- This topic has 4 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 2 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
So a while back I gave a Library 8 tracks exclusively. After that I sent them 5 more which they passed on. I recently found that they are only marketing 5 of the original 8 on their site but, also one of the other 5 I sent them that they rejected. All tracks were re-titled but I have been sending out that one track and have non-ex contracts for it and have even sold it on another site. I have all emails between us and file transfer history to prove their mistake.
Do I tell them about the one track ?
Or do I just wait till May 2014 and terminate per the contract ?
Lastly why would someone give me a contract for tracks exclusively and then re-title ?Contact them now.
Exclusive deals are not written in stone. Libraries want to make money from songs. The library should definitely release the song that was originally rejected. You have proof and can show that the song was formally rejected. They made a simple mistake.
As far as the three songs that are not being marketed, the library may release those songs if they feel that they cannot make any money from them. I have had songs released from exclusive contracts. Most contracts state that the deal can be terminated if both parties agree on terminating the deal.
Do not hesitate. Send an email to the library with your questions. They will respond. Music libraries are businesses and want to make a return on their product. They may release songs if they feel they cannot successfully market and profit from those songs. You just have to be nice and ask!
You should definitely contact the library and straighten out the situation.
Their marketing one of the rejected tracks as exclusive while you may be putting in in non-exclusive libraries is a recipe for trouble.
As far as their only putting 5 of the original 8 on their website, that partly depends on whether it is the type of library that markets solely via the website or is that adjunct to other marketing (mailing out hard drives, CDs, mp3s, etc). It *could* be possible that they don’t feature all of a composer’s tracks on the site. That is, unless as I said, they are 100% a website based entity.
Some EXCLUSIVE libraries re-title to allow you to market the same tracks outside of the film/TV world. Let’s say their deal allows you to pitch your songs to artists, sell CDs, sell downloads on iTunes, etc. The re-title allows for you to collect any PRO royalties earned outside their scope. Also, sometimes they simply re-title to make a more descriptive title.
Here is another vote for contact them. I have a feeling I know which library it is.
I had something similar happen. I submitted a couple of non-exclusive tracks to a call for genre “X” and never heard back after several months, so I assumed I was rejected. I was surprised by the rejection so I went searching that genre to see what they had. I found my tracks in there and they were retitled.
I was all spun up about it and contacted them. It turns out they had accepted the track and simply forgot to send the schedule (or it went to spam). They apologized because and assured me the track was assigned to me the whole time. We are all human.I think you should contact them immediately to avoid them licensing it under the premise of being exclusive when you have it elsewhere.
As far as the re-titling of exclusive tracks. It has happened to me too. Maybe they already had that title, did you check? Or maybe it was too long, or they felt a different title would generate more interest. I consider them the experts in that respect.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.