track on compilation /exclusive library deal still possible?

[sonotoni]

Hi there,

I posted something similar last week...this one is more specific.
it would be great, if you guys could help me understand this

a record lable wants to sign some of my tracks for their compilations.
this would be a non-exclusive deal and as far as I understood only for compilations.
I wonder if signing a non-exclusive compilation deal would be a problem for exclusive
deals later on.
I'd kind of like to focus on exclusive libraries, as I read that this is the better option
for the future.
does signing a song to a record company (non-exclusive for only compilation releases) have the same effect as signing the song to a non-exclusive library for a possible future signing to an exclusive library. I thought it's actually something else as music libraries and record companies do different things, but I'm not sure.

of course it would be great to release a song on compilations, still having the option to sign the songs to an exclusive library...does this work?

I also wonder what the "re-title game" is...

I'm kind of clueless concerning library music as I haven't worked in this paricular business before...so I might be asking silly questions...sorry for that

thank you

[davewalton]

Hi there,

I posted something similar last week...this one is more specific.
it would be great, if you guys could help me understand this

a record lable wants to sign some of my tracks for their compilations.
this would be a non-exclusive deal and as far as I understood only for compilations.
I wonder if signing a non-exclusive compilation deal would be a problem for exclusive
deals later on.
I'd kind of like to focus on exclusive libraries, as I read that this is the better option
for the future.

Bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

Generally speaking, exclusive means exclusive which means that the company signing (and maybe paying $$$$$) for that exclusivity doesn't want that music floating around and maybe showing up as competition to itself elsewhere. For decision making it's probably best to go with the most likely outcome and a non-exclusive deal most likely will preclude any future exclusive deals.

But, if you have the ability to efficiently write more music and produce more songs, for the most part, if the compilation deal is a good deal, it wouldn't make a lot of sense to turn a deal-in-hand down for a deal that doesn't yet exist for you. If you're writing new music, that new music (which will probably be better because we all improve over time) will then be available for whatever exclusive deal that might come up in the future.

I also wonder what the "re-title game" is...

Non-exclusive/re-title deals are an integral and important part of the overall opportunities that Taxi provides through the listings. The Taxi Rally will have non-exclusive library owners as mentors, panelists, etc along with the same from the exclusive side of the fence. Taxi provides wonderful exclusive AND non-exclusive opportunities and they will aparently continue to do so because they've said nothing to the contrary. At the time that Laskow/Taxi posts something to the effect of "We will no longer be providing listing opportunities for any non-exclusive deals...", then it's time to maybe look at non-exclusive deals in a different light.

Me, I listen to both sides and for the most part, just follow what Taxi does. I'm not particularly "connected" so I take my cues from Taxi and that's a pretty safe bet. Laskow is probably one of the better connected people in the industry and "we're abandoning all non-exclusives" isn't coming from his lips (or keyboard) as of yet.

Retitle as a business model is nothing more than an accounting thing so that a library representing your track can collect publishing royalties on a song for their placements while allowing you to also collect publishing royalties on that same song for any placements/deals you make. You have a song called "My Song". I'm a library. I license that song from you non-exclusive and call it "DW-MySong". I place "DW-MySong" in a tv show and I collect the publisher share of the royalty for that title and you collect the writer's share. Separately, you make friends with a tv show producer who also wants to use your song. You place your title (titled "My Song") in a tv show and you collect the publishing royalties as well as the writers royalties for that placement using that title. No fuss, no muss, no problem. You get the best of both worlds.

The problem has been (and continues to be) composers/musicians that place boatloads of the same songs into multiple non-exclusive libraries, all of whom more or less serve the same market. So a network or production company signs a blanket licensing deal with multiple libraries, pays each library for that blanket deal and finds out that there's duplication, that they've paid multiple times for the same songs with different titles. Understandably they're not happy. Some or maybe all of the major networks are making or considering some kind of policy not to do blanket licensing deals with non-exclusive libraries. A top non-exclusive library (which doesn't do blanket deals) wrote in an email that this doesn't affect them as they continue to license their tracks individually. So the thing about networks not working with any non-exclusive libraries is not an absolute.

So... some or maybe all non-exclusive catalogs doing *blanket* deals with the networks are going to get phased out of those specific opportunities (sort of). Some libraries are just setting up exclusive catalogs along side their non-exclusive, offering to transfer any music into the exclusive catalog if it qualifies and then making that available for the blanket deals. Personally I only know of the one non-exclusive library that's saying that their business isn't affected because they don't do blanket deals and they continue to provide music to all the major networks. Maybe they're the only one or maybe there's others in that same situation. I don't know. Regardless, ad agencies, movie trailer houses, foreign television, cable shows, corporate media, compilation CD's, etc, are all viable markets for music represented by non-exclusive catalogs.

There's a middle ground that Taxi is taking and that's reflected in their listings which includes both exclusive and non-exclusive deals. Their listings are probably the most balanced viewpoint.

FWIW,

Dave

PS - I'm in both exclusive and non-exclusive catalogs. They each have their plus's and minus's. I have no opinion (based on my experience) on which is better. I've been fortunate to have had good placements though the handful of libraries that I'm in (which incidentally, either came as a direct or indirect result of Taxi).

[sonotoni]

Hi Dave,

great...thanks a lot!!!
that was very helpful

finally I get the "blanket" and the "re-title" thing.

I really appreciate that...thanks again.

best wishes
Toni

[sonotoni]

...one more little question:

are the Taxi listings usually for non-exclusive deals as long as they don't mention "exclusive" in the listing?

[coachdebra]

Generally speaking, exclusive means exclusive which means that the company signing (and maybe paying $$$$$) for that exclusivity doesn't want that music floating around and maybe showing up as competition to itself elsewhere. For decision making it's probably best to go with the most likely outcome and a non-exclusive deal most likely will preclude any future exclusive deals.

But, if you have the ability to efficiently write more music and produce more songs, for the most part, if the compilation deal is a good deal, it wouldn't make a lot of sense to turn a deal-in-hand down for a deal that doesn't yet exist for you. If you're writing new music, that new music (which will probably be better because we all improve over time) will then be available for whatever exclusive deal that might come up in the future.

Dave,
Thank you so much for this reply! It just came up in a session yesterday with a client and you did a great job explaining what I did only a mediocre job of saying. I'm sending him a link to this thread! Awesomeness!

Warm regards,
Debra

[davewalton]

...one more little question:

are the Taxi listings usually for non-exclusive deals as long as they don't mention "exclusive" in the listing?

That's a good question and probably best answered by Taxi themselves. I see that it appears that exclusive listings are designated specifically so I'm guessing that's the case but a quick phone call or email to Taxi to clarify wouldn't hurt.

[sonotoni]

that makes sense

thanks, Dave!

best wishes
Toni