[WlaUs396]

That has been my experience so far with libraries such as J* and S*. It’s all back end. The library makes it’s money from the blanket fees. Yes, those same libraries (I see it with J*), do also go after conventional sync deals, but what I’ve seen is the majority of placements being blanket, back-end only.

Thanks, Advice. Not a rosy picture, but there it is. And yes, I have placed a inquiry in this site on the library specific forum asking about track record for this library.

Non-exclusive with retitling does not necessarily bother me; in perpetuity does. In perpetuity is not the subject of this thread, but agreeing to in perpetuity with no fees on blankets, back end only, is a lot to ask. I guess that is the way things are going.

[WlaUs396]

Alas, after clarifying this particular library’s terms on blanket licenses and direct performance fees, the answer is that the composer gets 0 %. I am told that the calculations over thousands of tracks became “(an) accounting nightmare” and “(often led) to pennies for the writers.” So, the upshot is that writers get nothing for blankets, except of course for backend writer’s royalties, which can’t amount to much unless there are regular worldwide airings.

So, it would seem that 0 % is the “norm” for blankets? I wonder where the incentive is for a library to push for needle drops on individual tracks when they can just sell a blanket, pocket the fee and be done with it.

[WlaUs396]

Thanks, Advice. I am in the process of sending a letter to try to clarify the blanket deals. Your interpretation was more positive than mine; I read it to mean 0% on blankets. I’ll let you know when I hear back from them.

I know the norm is 50% on sync. I hate to encourage a 25% rate –

[Author]

Posts