- This topic has 23 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 2 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Hi all,
Today I’ve noticed several detections in different channels for the same tv ad on Tunesat. After researching a bit, I’ve found a Youtube video of the 20sec ad. My question is, now what? I’m with BMI. Where can I report this stuff ? this is the very first time I see an advert and I’ve joined Tunesat just a couple of days ago. I appreciate any help
My question is, now what? I’m with BMI.
Get a Competitrack account. If it shows up there (you will need to search for the product or company) and use the ad code to submit to BMI. BMI only pays off of a Competitrack ad code, AFAIK.
https://musiclibraryreport.com/forums/topic/competitrack-how-do-we-use-it/
Try this https://www.numerator.com/contact-us. They have made it harder.
Attention everyone, especially stupid stock music licensing sites that just let clients quickly license music for TV spots with no questions asked. Just roll out the red carpet baby and click BUY! Do not ask any questions ever about who is licensing the music for TV spots. Continue to disrespect our business and cheapen it down. Continue to make sure anyone can get a track for any TV spot project easily with no questions asked.
You see what I am getting at folks? We are now entering very unprecedented times. There once was a time when licensing music for TV spots was an important matter where producers would ask for a quote. they would indicate:
1. The name of the advertiser/ product brand
2. The name of the agency licensing the music
3. The country and region the spot would air in
4. The first air date and the number of weeks/ months/ or years they would rent the composition and sound recording.What the hell is everyone doing now? Just rolling out a cushy red carpet and saying “take it, no questions asked…just click buy and throw that track on your spot and we will leave you alone.”
Yes indeed this is my impression of where things are at and this needs to stop right now.
This is total insanity and 100% unprecedented nonsense. I call on every writer to dial up the pressure on the publishers and stock music licensing site operatoirs to change this garbage approach to music licensing as soon as possible.
I am learning about spots on air more and more these days by just watching TV and also Tunesat. Doesn’t everyone realize that there are thousands upon thousands of dollars to be collected in performance royalties for these tv spot campaigns?
Do some due diligence and start making some noise about this topic. TV spots pay big time royalties. TV spot music licensing needs to be treated with more care now, not later.
I don’t know about you guys but I am really tired of stock music sites just blatantly disregarding the information that should be gathered when they issue a license for a TV spot.1234,
I can’t tell you how many placements that Tunesat has picked up and BMI missed. When I call BMI they basically say thanks for joining and F you.
I was thinking about getting a Source Audio account because they show actual videos of placements, not just audio clips but BMI would still argue that they can’t acknowledge the amount of times a cue was placed. They do the same with Tunesat.
My beef is not with the PRO’s. It’s the stock music sites’ total disregard for who is licensing music and for what kind of project. They simply do not want to ask the clients this information for fear that they may lose the purchase. Their goal is to make licensing music as easy and as fast as possible, and it should be for internet only projects, but when a client is creating a national branding campaign or worldwide advertising campaign, they better start asking some questions starting with my list above.
I know exactly what is going on here, they are all pouting and crying that they do not collect the publishing performance royalties so they have no incentive to ask questions about end usage. The attitude is “what’s in it for me?”
PROs will never just pay like magic. We have to prove to the PRO (File a claim) that the music is ours. This has always been the case but I just find it disgusting that some of these stock music sites do not want to help their writer contributors by mining this data at the point of purchase.
We’re literally down to relying on TUNESAT (which does not detect everything) and watching TV to get information as to when our music is being used on TV spots. This is unprecedented and it’s quite pathetic in all honesty. I never thought we’d see the day when big national brands are tapping into stock music sites and getting tracks for just $250 or so, but those days are definitely upon us. I can guarantee you that 9 out of 10 brands and advertisers would be more than willing to serve up the information about 1st air dates and length of time they intend to use the track but the stock sites simply want to be extra nice to everyone and not bother them.
Meanwhile hundreds of thousands of dollars go unclaimed because of this stupidity and reckless approach to licensing music into TV spot campaigns.
Tunesat, Scott specifically, if you are listening lower your price for your service and you will get a lot more willing users of your technology. Your price of $667 a month for monitoring 500 tracks is way too high. This is 8K a year and that price is way too greedy and unsustainable for an individual writer. I think a reasonable price for individual writers who want to monitor their catalog is $100 a month for 500 tracks
Hey there colleagues,
can anyone shed some light on Source Audio? Why is it different/better compared to TuneSat or Numerator?
Thanks 🙂
https://www.sourceaudio.com/plans-pricing/
https://www.sourceaudio.com/tv-channels/
Not sure if they are quite there yet with monitoring. We need worldwide monitoring not just USA monitoring.
https://www.sourceaudio.com/collect/
They need to explain exactly how the deal works. What royalties , precisely, are they collecting? I am not interested in .0000000000001 royalties. I am very interested in $5, $10, $20, $50, $80 royalties from National TV spots airing all over the world.
Meanwhile hundreds of thousands of dollars go unclaimed because of this stupidity and reckless approach to licensing music into TV spot campaigns.
Which is EXACTLY how the PRO’s like it. Money to move around to their pet projects (composers / publishers) or wherever they see fit.
can anyone shed some light on Source Audio? Why is it different/better compared to TuneSat or Numerator?
Source Audio will be more accurate with detections BUT,
Source Audio can ONLY detect IF your file is watermarked (with Source Audio) before placement in a show. Anything you have already placed, Source Audio CAN NOT detect!
Tunesat detects WITHOUT a watermark. I would imagine Numerator is the same.
Sorry, I’m shouting but this has come up many times before.
Which is EXACTLY how the PRO’s like it. Money to move around to their pet projects (composers / publishers) or wherever they see fit.
Ha Ha Ha! Good one LA Writer! Let’s not forget that wall street really has their hands in our business these days. When “private equity” gets their hands on these institutions clearly they are not motivated to pay writers:
https://www.tennessean.com/story/money/2017/01/04/private-equity-firm-buys-sesac/96149874/
https://www.billboard.com/articles/business/7646930/sesac-blackstone-acquisition-details
Tunesat detects WITHOUT a watermark. I would imagine Numerator is the same.
Numerator is not in the business of charging writers for the data they mine about air dates and “occurrences”. It’s a business designed to help advertisers audit, study, analyze each others media buys and creative work. Example: Burger King’s ad team needs to spy on McDonald’s ads (the amount of spots they are buying and the creative approach) and vice versa…Numerator helps companies with that kind of info. But they help us by showing us how many times a spot airs. PRO’s don’t always get that right either.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.