The re-title game is over

[DesireInspires]

Thanks Cat Herder.

[MpgCollins]

Hey all, I'm new here!

I was reading The Business of Music Licensing by Emmett Cooke that came out this year and was recommended on this forum, and the first few steps of his 3 year plan is to create 25 cues and upload them all to 10 different non-exclusive libraries. Is this a bad idea even if you don't re-title them?

[Cruciform]

Hey all, I'm new here!

I was reading The Business of Music Licensing by Emmett Cooke that came out this year and was recommended on this forum, and the first few steps of his 3 year plan is to create 25 cues and upload them all to 10 different non-exclusive libraries. Is this a bad idea even if you don't re-title them?

Retitling has been discussed voluminously across music sites around the net. You'll find plenty of pros and cons.

If you are interested in following the retitle road, it's worth dividing your catalogue into 3 parts.

1) Stock music that goes into non-exclusive so-called royalty-free sites. This is easy, fastly produced music suitable for low-budget in-house corporate vids, student projects, website vids, etc. Keep the quality high but don't spend time on bells and whistles. Keep your prices across sites comparative so you are not competing with yourself. The client demographic here is not about broadcast although occasionally a piece will find its way into a tv spot.

2) Another slice of the catalogue aimed squarely at broadcast that you then sign into tv-focused libraries. Whether or not these libraries are exclusive or non-exclusive, it's best to treat these cues AS EXCLUSIVE. Find a few libraries that focus on this market and then divide up this section of your catalogue up among these.

3) High-end exclusive. This is your top shelf work. This is the best stuff that is aimed squarely at commercials, medium-big budget films, network shows, expensive corporate use (ie. new car unveiling at a trade show) etc. And you treat it as high-end ie. not everyone can access it. You're never 'feeding' it to stock sites or cable tv focused libraries. This is the stuff they wish they could get their hands on.

[Kolstad]

That's great advice, Rob!
Differentiation of your own catalog is definitely the way to go, so we can keep it real a la "you get what you pay for".

[MpgCollins]

Hey all, I'm new here!

I was reading The Business of Music Licensing by Emmett Cooke that came out this year and was recommended on this forum, and the first few steps of his 3 year plan is to create 25 cues and upload them all to 10 different non-exclusive libraries. Is this a bad idea even if you don't re-title them?

Retitling has been discussed voluminously across music sites around the net. You'll find plenty of pros and cons.

If you are interested in following the retitle road, it's worth dividing your catalogue into 3 parts.

1) Stock music that goes into non-exclusive so-called royalty-free sites. This is easy, fastly produced music suitable for low-budget in-house corporate vids, student projects, website vids, etc. Keep the quality high but don't spend time on bells and whistles. Keep your prices across sites comparative so you are not competing with yourself. The client demographic here is not about broadcast although occasionally a piece will find its way into a tv spot.

2) Another slice of the catalogue aimed squarely at broadcast that you then sign into tv-focused libraries. Whether or not these libraries are exclusive or non-exclusive, it's best to treat these cues AS EXCLUSIVE. Find a few libraries that focus on this market and then divide up this section of your catalogue up among these.

3) High-end exclusive. This is your top shelf work. This is the best stuff that is aimed squarely at commercials, medium-big budget films, network shows, expensive corporate use (ie. new car unveiling at a trade show) etc. And you treat it as high-end ie. not everyone can access it. You're never 'feeding' it to stock sites or cable tv focused libraries. This is the stuff they wish they could get their hands on.

Maybe I don't understand re-titling too well. I can't just submit the same cue to different libraries without changing the titles, as suggested in the book?

[Cruciform]

Maybe I don't understand re-titling too well. I can't just submit the same cue to different libraries without changing the titles, as suggested in the book?

Most non-exclusive retitling libraries add an identifier to the title. Say you have a cue called "Happy summer" and you submit that cue to four different NE retitle libs. They will add an identifier and register that new title with their PRO. The new title will typically be listed on their contract or schedule A that they send you. In any case, when you look up your registered titles with your PRO you would find something like this:

Happy summer
Happy summer-ABC
Happy summer-XZ
YY12345-Happy summer
Happy Summer-kk987

The first one is your original title that you registered. The others will be the retitles from the various libraries. Be aware that no matter how many titles there are, there is only one underlying composition and you MUST still own the copyright to that composition to be able to participate in the retitle arena. You could never sign an exclusive contract on a composition that also had non-exclusive retitles attached to it.

If you want to rename your track differently for each NE you submit to, you can do it. But they will still add their identifier. It's how they ensure cues are tracked properly so they get paid their royalties for broadcast use.

Personally, I've stopped bothering with NE retitle libs. To make them work you need a high output and be prepared to spend a lot of time uploading, tagging, describing etc. I know horror stories from this arena and I know people who've made it work with a very decent income. You've got to find out what works for you.

[Casey H]

Hey Rob
Just a note that not all (and probably not quite 'most') NE re-title libs use a tag identifier. Many don't. They often ask you to supply a unique title (e.g. "The Happiest Summer Of My Life") and then don't tag. It varies all over the board.

MpgCollins:
*IF* you do put the same tracks in multiple NE libraries, the titles all must be unique in SOME way. (Not saying anyone should or shouldn't do this-- that's another discussion)... The reason for the unique titles is the libraries generally collect the publisher's share of PRO income while the writer collects the writer's share. When a TV show (for example) uses a track they fill out a cue sheet which identifies the track, writer, publisher, etc. and send that to the PRO's. The unique title identifies who the actual publisher for THAT USAGE is so the payment can go to the correct library.

So in library 1, you might have for the same track:

"I Love You" (with or w/o a tag ID)
Writer: MpgCollins
Publisher: Library 1

and in library 2, you might have:

"You Are My Love" (with or w/o a tag ID)
Writer: MpgCollins
Publisher: Library 2

HTH
Casey

[MpgCollins]

Hey Rob
Just a note that not all (and probably not quite 'most') NE re-title libs use a tag identifier. Many don't. They often ask you to supply a unique title (e.g. "The Happiest Summer Of My Life") and then don't tag. It varies all over the board.

MpgCollins:
*IF* you do put the same tracks in multiple NE libraries, the titles all must be unique in SOME way. (Not saying anyone should or shouldn't do this-- that's another discussion)... The reason for the unique titles is the libraries generally collect the publisher's share of PRO income while the writer collects the writer's share. When a TV show (for example) uses a track they fill out a cue sheet which identifies the track, writer, publisher, etc. and send that to the PRO's. The unique title identifies who the actual publisher for THAT USAGE is so the payment can go to the correct library.

So in library 1, you might have for the same track:

"I Love You" (with or w/o a tag ID)
Writer: MpgCollins
Publisher: Library 1

and in library 2, you might have:

"You Are My Love" (with or w/o a tag ID)
Writer: MpgCollins
Publisher: Library 2

HTH
Casey

But I though the whole point of this thread is that we shouldn't be doing this... I just don't want to
get rejected by future libraries for doing it.

[Casey H]

MpgCollins
PM me and we can talk more about this, maybe even set up a phone call. There is no blacklist. No worries.

Best,
Casey

[DesireInspires]

But I though the whole point of this thread is that we shouldn't be doing this... I just don't want to
get rejected by future libraries for doing it.

You should do whatever brings you happiness and success.