Music Library Clause Question

[lowden2000]

Hi Guys,

Could you help me understand the following clause:

""
4. We offer no up-front fees for any blanket licenses (a production company's license of the entire library for a given production). Composer's performance royalties are the source of income you would look to in these cases.
""

This is from the paperwork of a library I'm signing with (came out of a TAXI Forward - really excited about it!).
They split up-front fees for single-track licenses 50/50 with the composer, but the way I understand the above, they don't share any up-front fees they charge clients to access ALL of the library for a flat fee.
Is that correct?


Thank you so much, as always!


Cheers,
Dirk

[mazz]

I think you're reading it correctly. I'm not an attorney so this is purely from my studies and experience and is not legal advice.

If you're in doubt about anything, consult an attorney, that's my advice.

Cheers and congrats on the deal!!

Mazz

[Casey H]

Some libraries do a lot of blanket deals where they charge a flat fee to a network or show for unlimited access to the catalog. In this biz model, it's not practical to share that with the composers. I think I know what library you are dealing with (don't tell me) and it's a solid one with a good track record. The back end can be very lucrative. No guarantees but, for example, a friend of mine who has tracks in a library like this (probably the same one) gets quarterly checks over $1000 often. It depends on where your tracks end up. Cable pays less than prime time major network, for example, and the more often your track airs, the more money.

Licenses fees have shrunk a lot of the past 10 years due to the overwhelming amount of music available. So in a large percentage of cases, the real money is in the back end anyway. The exception might be a major placement like a feature film or a national advertising campaign-- those have higher license fees.

PS I've had a number of placements like this. The money for me hasn't been great YET (a few hundred $ to date) but I hope to get more placements. One big positive for me is the placements go on my bio and that gets other people paying more attention to other submissions.

Good luck!
HTH
Casey

[matto]

Some libraries do a lot of blanket deals where they charge a flat fee to a network or show for unlimited access to the catalog. In this biz model, it's not practical to share that with the composers.

I would have to disagree with the statement that it's "not practical". A good number of libraries do share blanket license fees for both production blankets and annual blankets. However it does create more admin work for the library so it really is a business decision.

I would agree that in most cases, lack of blanket fee participation in itself should not be a deal breaker.

[lowden2000]

Mazz, Casey, Matto,

Thanks for the congrats and quick replies!
Not sharing blanket fees is definitely not a deal breaker, good to know that some libraries do it though. Yes, from an administrative perspective it must be really difficult to share a blanket fee across the board with all composers in the library, depending on how many tracks they got signed etc.
Not that there are any deal breakers for me PERIOD at this point in the game when it comes to licensing my tracks ....
As a matter of fact, right now it's SIGN ONE TRACK GET TWO FREE ...

Thanks for all your help! Amazing how quickly you guys respond to helpless fellows like me on the forum.

Cheers,
Dirk