]

I am used to a 50/50 split with most libraries I have signed with. This one wants the following. How do you feel about their policy?

“In return for this service the writer will agree to a writer split of 1/3 each in the publishing agreement with the publisher wishing to take the track. This will mean that there will be four names on this agreement – the publisher, the writer and the A&R team who are known as the ‘interested parties’ or ‘co-writers’ in the writer and publishing agreement.”

[Tbone]

So the A&R team want a percentage of the writer’s broadcast royalties? That sounds terrible to me and I probably wouldn’t sign if so. I’ve never had any company take a percentage of the writer’s PRO royalties.

What is the ‘service’ they’re offering? Is it above and beyond publishing?

How will it be a 1/3 split if there are 4 interested parties? Is it Composer 33%, Publisher 33%, A&R 1 16.66% and A&R 2 16.66%?
Is this a UK company?

[daveydad]

Here’s what they state. Yes, they are in the UK.

In return the A&R Team will make suggestions for the required improvement, if any, to the track’s arrangement, editing, length and production for optimum placing possibility. In return the A&R team will also attempt to place the track with a music publisher.

[Philtunes]

I know it is late in the evening. However, I would not consider a deal of this sort. You are signing your ideas, creative skills and ingenuity away. The company are not offering anything but a slim hope of placing your music. Personally, I feel the music publishing is not a good deal either…. A music publisher still has to find an artist to record a particular song to do this they will need to have lots of conversations with artists, managers etc.

I would assume the music they are interested in is an actual song and not an instrumental piece.
I would advise caution before you agree.

[daveydad]

This was for an album of 10-12 instrumental tracks. I’ve decided to pass on it. Thanks for the feedback!

[Mark_Petrie]

Here’s a Public Safety Announcement:

This particular company is trying to be a middleman between composers and libraries – but it’s completely unnecessary and borderline predatory. Ask yourself, do they really deserve to take a cut of your writer’s share from work you did entirely yourself, for the rest of your life, and then for 70 years after you die?

It’s not hard at all to find willing libraries to accept tracks for free, especially exclusively. You’re literally adding to the library’s valuation and they barely have to lift a finger.

I’ve certainly split the writer’s share before, not just with actual co-writers but when writing for a show or film where the credited composer has established a palette and set of themes. But never with an ‘A&R’ company.

[Author]

Posts