- January 7, 2020 at 5:10 pm #33998cyberk91Participant
Glad I made everyone’s day ….I’m actually sittin here drinking JD typing to you all youtz and cuttin alts….ha ha life is good…..Happy New and may you all have a prosperous year…peace out 😀 VB StrongJanuary 7, 2020 at 6:30 pm #33999BEATSLINGERParticipant
I have a couple of predictions in 2020
1) Punk Bands will be getting a TON of Placements.
2) Scripps & Discovery will be in The Library Business
3) Little Teenage Girls on IPad’s will Dominate The EDM & Trap Markets.
Also, I have a feeling that Women DJ’s will be a MAJOR Force too!!January 8, 2020 at 4:17 am #34000KubedGuest
Happy New Year to all of you guys!
I’m really terrible at predictions though so, i’ll just keep working on my music 🙂January 8, 2020 at 6:27 am #34001Music1234Participant
Jared Left JP. Now that is change.
– The PRO’s need to morph into a government agency called “The Department of Music Royalty Distribution”. If any TV network can simply avoid paying ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC annual license fees to broadcast PRO Registered music, I’m afraid every TV network will follow suit. The PRO’s better get their shat together soon, and take some serious action. Composers will continue to undercut each other until we hit fractions of cents to rent a piece of production music.
Anyway, I am grateful for the run I had this past decade, but I can not get on the optimism ship for this next decade.This Discovery direct license issue foreshadows a bleak future for music royalty collections. I mean, I log into TUNESAT every day and hear my catalog getting pillaged every day…literally DOZENS of detections of air plays, literally EVERY DAY, that will never pay me, not even a fraction of a cent. This is not right. It’s overt theft, but it is a reality. My music airs on dozens of shows daily on DIY, HGTV, GAC, Travel Channel, Food Network, ESPN, ESPN 2, BTN, etc…. and I do not get paid. How is this legally possible? Someone (other than me) is profiting from the on air usage of my music. It makes me sick.January 8, 2020 at 9:59 am #34004AdviceParticipant
This is getting off topic and should probably go on it’s own thread but the subject of direct licensing came up.
Here is a little history: https://futureofmusic.org/article/fact-sheet/ascap-bmi-consent-decrees
Originally, direct licensing was created to benefit composers by not letting ASCAP/BMI have a monopoly. Obviously back then no one could foreshadow how it would come to be used decades later. Now TV production companies have figured out how to use this to their advantage and too many music libraries were willing to go along with it. Here in the US, we definitely need our representatives to step in and revise the consent decree/direct license laws. Sadly, getting someone in Congress to even understand what this is about is pretty tough. And we’re certainly not high on their priority list. It’s not like we’re farmers or rust belt factory workers that are large voting blocks. But we need to all be vocal and keep writing our representatives. Finding your reps, if you don’t know who they are is easy on the web. And they all have websites from which you can email them. We all spend a ton of time writing on forums. We certainly have the time to write our reps. I did it when the Discovery thing first became known and will keep doing it.
Best wishes for 2020!January 8, 2020 at 12:39 pm #34007StevenOBrienParticipant
I don’t think I’ll be putting as much of a focus on library music this year. I have ~200 unpublished tracks consisting of both re-worked RF music and new music that I was planning to finish up and shop around to exclusives, but the situation regarding royalties seems so volatile at the moment that I’ve become extremely reluctant to sign them away without having a better idea of how things will play out. I don’t want to be in a situation where they’re stuck in libraries for years, being placed in situations where they just won’t earn me anything.
I’ve been talking to the lead signer of a successful foreign pop-group recently who wants to license beats from me, so hopefully that’ll lead to greener pastures. But if not, I think I’ll be focusing web design/programming work for the next year instead of music until things settle down. 🙂January 8, 2020 at 1:54 pm #34010Music1234Participant
I always wonder how the owners of music libraries can consciously sign music into their catalog under an agreement that they will:
1. Exploit the music for music licensing opportunities, pay 50% of sync licenses sold to writers, then guarantee us that we will get 100% writers share for all TV show background cue placements….BUT…
2. They then sell DIRECT BLANKET LICENSE DEALS (that contains PRO REGISTERED MUSIC) to these TV networks that DO NOT pay ASCAP, BMI, nor SESAC. Hence, no back end royalty compensation is even in play…. Is this not overt theft and border line breach of contract? Since when did we sign deals that state “license my music but do not share the licensing revenue you generate from those Direct Blanket license Deals? Does anyone have an answer to that question?January 8, 2020 at 2:42 pm #34012AdviceParticipant
Actually, if you look at the contracts in most cases, there *is* a clause that covers it. I know in SK’s contract there is something that covers it. It may not be clear at first but it’s there. What makes it tough is there are libraries that have made me good money with real paying placements and also Scripps placements paying me nothing. Pulling out makes a statement but it cuts off my own nose. I don’t think I’d sign a NEW contract with any library that doesn’t agree not to do non-PRO blankets or at least says they’ll share the blanket fees with composers.
- This topic has 22 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 1 week, 4 days ago by .
Viewing 8 posts - 16 through 23 (of 23 total)
Viewing 8 posts - 16 through 23 (of 23 total)