Neighboring Rights Royalties

Home Forums General Questions Neighboring Rights Royalties

This topic contains 17 replies, has 6 voices, and was last updated by  MichaelL 2 months ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 18 total)
  • Author
  • #30346 Reply


    Hello all,

    A friend of mine in the UK brought this up in an email the other day and is looking into it. Apparently as composers and artists it’s possible that we are missing out on another revenue stream. There are agencies, not PROs, that collect these royalties minus a commission.

    Has anybody out there had personal experience of this?

    I’m interested to find out more.

    best to all


    #30350 Reply

    Art Munson
    #30364 Reply


    Cheers Art I’m checking them out.



    #30379 Reply

    Abby North

    The neighboring rights (public performance royalty in the sound recording) society in the United States is Sound Exchange, but the US concept of neighboring rights is different from that of most of the world. Those 75-some countries that signed the Rome Convention have reciprocity with one another when a sound recording is performed. Different territories have different distributions for the sound recording vs. performer.

    Sound Exchange was created by statute. It administers the master performance royalties from satellite radio, webcasters and some other entities. 50% is allotted to the sound recording owner, 45% to the featured artist and 5% to the non-featured artist (paid by SAG AFTRA and AFM).

    A record label may not recoup advances from the performer share.

    Ex-US, Germany now gives reciprocity to the US for some performances (radio, tv, etc), and fortunately, a few other territories are moving in that direction.

    The AFM SAG-AFTRA Intellectual Property Fund pays Symphonic, A/V and SR royalties to non-featured musicians.

    PPL is the UK neighboring rights society, and I highly recommend you consider affiliating there in addition to at Sound Exchange

    #30380 Reply

    Art Munson

    Thanks Abby North, I always learn so much from you!

    #30382 Reply

    Abby North

    My pleasure, Art!

    I realized I may not have been entirely clear about the fact that the United States is NOT part of the Rome Convention, which is why we do not have reciprocity with many territories.

    If a sound recording by a United States citizen is recorded outside of the US, most societies will pay performance royalties for that recording. Also, if a US recording features non-US citizens, those performers will likely receive performance royalties for the sound recording.

    Also, by this: “Different territories have different distributions for the sound recording vs. performer.” I meant that different neighboring societies have different splits for the SR owner, the featured performer and the non-featured performers.

    Take care,

    #30383 Reply


    Thanks Abby, Iā€™m checking with sound exchange. Do I need to inform BMI. Or is this completely separate from PROs. Cheers. BobG

    #30385 Reply


    I’ve been increasing my efforts to “Chase the Pennies”. I’m developing an appreciation for Abby’s field of work. Rights Management is a complex issue. My to do list includes…
    1. ASCAP
    2. Harry Fox
    3. Music Report
    4. PPL UK
    5. Sound Exchange
    6. Common Works Registration (CWR)
    7. Updating Library of Congress Registrations.

    There also seems to be a division between the US/Europe & Asia. I’ve not yet figured that out.

    My head hurts. šŸ™‚

    #30386 Reply


    Very informative stuff,thanks Abby.Taking a look at PPL right now.

    #30700 Reply


    I started to register a PPL account, but I don’t know how this can affect my agreements with libraries.

    Especially this:
    “To join as a recording rightsholder member, you must give PPL the exclusive UK public performance and broadcasting rights in your recordings, so that PPL can license those uses of your recordings on your behalf.”

    Any thoughts?

    #30701 Reply

    Art Munson

    Any thoughts?

    Probably best to contact an attorney. It’s complicated stuff. Did you watch our video?

    #30702 Reply


    Hi Art, thanks for your entry!
    You’re right, it’s complicated stuff…
    I just got the answer from PPL: “PPL do not license library music so in any case this would not affect your agreements you have in place in relation to music libraries.”
    Then I don’t understand why I must give the exclusive rights to them?
    Hmm… seems to be tricky.

    #30767 Reply

    Abby North

    This is all extremely complicated, but here’s my two cents: PPL doesn’t license library music, but it’s not always clear what is and what is not library music. If a work has been in a library but it has also been commercially released, there may in fact be a neighboring right.

    #32321 Reply

    Les Hurdle

    Library Music/Production Music does indeed carry the same Neighbouring Right as commercial music. So far PPL have refused to acknowledge this.

    Yes the PPL exclusive license prevents you from collecting for PM … it is a dumb deal, but then we are dealing with suits !

    You can join eg; NRG but they will want ALL of your catalog on an exclusive bases plus 15%
    please a 500 Euro buffer before they will pay you.

    NONE of this is complicated you need to get off your duff and fight for what is yours


    #32324 Reply


    NONE of this is complicated you need to get off your duff and fight for what is yours

    Actually, it is complicated and broad statements can open a can of worms. For example, the Untied States does not officially recognize neighboring rights. The closest thing here is what Sound Exchange collects for featured performers and producers within the narrow scope of non-interactive digital performances on DSPs.This does not include typical uses of production music within productions.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 18 total)
Reply To: Neighboring Rights Royalties
Your information: