Exclusive vs. Non-Exclusive

[fusilierb]

A question...

If one was trying to get music into an exclusive library, would you pitch it to one at a time and wait for a formal rejection or pitch it to multiple and first in gets it?

This whole thread has been an education for me as I hadn't even considered the downside of non-exclusive libraries and retitling but the arguments against it are quite persuasive.

Rob O.

I think that you would pitch the amount they accept as a pitch. These libraries are much harder to get into and don't usually let the general public submit directly to them (hence Taxi). But if you've found one, pick your best pieces (the most placeable and the most representable of what you can do) and use those for a pitch. If they open up the door, then give them more, but don't give them everything until you see if they are really working for you or not as you are locking up the publishing side of these pieces when you sign with them.

hth's
B

[Cruciform]

fusilier,

I think you misunderstood my question. I wasn't asking if you pitch one song at a time, but whether to submit to exclusive libraries one at a time, or to multiple libraries and (ideally) be in a position to choose.

Rob O.

[fusilierb]

Oh yeah, totally different question. Definitely multiple and then choose.
B

[Eric Bolvin]

So what about non-exclusive deals that DON'T re-title?

[Eric Bolvin]

And...What if a library wants an exclusive deal on a song that is already signed to another non-exclusive deal?

[Casey H]

And...What if a library wants an exclusive deal on a song that is already signed to another non-exclusive deal?

You cannot enter an exclusive library deal on a song if there are other library deals in place or if you have anything else out there that would conflict with the exclusive contract.

If you get offered an exclusive and already have one or more non-exclusives on the song, you can only sign the exclusive if you can terminate the other deals (assuming that's what you want to do). Library contracts vary alot. Some non-exclusives have a clause whereby you can terminate with a certain amount of written notice (60 or 90 days). Others, not at all or only at the end of a term such as 2, 3, or 5 years.

Also, keep in mind that even if you have a non-exclusive signed for the instrumental-only portion of a song, it would still be a conflict. That question comes up from time to time.

Good luck,
Casey

[davewalton]

So what about non-exclusive deals that DON'T re-title?

I don't know if there is such a thing. The retitling is simply an accounting thing so that Library A gets publishing royalties for placements on "their title", Library B gets publishing royalties for placements on "their title", etc.

[guscave]

So what about non-exclusive deals that DON'T re-title?

I don't know if there is such a thing. The retitling is simply an accounting thing so that Library A gets publishing royalties for placements on "their title", Library B gets publishing royalties for placements on "their title", etc.

There are some nonexclusives that don't retitle. I work with two.

[Casey H]

So what about non-exclusive deals that DON'T re-title?

I don't know if there is such a thing. The retitling is simply an accounting thing so that Library A gets publishing royalties for placements on "their title", Library B gets publishing royalties for placements on "their title", etc.

There are some nonexclusives that don't retitle. I work with two.

If a non-exclusive libary only shares in license fees but not PRO royalties, they don't have to re-title. Like Gus, I know 1-2 like that. I do wonder how those libraries can generate enough income in today's market whereby license fees are shrinking so much. But it does seem to work for them.

Casey

[monteverdejon]

incredibly informative and enlightening discussion. thanks everyone.