Festival License vs Ownership shares

A creative space for business discussions.

Moderators: admin, mdc, TAXIstaff

Post Reply
User avatar
shellsings
Committed Musician
Committed Musician
Posts: 976
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:50 pm
Gender: Female
Location: Germantown, MD
Contact:

Festival License vs Ownership shares

Post by shellsings » Wed Apr 03, 2013 5:12 am

Hello

Can someone explain what a Festival license is and why it is advantageous over say an outright ownership of shares for an small Indie film? The Indie film is offering deferred payment of a very small % of ownership and someone suggested to ask for a Festival License. (which if they have no budget, I would assume they couldn't pay anyway?)

It would be great to have songs in a film for building a resume etc, and perhaps do get some $ on the other end, but I also don't want to ruin any future deals. This is a non exclusive deal.

New at negotiating and sometimes feel beggars can't be choosers, at least in the beginning ;)

User avatar
andygabrys
Total Pro
Total Pro
Posts: 5567
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 10:09 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Summerland, BC by way of Santa Fe, Chilliwack, Boston, NYC
Contact:

Re: Festival License vs Ownership shares

Post by andygabrys » Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:37 am

Hey shell.

In my experience, it's advantageous for the film maker to get festival licenses for any songs that would otherwise be expensive. Films don't often make any money at festivals, so for something that only does the festival run, you as the music owner could get a small payment (hundreds or less) for festivals only, reserving the right to renegotiate if the film is picked up for distribution etc.

Assuming this is a feature length film, it could get picked up later and distributed, and you could renegotiate for a more reasonable cut.

But it also might never make a lot so a small percentage up front could end up being peanuts compared to the festival license fee.

Depends whether you feel it's better to make an investment in the film (as percentage of profit means you shoulder some risk) in return for the credit and resume building, or if you would prefer to seek a festival type license and be paid up front.

A toss up, as you realize. You likely won't burn any bridges as long as you don't ask for the moon. If this is the second or third film with a particular filmmaker, then you are developing a relationship and can be a little more confident in asking for a certain $$.

Don't know if that helps your situation.

Good luck!!

User avatar
shellsings
Committed Musician
Committed Musician
Posts: 976
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:50 pm
Gender: Female
Location: Germantown, MD
Contact:

Re: Festival License vs Ownership shares

Post by shellsings » Wed Apr 03, 2013 11:01 am

Thanks. Just found out this is a MFN deal (Most Favored Nation) and there is no budget for up front fees. If the movie makes any money then we get a certain % (low, I might add). I am still building my resume so to speak I am considering the pros and cons of this type of deal when you are starting out..

User avatar
pboss
Committed Musician
Committed Musician
Posts: 665
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2010 10:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Festival License vs Ownership shares

Post by pboss » Fri Apr 05, 2013 11:17 pm

.. As I read somewhere recently, (probably linked to from these forums) - the director has a few hundred (or less) for the caterer but not for the music.

Shell, for what it's worth, I have done this kind of thing quite a bit for local film makers, and it was kind of fun to be involved. Often there's no money and the film or video doesn't really 'go anywhere'. I have a few thoughts on this. One, when you do attend the film fest or wherever it's played, it's nice seeing your name in the credits. I have been burned by this, too. ** Make sure if you find out if it's rolling credits or a short title card that lasts for a few seconds, and get it in an agreement, that you want a title card, for example.

Once my name was in the credits, but by the time the producer/director got to the final cut at the theater, the entire list of credits was rolling by so fast that you could not even read anything. After that I realized I could define these parameters for what I wanted to ask for, and swore that if I did that again, I would make sure I had a title card for a specified amount of seconds - definitely if doing it for free. This particular situation was where we actually made the music for the film, and did not use something I already had composed.

If you are doing this for free, you can ask for say, a 3 second title card and spell out how you want it to read. You can also ask for them to sign an agreement that says, sure, you can license this for free for the festivals but anything else will require a re-negotiation. I guess that's like a festival license, but you aren't getting the money up front.

The other thing I learned when providing music for free even for radio was that there is a huge difference between giving permission to use an already-made track, and actually spending time making or editing a track. I got kind of burned there, too where I finally decided, that if someone asked for free music, then the option would be something already composed, and that I would not spend time editing or making new music, as a general rule (unless paid, of course).

There are exceptions, like when something is likely to go to Sundance, then you definitely want to be on the credits and the up-front money doesn't really matter, in my opinion. (but the contract does!).

pboss
Patty Boss composes music for NBC, CBS, CNN, Fox, Bravo, MTV, VH1, etc.

http://soundcloud.com/pattyboss
http://pattyboss.com

User avatar
shellsings
Committed Musician
Committed Musician
Posts: 976
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:50 pm
Gender: Female
Location: Germantown, MD
Contact:

Re: Festival License vs Ownership shares

Post by shellsings » Sat Apr 06, 2013 7:14 am

Thanks Patty!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests