[Music1234]

@PeteJ, I certainly do not have all of the answers, but they are filing Notice Of Intentions to claim not just “Author Unknown” but also “Copyright Owner Unknown” according to the article and the man who conducted the investigation. I’d look at the articles and links again very closely.

In regards to CONTENT ID, that is google’s own internal form of royalty payment that has been around for a few years now. We need to understand the deal between youtube and ASCAP. It seems to me that YOUTUBE will be sending ASCAP some money to pay writers and publishers for “performances”. Otherwise, why are they making a deal?
What is in this deal?

This all loops back to how important LA Writers statement is:

Ownership = Flexibility = Longevity

If you do not own and control your cues 100%, you can not pivot and shift to the changes upon us.

Glancing at this one, it seems any increase in payment is tied to the Content ID system, which many of us here don’t utilize in order to work with RF libraries hassle free.

Or ultimately sending everything into Content ID may be the new way of reporting and collecting for streaming “on demand” consumption of TV shows “airing” on YOUTUBE. We just don’t know. We need details.

[Music1234]

Take the time to really study what google is doing with these NOI filings.

For 7 million songs they are saying “Author unknown, copyright owner unknown”

https://www.royaltyclaim.com/blog/royalty-claim-investigation-is-google-refusing-to-use-its-own-assets-to-identify-copyright-owners

Publishers, I know you are reading this. How are you fighting back? How are you protecting copyrights when google is trying to file spreadsheets that claim “Author unknown, copyright owner unknown” ?

This is not old news, this is breaking news. Google and Spotify are trying to strike first because once those NOI’s are filed, copyright owners have to jump through hoops to eliminate the status of “author unknown, copyright owner unknown.”

It’s quite sickening what they are doing and clearly their intent is to reduce as much as possible the amount of royalties they’d have to pay to rights holders (writers and publishers)

“After the NOI has been filed, it is then the copyright owner’s responsibility to become aware of and locate the NOI, and then take action in order to receive mechanical royalties.”

Read this too:

https://www.royaltyclaim.com/blog/royalty-claims-full-presentation-at-the-music-industry-research-association-conference

and this link to copyright.gov takes you to all the “copyright owner unknown, author unknown” filings by google, spotify, amazon, microsoft, a few others…They are filing these like crazy! Why? Because they don’t want to pay rights holders I’d imagine. A huge cost savings for them.

I am not an attorney but it seems like they are saying “NOTICE OF INTENTION” to the copyright office…”WE DO NOT KNOW WHO OWNS THESE SONGS SO WE CAN NOT PAY THESE FOLKS ROYALTIES”…

@Michael L…your thoughts?

https://www.copyright.gov/licensing/115/noi-submissions.html

[Music1234]

Everyone, (especially our publishers who are supposed to protect our copyrights and make every effort possible to see to it that writers and themselves get paid) need to be beating the drum and sounding the alarm to our PRO’s about performance royalties for streaming services (on demand) content.

If you do write for a Netflix series, you better ask for a healthy fee up front because the back end is not there.

I ignore all briefs that say “We need music for a new Netflix series” as should everyone at this point. If they pay up front, then fine. The back end is pennies.

It also disgusts me how Google is not on the hook for massive contributions to the performance royalty pool at all PRO’s. Google (AKA YOUTUBE) is basically the largest TV network in the world at this point in time. Their contributions to the royalty pools at BMI, ASCAP, and SESAC should be larger than ABC, NBC, and CBS combined as the world consumes entertainment by watching YOUTUBE.

A deal has been made between ASCAP and Google, but it would be nice if we knew what was inside this deal below?

YouTube’s ASCAP Deal Will Pay Out More Royalties To Musicians

ASCAP and BMI collected over a billion in 2016, I think they each need to collect another 500 million from Google in 2018 so writers and publishers get paid for YT performances (Streams). What do you think?

https://www.ascap.com/press/2017/04-04-2016-financial

https://www.bmi.com/pdfs/publications/2016/BMI_Annual_Review_2016.pdf

Read here: Google is also doing everything it can to NOT identify copyright owners.

https://www.royaltyclaim.com/blog/royalty-claim-investigation-is-google-refusing-to-use-its-own-assets-to-identify-copyright-owners

Google earned 20 Billion in Net Income in 2016 and is worth 650 Billion as of today.

http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/goog/financials

[Music1234]

I just want people to now state in this thread their earnings from cattle call briefs. When I submitted to cattle call opps…My tracks did place…and some good one’s would hit too, such as ABC, CBS, or NBC network plays, but again, the performance royalties these placements earned does not justify doing it for $0 in perpetuity, not even for tying it up for 3 years, because the 3 years of “add to cart buy now” sites may also bring in $500- 1K and faster too.

