Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
The best way to participate in Content ID to prevent false Content ID notices is to have your Content ID tracks in only one library.
The youtube terms of service for using Content ID require that, or at least used to.
So, if you’ve spread the same music out among a number of non-exclusive libraries, you should not opt-in to content ID.
Hi Greystone,
We all assimilate influences which are reflected in our work. You’d be hard-pressed to find a composition that is totally free from outside influence.
One important factor here is that this “quote” happened accidentally. You didn’t set out to create a soundalike, which shows intent and could trigger statutory damages if you got sued.
That said, courts have found infringement in as few as three notes. As an attorney, I can’t listen to your track and say whether or not you are in the clear. A musicologist can offer an opinion but it is just that, an opinion. There’s no way either a musicologist or an attorney could predict with 100% certainty what a jury would determine and it’s the jury’s opinion that matters.
Cinebrass Core + Pro offer ff dynamics: https://cinesamples.com/category/brass
Hi gigdude. I use Time Machine, but I would make a bootable clone of your OS drive with something like Carbon Copy Cloner before you try to update.
I have clones of all of my drives. You may have to reauthorize some software if you end up reverting to the cloned drive.
(don’t send them something obscure just because they don’t have it)
Because the reason they don’t have may be becasue they don’t want it.
@gigdude, how old is your Mac? I’m running 10.12.6 Sierra on a 2010 Mac Pro tower 12-core w/48 GB RAM.
I was running DP8, but upgraded to DP9. Not sure which older instruments you’re worried about, but I just did a test and was able to open Kontakt 4.
FWIW, this unit can’t handle 10.13.
I heard it straight from the horses mouth, but I’ve seen it in print as well.
Guess we were talking to different horses. 😀
Nice post Chuck. Not sure what you mean by “trade secret.”
Andy Mark (The Mark Award) was friend. He gave many composers a boost in this business, including me.
Among other things, back in the 80’s or early 90’s he started a royalty free library, which is now distributed by a PMA library. (the RF library is no longer in production).
No one that I’ve encountered at the PMA ever said to me that RF libraries were a problem. In fact, it was through a royalty free library that I met Andy.
You’re misunderstanding. On their site, they mention they don’t want you doing edits from the full track, they would rather you re-record or pre-record 30,60 second versions.
I’ve haven’t re-recorded a 30, 60 or 15 second edit in nearly 25 years, since the advent of DAW’s.
I don’t create edits from the stero master, but I do edit the midi files and/or recorded audio tracks.
I know Audiosparx would have you create separate 15 – 30 -60 Second tracks, but yes I am one who would rather complete edits from a full tracks then do a whole new version of a project. Am I wrong or do most folks recreate the wheel in this way?
Chuck, don’t single AudioSparx out here. This is an industry standard. I’ve written several hundred tracks for PMA libraries. Every track was delivered with full, 60, 30, 15, and bed versions.
60, 30 and 15 edits are ad-length edits. If a client has a choice of buying cut that’s ready to drop into a spot vs buying a cut that they have to pay someone to edit, or that they have to spend time editing, for the spot they are most likely to choose the ready-to-use cut.
I sell more edits in RF libraries than full tracks and I charge the same as a full track because I’ve done the editing work for the client.
Ive been a library writer for almost 3 years at this point and ive seen very little in The form of ascap payouts. I’ve seen over 360 cue sheets, but I feel that there have to be usages in not getting paid for.
You are probably falling through the cracks of ASCAP’s surevy system. They don’t pay based on cue sheets alone. They pay based on the performances detected in their sruvey.
See this thread:
Here’s are one very important statement from a Billboard article that came through the Copyright Society that cuts to the heart of one the biggest infringement issues faced by library composers:
“This isn’t going to do anything about the problem of mass infringement online outside the U.S.,” says David Lowery, the Camper Van Beethoven and Cracker frontman, who has become an outspoken advocate for creators rights. “But overall this is really important for creators.”
They’ve been talking about this concept for a number of years. It will be interesting to see how it gets implemented, if the small claims courts would be attached to Federal Districts, etc.
I’d also be very interested in seeing what their procedural requirments and evidentiary standards will be. A “tribunal” suggests that these matters will be heard by a panel of qualified individuals (perhaps lawyers) rather than a jury.
Of course, this is a sword that swings both ways. Composers could more easily find themselves as defendants on the receiving end of small claims suits.
Depending on the size of your current catalog with ASCAP, whatever royalties you miss out on in those 6 months will be peanuts compared to what you will be screwed out of by the ASCAP survey system over the rest of your lifetime.
You don’t miss out on 6 months of royalties. Remember that payments generally lag two quarters (6 months behind) performances. When I switched from ASCAP to BMI the process was coordinated between the PROs so that there was no gap in income.
As far as moving my catalog from ASCAP, BMI was very efficient at moving my works. BMI has even detected recent performances, and paid me for, 20-year old tracks originally paper-registered in ASCAP that never made a penny with ASCAP.