Is it ethical for a library to ask for writer's share?

[Casey H]

Anytime a library wants a percentage of Writer's Share, run away!
It's important to never contribute any acceptance of this practice. If I recall, this practice is actually against the bi-laws of PROs such as ASCAP. However, with re-title registration they really can't tell what's happening.

Just don't do it. Period.

Best,
Casey

[mojobone]

Anytime a library wants a percentage of Writer's Share, run away!
It's important to never contribute any acceptance of this practice. If I recall, this practice is actually against the bi-laws of PROs such as ASCAP. However, with re-title registration they really can't tell what's happening.

Just don't do it. Period.

And DI: I don't think posting that link on the Taxi forum is OK by Taxi forum rules. You essentially are posting an advertisement for a library from another forum.

Best,
Casey

Technically, I believe it's within the rules; it's a forum thread about a library, not a direct link to a library, and no mention in this forum of the name. The other thing; it's pretty informative, I theenk. Maybe it violates the spirit of the rule without violating the intent.

[mojobone]

Here is a link to the discussion, which was started by the owner of this new music library: http://vi-control.net/community/threads ... ary.62602/

The worrisome word in that first post is "subscriptions".

Composer will receive 40% of the licensing fee.
Standard License fee is $49 before discounts, promotions, and subscriptions.

What's the fee gonna be for folks who have 'subscriptions''? Then, it appears there's a hybrid business model where the same tracks will be shopped to production companies, which require, "gratis delivery and 50% of the publishing" so that, "In order to keep splits even between composer and company, composer will receive 75% of the writer share of the newly retitled tracks."


There are, ahem, some legit composers over at VI Control, so I'm looking forward to reading their responses to this 'deal'.

[DesireInspires]

Yeah, I just don't see how the deal helps the songwriter or the music library.

The production company gets to make out like bandits! They get to use the music for free and they get to collect PRO royalties. Heck, maybe I need to start my own production company.

[Danny]

I turned down a deal for this exact reason.

In my experience, no other library has ever asked for a part of the writers share.

[SteveBaruah]

I've just just been offered this type of deal through a Taxi listing. I was really amazed by the library. The owners are industry vets who have worked with some huge artists. Then they explained that the library and I go 50/50 on the writers and 50/50 on the publishing. If they need to (I'm not sure how often this happens) they offer UP TO 40% of the publishing to the television company. So worst case scenario, I get 40% of ALL royalties (publisher and writer).

[Casey H]

I've just just been offered this type of deal through a Taxi listing. I was really amazed by the library. The owners are industry vets who have worked with some huge artists. Then they explained that the library and I go 50/50 on the writers and 50/50 on the publishing. If they need to (I'm not sure how often this happens) they offer UP TO 40% of the publishing to the television company. So worst case scenario, I get 40% of ALL royalties (publisher and writer).

You were offered a deal thru a Taxi library that takes a portion of WRITER'S share? Are you sure that's what the deal is? I have to ask because some people (maybe not you!) misinterpret contracts. To the best of my knowledge, Taxi doesn't accept listings from libraries who want a portion of writer's share. Yes, some libraries do a 60/40 split in their favor on SYNC fees (not thrilled with that) but that has nothing to do with writer's share on PRO.

If this truly is a deal in which the library wants a portion of writer's share (PRO), you should definitely contact Taxi about it. My PERSONAL opinion is Taxi shouldn't run listings for companies that do this.

Best,
Casey

[hummingbird]

I am very dubious about any deal in which some other entity takes any part of the writing royalties. Just think what means. It means they wrote music, lyrics, played instruments, sang, produced, or otherwise contributed to the master recording and the underlying composition. Is this really the route we want to take? Allow someone partial ownership in a composition to which they contributed nothing? Surely it's up to the entity that wants to sign the track to look for better deals. Because the more libraries and publishers give away publishing to get placements, the more we are all devalued here. JMHO.

[Danny]

Casey,

It is absolutely true. I was offered a deal but their "Proposal" stated that they get 50 percent of the writers share.

I have been around the block and never saw this before. When I questioned the contract, I was told that I asked too many questions and was told that this company was not going to be a good match for me.

Go figure, This is after they really liked my tracks.

[davekropf]

Always a hard "no" if they want a portion of the writer's share.