The Music Umbrella -- Ever worked with them?

[pamarama]

Recently I was offered a licensing contract for one of my songs through The Music Umbrella. My attorney looked at the contract and had significant issues with it. Have any of you licensed anyting with this company, and if so do you have any feedback about the experience?I have not signed anything yet.

[mojobone]

Without posting significant portions of the agreement, could you tell us what those issues were? Film and TV deals can be very different from artist deals, does your attorney specialize in that end of the business?

[pamarama]

Hey Mojobone,Thanks for responding. The issues my attorney had with the contract are in quotes below. He also had concerns about the company's track record. They provided inadequate references when asked. So, I think he did a good job looking out for me. The company DID agree to let my attorney rework the contract, but I'd wind up paying for it. So I decided to pass. He IS a music industry attorney.> "The royalty break down is very> sketchy - while a 50% fee is pretty standard for this sort of thing,> this appears to be just related to your song composition and NOT your> sound recording of the song. In any case, view the publishing rights> as consisting of two halves: the publisher's side (50%) and the> writer's side (50%). When they say that you are retaining 100% ofthe> writer's royalties, they are actually talking about 50% of the total> publishing income pie. It is very unclear here as to whether they are> taking the ENTIRE publisher's side, or are taking on 50% of the> publisher's side. The fact that this key point is unclear suggests> that this is a BAD deal, unless you are interested in a one-year deal> (plus three more if they place a song). Oddly, most "real" publishing> deals have a LOT more content to them and normally last well beyond> one (plus three years).>> Unless they can clarify the payment terms, I say pass on this deal."I was also concered because it was very poorly formatted -- as in basic layout. Kinda unprofessional.Anyway, any other feedback you might have would be appreciated. I'm new to all of this.Pam

[mojobone]

If it's a library licensing deal, that sounds pretty standard, maybe a little sloppy. Maybe some others with more experience can weigh in, here; the folks that can help you best tend to post in the Biz forum. If the deal's non-exclusive, it's hard to go too far wrong, unless some kind of placement deal is already on the table. If you already have lots of deals and placements, and you can afford to ignore it, you can politely decline; if you're building a resume, I'd say take the deal, then you're a guy with a deal-if these guys aren't the sharpest apple in the barrel, you can still pitch, you can still go write more. This isn't the only thing you're ever going to write, yes?Also, a one-year option (usually their option) is good even if exclusive-you get the rights back, pitch it some more, it's more likely to be signed if it's been signed unless the market considers it too dated for its intended use.I am not a lawyer, just a guy who believes in having one that specializes in licensing.

[pamarama]

And that was the dilemma for me. At least I'd have a deal, even if it was with someone who didn't present themselves well in writing. I've turned it down politely. I did post this question in Biz Talk, but it looks as if its been removed. This was my first time ever asking anything in the Taxi Forum. Maybe someone was annoyed that I posted the question in three categories. I was just looking for as much feedback as quickly as possible because I was trying to make a decision.

[pamarama]

I was wrong about that last post. It looks like the question is still in Biz Talk. It's missing form General Hangout. I did post it there too.