Have any of you written for a cattle call then seen $500 or more from the TV show placement? I am not talking about demos for TV spots, I am specifically talking about briefs for new TV shows in production or new sports seasons or special events shows. Background TV cue opportunities.

@EUCA …yeah the Netflix and Scripps shout outs are just unbelievable… Big 10 Network is a huge disappointment too. BTN is supposedly being looked at by ASCAP. Does Anyone have news on BTN?

[Music1234]

I am advocating for “exclusive only to the TV show” world, but OK to retitle the same tracks and sell them on other “add to cart” markets, license them privately with our own contacts, or even stream albums on Spotify.

I do realize that it is completely riduculous to have music in 5 libraries that service TV broadcast, specifically TV shows and TV networks.

Again, we have 2 very different markets that do not compete nor confuse music supervisors:
1. Add to cart (AKA RF/ Direct Licensing/ the $20 to $500 and up market)
-music supervisors don’t hang out here, independent video editors do

2. Music libraries/ publishers who feed cues to TV shows (The back end scene) – This is where professional music supervisors and TV production companies like to shop.

Is anyone consistently making $500 to $1000 in back end for all tracks signed into exclusive in perpetuity for $0 advance?

@paulo…exactly…I agree…sometimes writers don’t show up and suddenly it’s magical. “Hey Guys…Non Exclusive is OK! We’re kind of desperate here!”

[Music1234]

LA Writer and Music 1234,

What do you guys think about the ever growing group of Sups who ONLY want Exclusive ques? It seems like this is a growing trend. Sure we can tell them no and they will just get Exclusive tracks from the 40,000 other composers that are down with their model.

If a music supervisor happens to listen to a song twice from 2 different sources, I just do not see how this can be a major inconvenience. Just credit the publisher where you heard it first on the cue sheet. When these buyers are swimming in lots of inexpensive options for their scenes, I think they should not be too concerned about maybe hearing a cue from 2 publishers. They should be concerned about 1 thing and 1 thing only: using music that works for the scene, spot, trailer, promo, internet video….whatever. I am speaking from the perspective of instrumental production music that sits in the background most of the time.

[Music1234]

Chuck, we definitely can all learn from each others experiences. Please give examples of how your approach of signing cues over to an exclusive publisher for these terms:
-$0 advance/ consideration fee/ work for hire fee
-they control the cue perpetually
-you get only back end or perhaps 50% of a sync licesnse (I hope!)

What kind of back end numbers are you seeing?

From my experience, when I have given a cue for a cattle call brief, I have seen these place and go on and print $50 to $300 in back end. (Ball Park range). I have always done this non-exclusively.

Here is the problem with exc in perp under these parameters: While the cue eventually may reward a writer, you are losing potential and immediate income from that tune in other markets. So while it was nice to earn back end 1 to 2 years later from my submission for the brief, it is also a lot better when that same cue goes on and generates other license revenue, immediately, in other markets. Those royalties may also add up to another $300 to $1000 in “micro licensing” revenue.

It just depends, some cues do great, some average, some nothing at all, but at least the cues are getting the opportunity to generate revenue in multiple markets, and markets that do not directly compete with each other. The direct licensing “add to cart’ scene is a completely different market than TV shows. That market is for Internet videos, low budget spots, student films, wedding videos, etc. There is nothing wrong with satisfying everyone!

Now, if you are telling me that you are signing onto these exclusive deals and then 1 year later you see back end around $750 to $1500 for the cue you sent in for a brief, I certainly would not discourage you to embrace that relationship and business arrangement with the publisher who is getting these placements for your music. I just have my doubts that any of us can get that kind of back end return. From my perspective these people want exclusive cues, but the “performance royalty (PRO)” pay winds up being more in that $100 to $300 range.

I prefer to shoot for $500 to $1000 and up earned on a cue within 6 to 12 months of releasing it.

