Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
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?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.
Check this out:
Not much I can disagree with in this Man’s presentation. He just posted this yesterday.
We are absolutely concerned with what Discovery is proposing and we stand with composers in opposition. Additionally, we DO in fact pay composers from any direct license revenue based on tracks used and accounted for on the cue sheets for those shows. We DO NOT enter into gratis direct license deals.
Hi Taylor have lawyers determined whether or not it is in fact even legal to sell “direct licenses” to a major TV network that refuses to sign a deal with ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC? How would Discovery get away with using PRO Registered Music, but not have to pay the PRO’s? How did they build up an internal library of non pro registered music in the first place? Finally if they are threatening to replace PRO registered music with their internal library (which I assume is not pro registered) I do hope SK and others simply say “go ahead and remove the music from those shows.”
I highly doubt they will want to pay music and audio post editors for thousands of hours of labor to re-mix old episodes with new music. There really is nothing individual composers can do except complain on forums. Only music libraries have the leverage to say “No Thanks” to this deal. The composers hired to write original scores can walk away, but most shows are produced with “library music”.
Also has the PMA reached out to lawmakers regarding this proposal? Have the PRO’s threatened to sue Discovery Networks for broadcasting PRO registered music under “direct license” terms ?
One would hope that JP, SK, and others are fighting this along with composers.
They are doing the exact opposite. They are selling direct license blanket deals to SCRIPPS and Certainly now Discovery. This should be illegal to sell direct licenses to major TV networks that PUBLICLY PERFORM PRO registered Music.
So the threat really isn’t from some army of hungry, desperate young composers willing to give up their royalties. It’s greedy libraries.
Always has been the case.
The only way to truly combat this is to rewrite the laws and the rights that must be obtained by a major TV Network broadcasting to the public.It never stops amazing me how the big corporate monsters are always seeking cost savings from musicians, those who are always the last to be paid, and they also are the least paid when you compare compensation to actors, voice over talents, film directors, and film editors. Performance Royalties are all we have. Yes, absolutely everyone should join this group. Everyone should not only be contacting the PRO’s but really encourage the source: the libraries representing our music. They are the one’s enabling this by signing contracts where they direct license our tracks. And guess what? that revenue they collect in those deals is not shared with contributors to the library. Essentially Discovery, if they win this battle will get our music, the libraries supplying them will get their up front fee, we will earn $0. It’s already happening with ESPN, and SCRIPPS networks. Informing Congress is a good idea too. This industry needs to be regulated so there is some sort of payment to music producers.
https://us20.campaign-archive.com/?u=f3c4d465eaca57bbb46d3e648&id=b3fb5b876f 5I think source audio would do all that you described.
https://www.sourceaudio.com/I would like to create an online searchable database (website?) for my film industry contacts to use. I would like it to have descriptions, tags etc that would be searchable, to have the ability to show all edits, audition songs, be able to download mp3s and wav files (in different sample rates if necessary).
I don’t need to sell or have PayPal or anything like that, it would be specifically for people I trust to be able to easily search, listen and download songs.
Would that be acceptable, in the sense that it would not break the standard exclusive agreement that I would sign with the exclusive library?
Yes, but the professional thing to do is you should tell the exclusive library that you already sold a few licenses though your own efforts on a “do it yourself/ self publishing” platform. Everyone needs to keep in mind that when you upload, describe, and keyword your own works you are self publishing.
There is nothing wrong with selling and publishing your own works through a 3rd party platform, then removing that same track so you can grant the rights to license that same track to an exclusive publisher.
Also pay attention to words like “your music has never been licensed before” in the new exclusive contract you’d sign. That would make it unacceptable, but I am sure if they really wanted the track and you explained that you already licensed it a few times, that would not be a deal breaker.
They never really properly address the concept of “exclusivity”
Must it be Exclusively licensed from the original creator of the composition?
Must it be Exclusively licensed from “exclusive publisher/ library”?
And what happens when tracks are “sub published” or distributed to library agents all over the world?
Tracks simply do not just exist in only one database/ search engine.
YOUTUBE should simply not allow anyone to upload anything until they present all clearances required: music, photos, video clips, etc. Simply stated, you should not be allowed to upload a video to youtube unless you present the music license.
However, businesses such as ADREV and Identifyy want people to do that so that they can claim those videos and have them monetize back to adrev and identifyy and ultimately the music producers.These models are funny in that they flourish when people engage in copyright infringement. And also so many videos are monetizing back to composer when the client “really did” buy a music license.
I can’t even find it on Numerator…
From my experience more local, regional TV spots by local USA and regional USA companies do not always get into Numerator’s data base. I see and hear one of my spots on PBS, CBS, NBC, ABC on a regular basis advertising a senior care home, but only in one local market. I have been told by my PRO I will be out of luck collecting performance royalties because the TV spot is not turning up in Numerator, even though this is a major market.
