Is it ethical for a library to ask for writer's share?

[DesireInspires]

Nice history lesson, Debra.

I guess giving up a part of the writer's share may become an accepted practice.

[Casey H]

Although many composers might turn away from these types of deals, I’m afraid that it’s the thousands of other writers that will go for them which will eventually establish this as the new norm. Take a look back 15 or 20 years ago and see just how much less a writer gets today than they use to. A 50/50% was the normal split between a writer and a library. Now one of the biggest royalty free libraries out there only offers 35/65 split on license fees. Many libraries don't even pay licensing fee to writers. Leaving us to rely primarily on back-end royalties. All these practices have become the norm now days because enough writers agreed to them when they were first introduced.

Very true... Sadly, the supply/demand ratio right now is not in our favor.

[guscave]

Not sure if this is on point, but Paul Anka shared in an interview that there was another composer vying for the Tonight Show Theme. And Paul cut a deal with Johnny Carson, where Johnny took the publishing and shared the writer's share with Paul. Was Johnny the publisher or the writer? No. But without that, would Paul have signed the theme? According to Paul, no. And as he said in the interview half of something is better than all of nothing.

In 1962, when Johnny Carson took over the NBC "Tonight Show" from Jack Parr, he commissioned Anka for a new theme song. Paul suggested a song that he had already written called "Toot Sweet". After a lyric was added in 1959 it was re-named "It's Really Love" and under that title, was recorded by Annette Funicello on her LP, "Annette Sings". Under a deal with Carson, Johnny became the "author" for copyright purposes and got a piece of not only the publishing but the composer's share too. Both Anka and Carson's names were listed as writers and the two began collecting BMI performance royalties. The pair got $200 in royalties every time the show aired...and it ran for 32 years, 52 weeks a year, 5 nights a week -- which works out to $1,664,000.00 -- not bad for an old tune that had been re-cycled.

http://www.classicbands.com/anka.html

IMO - You have to decide if it's a good deal for you.

I see your point but in this example, Paul Anka was able to negotiate directly with the end user (Johnny Carson). The problem here is that libraries (the middleman) are negotiating these types of deals, and when too many writers start to float along with something like this, it starts to become a "standard" and you loose your ability to choose.

It would be great if we could all negotiate directly with production companies, but not many of us have that type of connection, so we have to rely on libraries to get us there.

[eeoo]

As I understand it a royalty free library is one that pays a one time fee for the right to unlimited synchronization of a given track as opposed to needle drop music where a license fee is paid for every use, even within the same show. But a writer will still collects the writer's share of the backend, even in a royalty free library deal. Am I understanding correctly or am I off base here? Just trying to get my brain around these terms if someone could fill in the blanks for me I'd appreciate it.

eo

[guscave]

As I understand it a royalty free library is one that pays a one time fee for the right to unlimited synchronization of a given track as opposed to needle drop music where a license fee is paid for every use, even within the same show. But a writer will still collects the writer's share of the backend, even in a royalty free library deal. Am I understanding correctly or am I off base here? Just trying to get my brain around these terms if someone could fill in the blanks for me I'd appreciate it.

eo

Hi Eo,
The type of deal you’re referring to is a “blanket license”. A library does not pay for this, but rather offers it to their clients (editors, production companies, etc…). IMO you should always keep 100% of your writer’s share, and if for whatever reason you do decide to split any part of it, you should get upfront money for it.

Again just my 2 cents...

[eeoo]

Thanks Gus, I guess maybe I don't understand what a royalty free library is then. The name implies that you give up your backend but that couldn't be true, right?

eo

[Casey H]

Thanks Gus, I guess maybe I don't understand what a royalty free library is then. The name implies that you give up your backend but that couldn't be true, right?

eo

No, you don't usually give up your back end. The name "royalty free" is confusing. It just means they pay one fee and no additional royalties for each play. Remember, a great percentage of RF placement are non-broadcast which don't pay PRO anyway. With many RF libraries, however, if there was a broadcast placement and cue sheets were filed, you would get back end royalties. In some cases you have to manage the publishing and cue sheets yourself (e.g. be the publisher and collect the publisher's share) while in other cases, the library acts as the publisher. Some RF libraries offer you the choice. I'm in one RF library and I opted to let them be the publisher.

Casey

[eeoo]

Okay, so how does that differ from a blanket license?

[slideboardouts]

Okay, so how does that differ from a blanket license?

In a way they are very similar. Both are one time fees to a certain extent. But usually royalty free libraries sell license one track at a time, or maybe a collection of ten. Some will sell their entire library at a discounted rate but most do not. After the client pays for those licenses, they can use the music forever. Thats the main difference: the time period of the license.

A blanket license is usually paid to a library for use of the entire library and usually its on a per year basis or some other limited time period. I'm just making numbers up here, but lets say NBC pays library X $10,000 to use their 30,000 track library for one year. Then the next year they pay that blanket license again (of course, by this time the library has more tracks than the original 30,000). Whereas with a royalty free library they would pay that $10,000 once and could use those 30,000 tracks in perpetuity without having to pay another dime.

Blankets are usually done for broadcast clients where as royalty free is usually for non-broadcast clients. You don't surrender performance royalties on either.

-Steve

[eeoo]

Got it, thanks for clarifying Steve!

eo