The exc for $0 model does a huge favor to the exclusive publisher: they get a free cue to service a client (and charge the client blanket fees or some fees), but writers in return, wait a long time to collect, and sacrifice other revenue streams. This is not a win/ win scenario. Only the publisher wins in this deal.

[Music1234]

The traditional model of 1K to 1.5 K for an “exclusively represented and published cue in perpetuity” and writers share is not a failure.

$0 for a cue and grant of rights that say “exclusively represented and published in perpetuity”.

This is a failure.

I have to admit that costs to produce high end music have come down with the sample libraries so even I’;d say 1K to 1.5K for a cue is far fetched. That budget used to be based on using a bigger studio, hiring some players to record several cues or an entire album, using an engineer, mixing, etc…

With most of us in front of a keyboard and computer and guitars next to us ready to plug and play, and everyone doing their own mixing and mastering, I do admit the cost to produce has come down. But time, creativity, and labor should still equate to compensation. $250 to $750 for a cue seems fair to me. Just depends on the genre you are asking for. Does it require 20 insts, or just 6 or 7? Do you need a 60 second track or a 2.5 minute track? Those variables should define the advance/ consideration fee for a commissioned cue based on a brief.

[Music1234]

Chuck, please do not doubt the level of experience that you are getting from our opinions just because we are on here being critical of publishers under an alias. If I were to present my real, full name, do you think I could actually present my opinions and experiences on this forum as forthright as I am? As you can see, I and LA Writer are highly critical of the publishers and production companies who want free work from everyone.

I am sorry but these companies DO have “up front” money for music cues just as they have money for actors, directors, producers, editors, assistants, gaffers, production managers, booking agents, etc…

We are just sounding the alarm here on all fronts. If EVERYONE continues to write to briefs for free, that then becomes the norm. Have you ever bothered to ask some questions about these briefs? Such as what show is it for? What network will it air on? Why is there no budget to develop underscores for the show? (There is a budget, the library just does not want to spend any of the money they will charge because there are too many folks fishing/ hoping for back end in 12 months) Can I write cues for the show but still sell them under different titles on RF markets?

Writers need to ask some questions and not be so gullible. Don’t be a “sure I’ll get you some cues” kind of person, every time you get a brief.

I guarantee you that privately these publishers chuckle behind the scenes and say “ahh…no worries, we’ll put out a brief and have 40 cues on our desk in a week, composers are just a dime a dozen” …Not even a penny a dozen I’d say…

The practice needs to end just as piracy needed to end. The music business did find a way to combat piracy with spotify, Pandora, and other streaming services. People are not buying records, but they are buying monthly subscriptions for $10 to eliminate ads. That means people are buying music again.It’s just happening in a different way.

In our world of music for TV, Film, advertising, YT/ internet Videos, Games, explainers, tutorials, podcasts, blogs, etc…there is money for music. That I guarantee you. Composers somewhere along the line decided that they are not only free (for TV show cues), but free in perpetuity. It’s mind boggling how this happened.

RESIST.

Publishers: Change your ways, dig into the budget and do what’s right, pay writers OR, make the deal non-exclusive. Don’t suppress a writers income potential. Create a win/ win situation. As it stands now it’s an “only we win” deal. This is my opinion folks. You decide if you agree or not. I also have some facts to back it up. When I write a cue and release in both markets: direct licensing and NE publisher, I see revenue happening from both sides of the equation. I have video editors buying the tunes for $50, $70, $100, and up for their web videos, then I see 12 to 18 months down the road the same cue going on shows and cue sheets start hitting. Then I see the back end for these cues. Write for all ends. I cant wait 18 months to MAYBE be paid for my works. Nor should you, nor anyone. If publishers need exclusivity, pay up for it. This should become the biggest topic of discussion at the next PMA meeting.

[Music1234]

at least you were paid!

[Music1234]

“I’ve got a couple hundred tracks in the BEST of the A list companies that are essentially sitting dead on a shelf somewhere. “

I would call the company and ask for a reversion or conversion to non-exclusive in perpetuity. All they can do is say no but why would they? If they are not presenting and pitching the music and you have gone a few years with no royalty income activity on those albums, ask if you can take a shot at making income with them. What do you have to lose? All they can do is say no. People should never under estimate what can happen in any and all markets. in the last year, My father pulled some 1/4 inch tape masters and digitally transferred 30 or 40 tunes. I listened and pointed out my favorites and told him where to sell them, how to title them, and how to keyword them. These were recorded in the 1956 to 1964 era. A couple of those suckers are selling away and I know that one of these days we will nail down a 4 figure or 5 figure license on one of them. NO WAY would we ever give this stuff to an exclusive publisher.

