This topic contains 18 replies, has 6 voices, and was last updated by Dan W 2 months, 3 weeks ago.
- January 23, 2019 at 10:05 am #31555
MichaelL, I mean Non-Exc libraries that that reports to PRO´S. In your opinion, there’s no problem with putting that same music on RF sites?January 23, 2019 at 11:50 am #31556
I mean Non-Exc libraries that that reports to PRO´S. In your opinion, there’s no problem with putting that same music on RF sites?
If the agreement is truly non-exclusive, there’s nothing contractually to prevent you from putting the same music into RF libraries. As far as reputation goes, if you’re talking about the kind of libraries that send their catalog in bulk to editors and music sups, I’m not sure that anyone cares if you have the same tracks in RF libraries.
An issue could arise if you belong to a non-US PRO that has the exclusive right to control the music that you’ve registered with them and does not allow members to direct license their music.January 23, 2019 at 3:08 pm #31557
Thanks MichaelL, your comments are very useful for the decisions I am making.January 30, 2019 at 12:04 pm #31568
I know Google punishes duplicate content in searches, like two web pages containing the same content. That being said, I have not bothered to re-title my track on various online libraries. It is a lot of work to track different variations on my paperwork, and there doesn’t seem to be enough benefit. I will alter the descriptions a bit depending on the field requirements of the library.
Other times I change the track title because of the way the music was submitted. For example, AJ allows you to bundle track variations into a .zip file, but P5 only takes single tracks. In this case, I’d upload the compiled zip to AJ under one title, and the different variations to P5 with more specific titles to note the differences in instrumentation, etc.