Tunesat just doesn’t have an ad code that I’m aware of and as far as I know BMI wants that Ad Code
You are correct. All 3 USA Pro’s corroborate data about TV spot air dates using Numerator’s database. So, not in numerator =’s no performance royalties paid by PRO’s most likely.
It seems like European PRO’s pay based on “minutes of air time” a track accumulates.
Sweeden’s PRO (STIM) pay rate card is interesting to observe:
for a small cable tv show, how much could the royalty possibly be? I don’t see how this could even buy lunch. Now the claim is not that the person will keep the sync fee, the claim is that there is none.
Not sure how many years of experience you have Kevin, but background usage in reality cable shows rarely pay up front sync licenses. They typically just get used in shows and are cue sheeted. You then are paid the royalty by your PRO for the air date. They also often re-run a lot and create more royalties over time. One and done broadcasts are more for Live Sports broadcasts. And those often are not really “one and done” If sports shows like a cue, they will use them as bumpers across many live sports broadcasts. It seems like we all need more information about your deal before we pass final judgement.
I agree with everything Art says above too. Having total control over your catalog is increasingly very important. I know many writers can claim that they do very well writing exclusive music for reputable libraries, but one of these days, they will wake up and say…hmmmm….what happened to those 500 pieces of music I wrote over the last 5 to 10 years? I guess they are under the control of ________publisher/ library and I have no way of getting them back. 2 to 3 year reversion clauses are very important.
Alan, there is no discrepancy. Numerator just presents the actual commercials airing. It is very normal for the same track to be used to advertise the same product in 3 or 4 different “edits” of a commercial. Example: client makes a 30 TV, then a 15 TV, and then another 15 TV, but they use the same track and may just change the edit and VO message slightly. You need to document all 3 ad titles and ad codes in your claim.
What PRO are you with? I find that numerator only captures commercials airing in the USA. I could be wrong, but I have never found a spot airing in Europe on numerator. Tunesat can and does pick up TV spots in Europe. European countries probably have a different system for tracking TV spots and if anyone here knows how that is done please chime in. I am interested as I have had spots airing in France, Germany, Sweeden, Netherlands, Spain, Switzerland, Russia, etc….
It’s always been a challenge compiling the information to make an international ad claim. The only thing I have been able to do is provide a link to the youtube video of the spot and that is not always enough “claim support”.
In the USA, those numerator ad codes are very important for collecting performance royalties on TV spots.
Does a Numerator style service exist in Europe?
[Removed, off topic]
Why not commercial music writers?
I am afraid that there are too many hungry young writers that charge forward so fast and will sign any contract presented to them. The attitude is “if i don’t sign this deal, someone else will.” So they sign exclusive in perpetuity deals where they give away all their rights. they aggressively participate in subscription models where accounting is entirely “opaque” and in total control of licensing platforms. They literally pay whatever they want because they collect ALL THE MONEY FIRST, and share 0 data with music producers.
When you have an army of music producers charging into the industry with 0 knowledge of how the old model worked, couple that with Eastern European and London under cutters, you have the perfect formula to feed the Oligarchy more power, control, and profits.
If artists want to continue to give away their work and grant rights to their works for very little money, strategically not join PRO’s to sell “performance royalty free” (free of all potential “problems” ) what can we do?
Then you have publishers caving into Scripps, Netflix, Disney, Apple, Google and so on by supplying music for very cheap, knowing that back end royalties are either non existent or just 01 cents. How do we convince all music producers and music publishers to hold their ground? and Yes jdt9157, I agree if streaming services simply do not get the content produced in the first place, this problem disappears. The problem is the willingness of the music business giving works away for very small costs under contracts that favor mainly the “oligarchy”.
Art, glad you have the SAG and AFM pension income streams! good for you!
While my pension was not huge, it was enough that I was looking forward to getting it. Kiss that goodbye.
Not exactly true. They still have $2 Billion in that fund and while they are now paying out more than they are taking in, they are only proposing to cut the payouts for folks under 80, you certainly will not be cut to 0. That issue is an on-going negotiation. That fund will be around for 20 to 30 more years.I know many people getting a beautiful monthly check from that pension fund. I will too one day. It will be small, but again, had they developed a plan for production music library composers, that fund could have been supported better from the “new music for film and tv” business.
As I wrote before, the “Oligarchy” is doing everything they can to strip away money from musicians to maximize shareholder value for google, apple, netflix, disney, CBS viacom, NBC Universal/ Comcast, Spotify and all “streaming” subscription companies.They all will profit greatly from subscribers but simultaneously not find any meaningful royalties to offer to musicians who help produce the content. Unions come in handy to negotiate that stuff. But libraries are divided and scrambling and undercutting each other….that’s exactly the way the Oligarchy wants it. When music libraries and film composers are scrambling, distracted, running to London and Prague to record Orchestra’s, screwing local union talent in LA and NYC, avoiding union contracts, and undercutting each other, the Oligarchy just stuffs more profits in the bank.