- This topic has 33 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 4 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
I would like to hear peoples thoughts on this…..
From a JP songwriter….
So I’m not crazy… the JP FAQ says this, word for word:
“you give Jingle Punks the right to non-exclusively place your music in our clients media content worldwide for a license fee based on usage, clients budgets, etc. ”I never had the impression that Jingle Punks was mostly just giving our music away for free, and it seems a lot of people are not aware of that either, and now I see why – the site doesn’t say so. Maybe it says so buried in the legal contract that no one reads, but if the site contradicts that contract, which one applies?
That’s not to say that I wouldn’t have signed up anyway, but it would certainly have helped manage expectations. My excitement at having a couple of songs placed in “the summer’s hottest show”, which airs across North America, dampened pretty quickly when I found out (only through digging through these boards) that not only would I receive no upfront licence fee, I’ve got a slim-to-none chance of even receiving PRO royalties. Add mine to the voices that are saying that Jingle Punks could/should be a little more upfront about this info, and it is not unreasonable to have expected a forthcoming upfront fee for a placement, since the FAQ specifically says “for a licence fee”, not for free…
Also later in the FAQ it says “When we get paid for a placement we cut you a check for your fifty percent.” Note again it doesn’t say “IF” we get paid for a placement, “in the rare instance where we get paid for a placement”, etc… it says “WHEN”. I think these points, intentionally or not, are confusing people and actually contradict what JP staff are saying on these boards, which is not the greatest of business/communcations practices. A few suggestions:
– the FAQ should reflect reality, e.g. clearly state that we are also licencing you to give away our music for free without any compensation whatsoever, upfront or via PRO in many instances (I realize that JP doesn’t control how the PRO’s distribute payments, but they are aware of how they work and the fact that for cable they only pay for a select 8 hours/quarter, which I’m sure a lot of people are not aware of) so it’s not unreasonable for them to be open about this info as well)
– the reality should be more publicized, the only way I found out that JP is mostly giving my music away and that for the most part I have approx. 0.03% chance of ever getting paid *anything* (most placements seem to be cable, and for cable usage you only get PRO royalties *if* your song happens to play during the right 8 hours out of approx. 2196 hours every quarter, = 0.03% chance of payment).I think for JP to keep the trust and loyalty of their contributors, it would be nice if these contradictions were addressed/corrected.
Also as other people have mentioned, in exchange for all this free music we are providing for JP to give away (and they are not collecting any subscription fees?), it would be nice to at least have some metrics or stats, be notified of usage (is it really too much to ask that a client provide reporting on when they’ve used the music that they’ve obtained for free? Is our music really of that little value?)
Don’t get me wrong, JP is a nice service and I understand the issues they are facing in terms of “major label” artists undervaluing their work just to get placement, shows expecting things for free, etc., I just think JP could be doing a better job of clearly communicating how all this works, how many/what percentage of placements ever result in upfront fees, stats on search hits, downloads by song, etc… with this info we can make an informed decision about whether to join at all, what songs seem to be working best, etc… rather than just the random lottery it seems to be… upload your song to the black hole and hope your friend tells you about hearing it, or pay TuneSat $20-100/month to track the usage of your songs that you’re not getting paid for anyway… hm.
Hopefully this is seen as the constructive criticism it is intended to be. Just thinking out loud, perhaps venting a little.
Cheers,
SKDhttp://support.jinglepunks.com/jinglepunks/topics/the_faq_does_say_for_a_licence_fee_not_for_free
If you follow the link http://support.jinglepunks.com/jinglepunks/topics/the_faq_does_say_for_a_licence_fee_not_for_free
which is at the end go bigg rome’s post there is an answer from JP about this. It seems a bit disingenuous to post a question on a different forum (MLR), without also posting the reply which in a large part corrects a lot of the assumptions made by the OP.
Art: Have you had any issues with recent Scripps placements showing up on your Tunesat that are licensed through them?
I do have placements on Design Star also. It’s too bad that this is happening but JP does get a lot of other placements, that do pay, so I guess we have to live with it.
The problem seems to be that some of the production companies produce shows for Scripps as well as PRO paying networks and the libraries feel they have to take the good with the bad. This was relayed to me by Scorekeepers at one point. But, as someone mentioned here, Scoreepers keeps track of Scripp shows and pay the composers. I got a check at the end of last year for those placements. You won’t get rich on it but it’s at least something.
I last posted about this on the JP forum just a day ago. I’m the Michael at the end of the topic “The FAQ does say “for a license fee”, not for free… ” I posted because a while back, Dan, the JP co-founder said they would not issue blanket licenses to Scripps networks anymore because they did not pay backend. Then I saw a JP user post that recently TuneSat picked up Scripps networks placements of his or her music.
I trust that Dan gave us truthful information, so one of these four scenarios must be happening:
JP is now paying sync fees to composers for these placements, like ScoreKeepers.
The Scripps Networks are now paying backend.
The JP artist was mistaken about his or her recent Scripps networks placements.
Scripps networks licensed the songs under the blanket before JP stopped issuing them.As you say, no response from JP, but it has been taking awhile over there for responses to any question.
I personally cannot accept a placement that pays no sync fee or royalty as a cost of doing business. My music should not be on broadcast TV for zero in compensation to me. The library is getting paid, so why not me? My music has value, even if it is the lousy $1.50 in backend.
JP has a FAQ – “Is it possible that I will I ever receive no license money from a placement?” There are three reasons listed why:
1) any placements made under this will generate significant royalties
Not the case here.
2) placements made here will be beneficial for both you and Jingle Punks promotionally
A 14 second background placement buried under the dialog on a cable TV reality show is not good for me promotionally. Nobody really hears it or cares.
3) it will lead to paid placements by this client in the future.
In this case placements by this client in the future will also mean no sync fee or backend.
Again, I trust Dan’s at JP information. It’s probably not a big deal, just a misunderstanding. Seeing as you guys are seeing recent Scripps networks placements from JP, it must be that these were licensed before JP stopped issuing the blakent. Hopefully, JP will clear it up soon on their forum.
Nope, never got any response to that on the forum or via email. I posted a new topic today because I saw the blog post you are referring to. Stop by and make a post:
http://support.jinglepunks.com/jinglepunks/topics/new_travel_channel_special
” I did contact several people at the production company, but never heard back from anyone so I have no idea where they got it from!”
Ah… ye old catch 22. This is just one of the reasons some producers and libraries are moving away from re-titled music. To quote one library owner…”our clients got tired of composers calling them up, to ask them which library they got their music from.”
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.