Forum Replies Created
Ok, I’m trying to think through the alternate titles for different libraries idea, bear with me.
So I come up with a title for a song when I’m working on it. I register that title with BMI. I send the song to one library and use that title.
When I send it to the second library, I use an alternate title (and so on for subsequent libraries), but I shouldn’t need to register that with BMI since the library will register that, won’t they? But shouldn’t that mean that I don’t need to register the first name either?
If they re-title it with a number or letter (for example: AS_Louie Louie), then I can tell which library it was.
So… doesn’t that mean that I don’t need to register any of my songs with BMI if the libraries are supposed to do that … If my music is going anyplace that will not register with BMI (Like direct placement in a movie, etc), that’s when I should be registering my songs, right?
Can someone clarify?
I’ve thought about that organization. I just figured someday I may want a music lawyer, and might as well search one out now.
Since there are people here who most likely have music lawyers, I thought it would be a good place to ask about ‘interviewing’ a prospective lawyer.
Thanks, that’s all helpful.
At what point in your library music careers did you guys create an LLC or a corporation?
I’d like to not hand out my SS to all the music libraries, but I don’t feel that I’m ready to create an LLC and spend $800 per year…
What is the problem with re-titling libraries and detection technology?February 14, 2013 at 2:46 pm in reply to: Define 'publishing' and 'administering publishing'… #8688
Thanks Michael, I’ll ask them to clarify.
Just out of curiosity, for those libraries that offer you a choice, what do most of you choose (whether to be the publisher or let the library be the publisher) and why?February 14, 2013 at 10:46 am in reply to: Define 'publishing' and 'administering publishing'… #8685
However, AudioSparx, specifically offers composers the option of having them administer their publishing. In that case they do take a percentage of your publishing in addition to a percentage of the sync fee.
Does it still add up to 50% of the revenue? If so, what is the difference between AudioSparx being the publisher and AudioSparx allowing the writer to be the publisher?February 13, 2013 at 11:06 am in reply to: Define 'publishing' and 'administering publishing'… #8679
Thanks Art, well that makes sense.
I was wondering why a library would allow me to use my publishing company, wouldn’t that take away their income from my song?February 12, 2013 at 3:24 pm in reply to: Define 'publishing' and 'administering publishing'… #8677
From the suggested post: "
You're probably registered as writer with your PRO but unless you're registered (separately) as a publisher (for your own or even others' music) you don't receive any publishing royalties.
When a library licenses a track of yours that is non-exclusive they can register it under a new title (usually the original title with their own code) with the PRO and set themselves as publisher to earn 50%-100% of the publishing. That's how they make part of their revenue.
You still hold the rights to the "original" titled work, even if it isn't technically published, because you didn't give anyone an exclusive right to license it.
But if you also register as a publisher with your PRO (using whatever biz name/dba name you want) and then submit that track to be licensed exclusively by a single library, if it gets picked up, you can register that track with your PRO as both the writer and publisher, letting you collect both the writer and publisher percentages, for whatever that library's contract stipulated."
Ok, so first question … if I have set up a publishing company with BMI, and I submit a song to a non-exclusive library, why would they allow me to be the publisher if they won’t make any money off my music?
If I did put myself down as publisher would I then receive 50% as the writer, 25% as the publisher and then the library would then get the other 25%?