registering vocal songs and their bedtracks with PRO's

[Casey H]

Wow,

this is interesting. Thanks for posting this question.

So, the general consensus is if you have one song (or multiple songs) in a library that you are then putting into a different library it is potentially beneficial, with no side effects, to register an alternate title with your PRO to the effect of: "my song 123" and "my song 456".

-Just want to make sure I understand cause I think it is a good idea that I could potentially immediately implement.

No, we are talking about how the LIBRARIES re-title and register. This is not something you should do for your own registrations.

[mikeymike2000]

No, we are talking about how the LIBRARIES re-title and register. This is not something you should do for your own registrations.

I too am talking about libraries. When I send in a song to a library I can call it anything I want. (I get the impression your libraries don't give you the option to title or maybe re-title on their own)

So, if I send in "song A" to 2 or 3 libraries, it now seems to make sense to alter the name slightly so the great debate of what library will get the credit of the song becomes completely irrelevant. - I think this is genius.

If it is acceptable for a library to have this practice, why would it be unacceptable for me to have the same practice?

-Interested in our rational here.

[Casey H]

No, we are talking about how the LIBRARIES re-title and register. This is not something you should do for your own registrations.

I too am talking about libraries. When I send in a song to a library I can call it anything I want. (I get the impression your libraries don't give you the option to title or maybe re-title on their own)

So, if I send in "song A" to 2 or 3 libraries, it now seems to make sense to alter the name slightly so the great debate of what library will get the credit of the song becomes completely irrelevant. - I think this is genius.

If it is acceptable for a library to have this practice, why would it be unacceptable for me to have the same practice?

-Interested in our rational here.

That doesn't make sense to me. The libraries will do the registrations. If they add their own tags anyway, yours are irrelevant and will just muck things up. If the libraries prefer fully different titles, they will suggest those or ask you for them and register those titles. My personal opinion is just submit under the original titles and let the libraries direct the rest of the show.

It's not a matter of "acceptable" or not... Just a matter of practical reality and not overdoing things and potentially making things worse.

[mikeymike2000]

hey Casey,

What you are saying makes sense if all libraries operate that same way.

It appears to me that my comment is only applicable to me and I don't want to confuse anyone who may be reading and using this as a basis to make important decisions on where or how they get their songs out there.

So, I thank you for your input! I will keep it in mind.

[mazz]

Mike,

If you are intending on pitching and hopefully signing pieces with a library, then I would hold off on registering them with the PRO yourself. (NOTE: Registering with the PRO does not serve the same purpose as registering your Copyright but you probably already knew that.)

Here's the scenarios that are possible:

1. You sign a piece with a non-exclusive retitle library. They retitle the piece and register it under that title with the PRO. They may or may not register the alternate versions, that's up to them.

2. You sign the same piece with another non-exclusive retitle library. They also register it as in #1

3. You sign the piece with an exclusive library and they register it with the original title. At this point you cannot sign it with any other library or publisher.

I don't see why you can't retitle the piece yourself every time you submit it, and even register it under different titles, but I can see where that will become a logistical nightmare at some point unless you keep really good records. This would be multiplied if you sign it to several different re-title libraries. If you go this route, I recommend you don't then sign it to an exclusive library because it would be hard to chase down all the versions to have them removed from their catalog. If it's now exclusive, it can't, by virtue of the terms of the exclusive deal be with any other library.

Not sure if this helps.

Cheers,

Mazz

[mikeymike2000]

Hi Mazz,

This is helpful. Thanks!

The details are where it's at.

In the equation I am talking about the word 're-title' is not there. The subject libraries don't re-title and even have a specific clause stating this and then ask that I name it, tag, and do everything for them and all non-exclusively.

So, with this in mind, as someone who does keep really good records, I was thinking that I would set up a system of:

Library A: "song name 1a"
Library B: "same song name 2b"

The reason I would think this is a good idea is because if a company wanted to use a song and found it in more than 1 place, they could then choose the library that gets the business and there would be no question as to 'where did it come from' cause each library has its own code for my catalog.

I think it would be more confusing if the same song is in more than one place with the same exact title. This idea would have the same base title, but a sub-section after it. - more work, maybe so but I don't mind.

Not sure if I am over-thinking this, that is entirely possible.

[matto]

Getting back to the original question, I can't see any reason to register the track mix separately unless the writer splits are different or you need to track the two independently for other logistical reasons. I wouldn't even register the track title as an alternate title. It's the same song, just a different mix. As a matter of fact I think registering the track mix as an alternate title would be confusing since it would imply it is just a different title for the same thing...

[deantaylor]

Getting back to the original question, I can't see any reason to register the track mix separately unless the writer splits are different or you need to track the two independently for other logistical reasons. I wouldn't even register the track title as an alternate title. It's the same song, just a different mix. As a matter of fact I think registering the track mix as an alternate title would be confusing since it would imply it is just a different title for the same thing...

Thanks Matt. Writer and publisher splits are the same.

One reason I have for registering the bedtrack as an alternate title is that some of these songs are represented by companies that don't take any publishing (only a share of licensing fees), but they require 2 different titles (one for the vocal mix, one for the bedtrack).

RE: "As a matter of fact I think registering the track mix as an alternate title would be confusing since it would imply it is just a different title for the same thing" .. not sure I understand htis? what does it hurt if that is implied? i don't really understand how alternate titles are meant to be used, but my layman view says the bedtrack is a different version of the same song, so an "alternate title" seems appropriate?

[matto]

Dean,

the way alternate titles are usually used in PRO registration is if the same songs is known under different titles...e.g. "Summon The Heroes aka Olympic Theme". Both titles refer to the same piece of music and either a specific version, or all known versions of it.
Whereas in your case, one title refers to one version, and another title refers to a different version.

In case of the specific situation with the specific pitching companies you are referring to, I can't see any problem with registering the track mix as an alternate title, but if it's possible you might exploit these compositions in a different way in the future, I think registering each version separately with its own unique title is still the safer and clearner way to go...

IMH-and-non-lawyerly-O,

m

[deantaylor]

Thanks Matt. Very helpful.