Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Nice one DI
Dave, everyone here is concerned about theft but most of us don’t think that content id is the right way to go about it.
You said that you were talking with the CEO of P5 and that he was talking with AdRev. For P5 to submit to Content ID they need to control the exclusive streaming rights. Being an RF site I would guess 99% of composers are on multiple non ex libraries and would not qualify. How is that a benefit to P5 or any other Non ex library ?
AS does operate a scheme but you must be exclusive to them.
I am curios as you seem to have a different definition of “exclusive streaming rights” than most of us here. Perhaps you could explain as I don’t really understand .
https://www.youtube.com/content_id_signup
To qualify for Content ID, you must own or control exclusive online streaming rights for the content you submit in the territories in which you assert rights. Visit the Help Center for more information about copyrights
https://www.youtube.com/content_id_signup
To qualify for Content ID, you must own or control exclusive online streaming rights for the content you submit in the territories in which you assert rights. Visit the Help Center for more information about copyrights.
Just to clarify the situation regarding exclusivity, In the YT TOS above it simply says “control exclusive online streaming rights”, surely this is not the same as ownership. Online streaming rights are what you hand over to a library to sell licenses on your behalf. Therefore if you have any tracks in an RF library you do not have control of them, hence you as an individual cannot join. (MichaelL come in on this!!!)
I think Adrev and others purposely blur the line on this, but they all have to play by YT rules in the end.
Also can we stop linking copyright infringement with Adrev, nobody here sanctions the illegal use of music, Adrev is short for Advertising revenue, they are there to make money.It seems using Adrev for the sole purposes of copyright infringement is like the proverbial cracking a nut with a mallet.
The only people I have seen making substantial money from this are composers you play the system and create their own channels to which they put on their own music, not chasing down inconsequential wedding videos (as annoying and wrong as this might be )
What Mark Petrie said at the start of this thread remans true
A successful YouTuber is going to want to monetize the video, so you wouldn’t get any AdRev money.
Sync fess if due will take no longer, its just a wire transfer. PRO monies will take 1 year + to migrate over the Atlantic. You will find generally PRO money is better in the UK, US TV is vast and split up into multiple affiliates/cable etc
@Tbone as you say always get pro advice, I am just commenting on my situation with the common RF model not on any other in another country.
If I was earning over 81k in synch fees I would gladly register for VAT.LOL
I will check here about a threshold on Irish derived PRO income, that could indeed be the case, although I don’t think I would exceed that one either !!!
In the UK, any individual making over £81,000 in revenue in a tax year must legally register for VAT: https://www.gov.uk/vat-registration
TBone it’s if your VAT taxable turnover is in excess of 81k not your income. Money you receive from ML for example is not VAT taxable, they are the vendor and are responsible for charging VAT or any other relevant TAX to their customer. If was licensing directly from my own website or getting commissions personally that I was invoicing for in excess of 81 k, I would have to register and charge VAT.
For example if I was earning 100k a year for PRO royalties as my only income I wouldn’t be charging the PRS VAT or paying it from my 100k. I would be paying income tax of course.
Of course always get professional accounting and legal advice on such matters in your own country. I am in Ireland BTW.
http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/taxation/vat/how_vat_works/vat_on_services/index_en.htm
Basically the place of supply POS is responsible for charging VAT or any other relevant tax, if it is applicable to the end user.
If as a trader in Ireland and I was issuing invoices for work in the EU and I exceeded the threshold , I would charge VAT.With all RF libraries I am in I don’t issue the invoice to the end user, they do, are responsible for any taxes in their own country.
I don’t issue and invoice to the library either in that scenario.The library is the one selling the product so they would be liable for any VAT issues for that sale. Just like sales tax in the US the business owner has to pay that, not the composer.
I am in the EU and as Mark said this is how it works, any income you receive from that library is subject to your countries income tax etc not VAT.
http://www.audiosparx.com/sa/artist/sounds.cfm/artist_iid.6048
Most of my RF stuff.
I am guessing this is record royalties rather than PRO ? Is PRO money not sent directly to the writer in the US ? There are always shady ways around this I suppose, I am guessing the lawyers involved knew they were on to something and were employed on a no win no fee basis, as Sly had nothing.
In Ireland we do the same Ascap or BMI, it seemed up till recently BMI was better for production music BUT it seems BMI have changed the rules a bit and has resulted in a decrease.
Stay safe over there , its even heading over here later in the week brrrrrr
That is fantastic , practise makes perfect explained very well.