“Ownership=flexibility=longevity”= total control=empowerment=the only way forward

[Music1234]

Another spot on statement from LA Writer that is worth studying over and over. I am telling you folks, we are telling you, LA writer and I, and I have to believe Art is on board too, owning and controlling your catalog is where it’s at. If you want to survive long term and be able to shift and pivot with the never ending changing tide, ownership and control of your catalog is the key. Without ownership, how do you pivot to capitalize on where the market may shift next? I know I am embracing the front end a lot more these days. Front end happens sometimes the day I release the cue. Sometimes hours later my intellectual property is printing money directly into my pocket.

I am a bit more optimistic than LA writer is about streaming. I have to believe that when the world does shift to streaming only (all content is on demand when end users want to watch on phones, computers or TV’s)…I have to believe the PRO’s will develop a new formula where we are paid the same performance royalties. They still will have to shake everyone down for a Billion dollars and get that money into writers hands.

Today’s TV model is all based on ratings, if the show has 100 million viewers, the royalty is_______if 1 Million viewers only__________. Streaming is so F’d up because how do you measure the viewing audience size? Maybe performance royalties will be paid based on view counts/ streams? I don’t know. What I do know is I don’t want any raw deal surprises hitting me in the future so from here until eternity only I own my creations (I do anyway). Mr. publisher can be my agent and place my tunes, but guess what? I am going to sell them to whomever I want to too. My music is eternally for rent. If you need to borrow my tune, you owe me money. Start thinking along these lines folks. Resist this manipulation from briefs where the deal is “Thanks for your work, high five, we now control the cue in perpetuity, you go home and pray for decent back end 9 to 18 months down the line.”

RESIST, make them pay you for your labor.

If you don’t believe in yourself or your music and feel you are a part timer, semi pro, etc. well then fine, odds are that the cue will be received that way by end users:average. As LA Writer said, It’s always been about quality.

Finally, don’t discount the opportunity that exists at royalty exchange either. Our music now has a value and from my close analysis as I study and follow the auctions of (future) royalty streams that are being sold to investors on this market, one can conclude that our music catalog is worth 5 to 10x the previous years royalty statements.

When you own and control your catalog, you are much better positioned to cash in on that opportunity.

“Ownership=flexibility=longevity”…LOVE IT!

Oh yes indeed, my children some day will inherit a monster sized catalog and hopefully earn passive income for the rest of their lives. Or maybe I may decide to cash out for 5 to 10x my prior year earnings. This is where the flexibility variable comes into play.

“Ownership=flexibility=longevity”…LOVE IT SOME MORE!

Writing custom cues to briefs and handing them over to an exploiting publisher to control in perpetuity is absurd. My Goodness, at least negotiate exclusive for 1 year, then after 1 year the cue becomes non-exclusive in perpetuity if you are going to do this!
Better yet Mr Publisher, just buy the damn cue, don’t tell me you don’t have money to invest in cues. If you don’t have money to buy them, then you stay up late and write them for your client. Quit exploiting composers and composers please stop allowing yourself to be exploited.

I don’t care if the minimal underscore only takes you 2 hours to produce, that minimal underscore may very well print $300 to $500 in RF within 2 months if you are a pro and produce at a high level. There is always an opportunity cost with this exclusive in perpetuity for free garbage. It’s a risk I am not willing to take out of principle. It’s just wrong and a bad practice. It’s greedy and the greed starts with production companies and then trickles down to the library/ publishers supplying the shows.

[Music1234]

@ LA Writer, While I feel bad for your friend he really needed to negotiate a work for hire fee that covered all the work he was asked to do. When you are asked to do original “scoring to picture” work the compensation should be based on a work for hire fee. I have no idea what one would charge, but I would think that it should be based on a price per episode or price per minute of music, or fee per cue. My world used to be 10 to 20K to score a 30 second spot. Original scores for tv spots are still commissioned but a lot less these days.

So while your friend feels taken advantage of, why wasn’t he asking questions? Why wasn’t he negotiating a compensation model where he felt fairly paid for the work he did?

