Home › Forums › Commentary › When Libraries Fall!
Tagged: retitling music libraries
- This topic has 10 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 1 month ago by MichaelL.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 10, 2013 at 9:13 am #12920rwv123Participant
While I follow the “go with the libraries who best represent the feel of a particular cue,” I also spread my songs around like a flask of schnapps at the prom. Now, I won’t harp on the issue of re-titling’s future, because it has been bored out…but I have a “what if” question.
I’ve read everyone getting into a chicken fight over the whole thing, but from a composer standpoint…are we safe from the potential fallout? IF, and when, it all goes down (fingerprinting, no more re-titling, etc), then won’t it be up to the libraries to fight to hold on to cues? Won’t they be reaching to grab straws? If there is a “cancel any time” clause, won’t it just be a stream of “give me my tracks back, Jack!” composers requests to libraries?
Will the end result be total collapse of the smaller libraries, who didn’t lawyer up and grabbed the fewest straws?
October 10, 2013 at 9:53 am #12925Art MunsonKeymasterPersonally I think it’s all “much ado about nothing” but there are many others who will violently disagree with me. ๐
October 10, 2013 at 9:59 am #12926Desire_InspiresParticipantI agree with Art (in a non-violent manner of course). I am steadily placing songs exclusively and non-exclusively.
October 10, 2013 at 10:23 am #12928MichaelLParticipantWith respect to exclusive works. It really depends on 1) what the contract with the library says, and 2) whether or not you transferred the copyright to the library.
If the library cannot perform its side of the bargain, the contract should be void, in which case I would argue that you are no longer obligated to perform your side of the bargain, which is exclusivity.
If you did not transfer your copyright (AND YOU SHOULD NOT) the library owns nothing. The music is yours.One caveat: it is possible that in the fine print of the contract, which many overly hungry composers won’t bother to read, it may say that the exclusive right to your music is assignable or transferable. In that case the library may try to “sell” your exclusive cues to another library.
With respect to non-exclusive works, the library owns nothing.
October 10, 2013 at 11:08 am #12932More adviceGuestCan we please stop talking about the E and NE looming “fall out”?
It’s exactly what Art said “much ado about nothing”. I’d say 99.9 percent of the folks out there in our world of production music do not want to litigate, investigate, interrogate, and police what’s going on.
This is why it appears as though AS looks the other way when they know some composers have their stuff retitled in other places. Is it worth their time to investigate the sea of 12 billion tracks on 30 different sites to hold those accountable? Probably not.What composers and libraries do want is satisfied customers, placements, license fees, and checks showing up at the door, in paypal, direct deposit, all of the above ideally.
The litigation BS is for the super rock stars with well known songs who get cranky when a big brand rips them off and makes a national commercial. No one is concerned with everyone’s ukelele and U2-like didies providing a wallpapered background for TV shows and corporate videos,….and the occasional TV spot. That’s my 2 cents on the entire matter.
October 10, 2013 at 11:25 am #12934MichaelLParticipantThe OP didn’t ask anyone’s opinion on whether or not a collapse would happen. He asked what the legal ramifications are IF it does happen.
I gave him the legal answer.October 10, 2013 at 11:52 am #12935Art MunsonKeymaster+1 More Advice!
@MichaelL. I may have jumped on an unintended bandwagon but it was sure to go there. ๐October 10, 2013 at 12:03 pm #12937woodsdenisParticipantOne thing I do know is that when a lawyer answers a question, be sure to read exactly what they say or write. Its their job to be precise !! LOL
October 10, 2013 at 12:06 pm #12938Desire_InspiresParticipantThe litigation BS is for the super rock stars with well known songs who get cranky when a big brand rips them off and makes a national commercial. No one is concerned with everyone’s ukelele and U2-like didies providing a wallpapered background for TV shows and corporate videos,….and the occasional TV spot. That’s my 2 cents on the entire matter.
Agreed.
October 10, 2013 at 1:55 pm #12946rwv123ParticipantThanks for all the input….ukes and U2…that’s great. I’m definitely on the side of nobody is going to care about the smaller stuff. It really was sparked by my lawyer waving a fist at me and saying a particular opt-out any time contract was actually binding in ways more than I was originally led to believe.
Agreed the argument is beaten. just wanted to clear what would be our end of it. Thanks to all thoughts and advice!
October 10, 2013 at 2:16 pm #12947MichaelLParticipantIt really was sparked by my lawyer waving a fist at me and saying a particular opt-out any time contract was actually binding in ways more than I was originally led to believe.
NO doubt a contract drafted by some sneaky snake in the grass lawyer…
Damn lawyers!!!!! ๐ -
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.