Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
It depends on what interest rate I have to pay back my (earnings) with!! 😉 🙂
The email I got was the standard one with the exclusive contract. No answer to questions either. My feeling is just give them time to settle down. Given that it’s unlikely (as of today- it could change) I’ll sign any exclusives with JP, no biggie to me.
Maybe, with so many artists emailing them, they’ll send out a broadcast email with FAQ about the new exclusive option.
🙂
I emailed artists@JP asking for details, contract, etc for the exclusive option and just got a reply with the contract. Didn’t read it yet but my email WAS answered.
It could be they are overwhelemed right now with all the artists calling and emailing about this exclusive issue. It’s only about a week since this announcement. Maybe in a few weeks, when things calm down, things will return to more “normal”… We shall see. Breathe in… Breathe out…
The bottom line is, like it or not, JP’s business model is built around blanket license deals and they will do what they need to survive. And we all have free choice as to which libraries to put our music in. Their deal was non-exclusive up to now and their contract is fairly short term, meaning pulling tracks (if you choose to) is easy. No one’s been harmed and many of us had placements. Dissapointed, but not harmed…Â
I’ve always known that their model gives strong preference to their in house team as composers. But on the positive side, that opened lots of doors for the rest of us. They were able to build good relationships with the right people. If, for example, Jingle Jared custom composed a theme for a TV show and as a result of that was able to get a blanket licensing deal for the rest of the library, I’m VERY OK with that. In fact, happy about it.
I’m much more interested in what happens in the industry as a whole than what’s going on with JP.
😀
Ian
While I agree with you that commitment to quality is key, I don’t think you can define quality based on live vs. samples. That is, if by “samples” you mean anything virtual and not live. We certainly know very experienced composers who make a living (including major placements in film and network) and use zero or near zero live performers.
But yes… mediocre tracks result in pennies earned. Quality is the one thing you can control. Now more than ever, it’s critical to up your game. If you can’t do it alone, network with other composers for collaborative efforts. Get your tracks in libraries that are not in the blanket market. No one said it would be easy.
😀
It does appear that blanket licensing issues are a big part of this whole exclusive/non-exclusive thing. As mentioned earlier, TV shows do not want to sign multiple blanket license deals only to find the same tracks in the various catalogs.
Audiosparx is jumping in the blanket licensing game as well. Although they will offer both exc and non-exc tracks, it does appear that as time goes on, exclusives will have more and more of a better shot. If you are with AS, plesae DO NOT share here any artist communique emails they sent out. They clearly ask us not to do that.
I used to think all this exclusive stuff had to do with the higher end of the chain– vocal songs on major TV networks, etc. It still might but what we are seeing right now is on the so-called “lower” end. In fact, Crucial isn’t concerned about all this. It’s the blanket dependent libraries that are.
Personally, I have a very hard time giving exclusives on instrumental tracks that will be background on cable reality shows and pay very little. However, I’m a realist and if that becomes the only way to be in this game, I will have to adapt or get out.
As far as JP having 25,000 exclusive tracks now, most likely, those tracks are from the company principles and inner circle. I know that JP staff names are always on the cue sheets along with ours for placements. Since those tracks were not signed elsewhere, it would have been very easy for JP to simply call them exclusive now. I can’t see accusing them of anything dirty. If any of us had treated our non-exclusive tracks signed with them as exclusive (e.g. not signed them elsewhere), we’d immediately have the same option now. They didn’t set out to take advantage of anyone (IMHO). The industry changes and that’s the way it is.
😀
My comment with the now infamous “name calling” was not directed at you, Scott. If someome has a very specific situation to resolve, in can be very appropriate to contact a music sup or production company directly.
I was referring to more generic, unprofessional behavoir– calling music sups for minor, trivial things or hounding them with many phone calls, emails, etc. A number of libraries have sent out warning emails that their clients have been annoyed with all sorts of calls and inquiries. Libraries can even lose good clients this way.
Common sense… Professionalism… Always needed.
😀
I apologize. Art, feel free to delete that comment.
Name calling? I was referring to people who hound music supervisors directly about placements from libraries. Did it seem otherwise?
It that was inappropriate, I apologize. 🙂
“Someone needs to start a “boot camp” on how to navigate these waters in a businesslike and professional manner. Failure to do so is the musician’s Achilles heel”…
So true about non-professional behavior… Sadly, within any large group of people, there will be some a-holes who make it bad for everyone else.
LG
The word “sync” is used incorrectly here, just so you know. That refers to front-end (up front) license fees which PRO’s do not get involved in.
As far as back-end PRO royalties, the pay is about the same when averaged over a number of different placements. One may pay slightly more on one while the other pays better on another. For most folks who do what WE do – film/TV cues, there really isn’t a financial difference.
We all have the option of not signing non-exclusives with no up-front money, especially if there are long commitments. I know I wouldn’t unless I felt the library truly offered me something better than I could get doing what am currently doing with non-exclusive.
That being said, it’s easy to get huffy and think we, as composers, have all the power. Reality is supply and demand is not in our favor. There are many thousands of people churning out great tracks from home studios, willing to do anything just to get their music out there. If exclusive without upfront became the only way, I don’t think libraries would have a shortage of music. I could be wrong, but I don’t think so.
I’ve been told from a reliable source that Crucial has no intention of going exclusive, at least not for the forseeable future. They are very committed to the non-exclusive model.
What I’ve been hearing has been the problem has more to do with libraries like JP that rely heavily on blanket deals (Crucial does not do blankets). TV shows are signing multiple blanket deals only to find they are getting the same tracks from those different libraries (e.g. JP, SK, etc)… Budget-wise, this is very non-cost-effective. They feel like they are paying 2-3 times for the same thing. If the TV networks tell libraries like JP that they won’t do blanket deals anymore unless the tracks are exclusive, JP and others will simply have no choice. A large chunk of their business model depends on this.
As far as JP making this up as a scare tactic, that’s ridiculous. We may not like it and be disappointed, but accusing them of outright lying is very inappropriate. These possible changes in the industry are very real. I’ve heard it from at least 3-4 libaries and publishers the past 2 years. Many non-exc libraries we deal with have started exclusive catalogs for the same reason.
Deep breath, take it slow… See where the dust all settles. 😀
Mutilple clients licensing the same track from one source who has exclusive rights (e.g. true POA over copyright and master to issue licenses) is not the same as one client getting pitched the same track from multiple sources, raising doubt about true ownership and causing annoying redundancy.
As far as what to do now, I think everyone should take a deep breath and just wait and see… I wouldn’t (personally) do anything regarding existing tracks in any non-exclusive catalogs, even if in more than one. This hasn’t shaken out yet and we really don’t know where the dust will settle.
Although the result for the composer is the same as far as upfront sync fee, the term “gratis” deal is a misnomer. What there are more and more of are “blanket” deals between the library and the TV production company– one fee to the library for access to an entire catalog. These already are very common for JP, Scorekeepers, and others and these libraries do not share a portion of the blanket fees with composers. I may no judgement as to whether or not their business model would support sharing a piece of the blanket fees (e.g. they could do that and stay in business)…
It’s very possible that this trend will extend *further* into major networks (it has already). So, Blind, yes I expect you would see a library like JP placing exclusive tracks via blanket deals and there being no sync fee to the composer.
Actually, the whole blanket deal thing is one of the reasons for networks being concerned about exclusivity. They sign blanket deals with mulitiple libraries, only to find the same tracks in each catalog. They feel that they are therefore paying twice for the same thing. Budgets are too tight for that.
JP relies heavily on blanket deals. If the end users say they will only do blankets with exclusives, their business model has to change.