Folks, writing original music to briefs for exclusive libraries for $0 and only the hope of back end performance royalties 9 to 18 months down the line is not a business. It’s a gamble and prayer. You may only make $100 on the placement. You may make $0. Publishers/ Music Libraries who essentially are suppliers to production companies simply need to invest in original music production for their TV shows. Everyone else gets paid: the actors, the editors, the shooters, the director, the gaffers, the assistants, the producers. No one involved in the production of a TV show, TV spot, or film is working under this pathetic model of “Well you just wait and hope that those back end performance royalties show up in a year, we all are getting paid salaries and free-lance hourly day rates, you composers work for free now and hope that the PRO sugar daddy shows up with a bonus for your labor and creativity…and oh…by the way, we own and control the cue you nicely made in perpetuity, Thanks for the free cue!”

@Daniel, you are kind of missing the point about what LA writer is saying about “front end”. He is also taking into consideration the direct licensing markets (AKA RF markets). Those markets are when people pay you immediately for the cue. They license the stock music right then and there and you are paid (add to cart/ buy now). That is “front end” meaning you are paid immediately for the license sold. I don’t care what anyone says but when someone buys a license on these sold called “royalty free” sites, we are getting paid a royalty, immediately. By the way, I am having very good success at $50 a track so I encourage all to raise their prices to $50, $60, $70. It really depresses me when I see so many people selling for $20. If you believe in your stuff and you know you can compete with what you are hearing from UMG and other major label sounds, price your music at $50 on the direct licensing (add to cart/ license now) markets.

Another definition of “front end” is the work for hire fee, consideration fee, or advance fee. It’s all kind of semantics which term you chose but they all mean the same thing. This is when a library or production company approaches a composer and asks them to write music for a specific purpose (TV Show, TV Spot, Film, Video, Game, app, or even for a new album release of a production music genre like (minimal sci fi underscores, or epic sports rock, or Bombastic Trailers). A composer should be paid when asked to write for a specific purpose INCLUDING NEW RELEASES by production music libraries. Yes publishers, look in the mirror and stop this practice of not investing in what you need. Quit asking people to write in exchange for “maybe” back end in 12 to 18 months. If you don’t want to pay for cues and original scores, then you stay up late and write the music yourself. Remember, everyone else is getting paid when tv spots, tv shows, and films are getting produced. There is money for everyone, so producers need to set aside some money for composers. They need to be paid too, up front, for the work they do. Those of you who continue to write for free and hand over cues for a publisher to control in perpetuity, you too look in the mirror, and ask “why am I doing this?”

LA writer and I are telling you point blank that this is a failed model. It’s not sustainable and you are doing yourself and the entire business a major disservice by engaging in this. Personally, I like back end and front end…we need money from all ends!

The Streaming/ Netflix/ Hulu/ etc problem needs to be resolved immediately and if anyone invites you to write cues for a Netflix only show you better ask for work for hire compensation that makes sense for the labor and creativity you contribute to the show.

[Music1234]

How about this idea – Just write great music and then before you send it in to a library/ publisher for evaluation, why not listen to some accepted and published tracks in the exact same genre on these sites to hear if your music can realistically compete with what is currently offered. Be tough on yourself. Ask: Is my music ready for prime time? If you have any doubts and it’s obvious other writers have you beat, why submit?

Cabs, hits, and x-rays are not the path to follow. I will stand by my opinion which is this: these kinds of companies are motivated by profit from submission fees (mostly from unqualified writers/ music producers). On the other hand, maybe these places are a decent dose of reality for those who try to get into the “prime time” arena of tv, film and advertising licensing. The one thing I will give credit and KUDOS to at the cab company is that the owner does seem to be forthright in saying “country ballads are not going to get you cue sheets.” They offer lots of free lectures and Tips on YT. Why? I can only think that they are doing so to recruit a new crop of hopefuls into their ecosystem of submission fees.

[Music1234]

Indeed, every 5 to 10 years brings about a new crop of baby writers who are young and naive, don’t know what PRO’s are, do not know sync licensing fees, basically, they know nothing other than “SIGN UP AND UPLOAD!”.

We have to do everything we can to educate the newcomers, especially the talented one’s. We have to first and foremost eliminate subscription models. Can anyone reading this thread in this forum say they are having a very positive experience contributing to subscription based models?

[Author]

Posts