TAXI.com

Hi Taxi friends

I'm rather new to all this, therefore still some questions, I hope you can help.
I had a forward to a publisher who offer 50/50 and a exclusive deal in perpetuity.
If theres no money up front, what to expect?

I have no clue how many placement the publisher have.

What do you do, what is your experience with this?



This is the track btw https://soundcloud.com/tonemester/drifting-apart

It's not unusual, just depends on what you're comfortable with. I have no problem with it as I'm not precious about any single song/cue, I plan on producing many, many more! Honestly the more familiar you get with this biz the more you'll see that that is a petty standard deal and if you like and trust the publisher I wouldn't hesitate.

Thanks for your answer!
I think the perpetuity is an issue for me I have to deal with somehow, cause it feels like a "giveaway".
It is good to hear what other people experience.

Ernst wrote:Thanks for your answer!
I think the perpetuity is an issue for me I have to deal with somehow, cause it feels like a "giveaway".
It is good to hear what other people experience.

It is a giveaway. Give it up. Make more.

Ok then.

I would not sign an exclusive deal in perpetuity without advance. An exclusive deal for a limited period of time, is a different proposition, though. In that case, I'd might try it. But with exclusive in perpetuity without advance, you take a big risk of giving up ownership without never seeing anything in return, as some libraries give their clients blanket deals, subscribtion deals, goes to streaming ect. If it is exclusive in a limited time period, you can withdraw if they pull something like that, but if it is in perpetuity, you can't. So, it depends on if you know the library or not, and if trust is established, imo, of course.

But I can only tell you what I'd do, not give any advice.

Could you ever imagine anyone signing an exclusive real estate listing into perpetuity? Is it really a deal? Is it really even a contract? At least you could set the price in the real estate deal presumably. Maybe it's apples and oranges? At least in one of those " buy and kill the story" journalism escapades, the person gets hush money,lol! You'd really have to trust the reputation of the other party it seems to me. That's not even discussing whether or not it's ethical.

Len911 wrote:Maybe it's apples and oranges?

It is.

I would sign the deal and then make more music for non-exclusive use. More is more. So make some tracks, then make some more tracks. After that, make more. Never run out of material. The machine has to be constantly fed.

More than half of the songs I get backend royalties on are from exclusive libraries. And some of those are in perpetuity with no money upfront. It does suck as this is now very common business practice, however to be honest I really don't have the time to follow up on tracks that are sign with reversion clause to see if I need to get them back. Most reversions are for 1 or more years. By the time the expiration date rolls around I've written tons of new material.

guscave wrote: By the time the expiration date rolls around I've written tons of new material.

By the time the reversion clause comes around and the music is 3-5yrs old I'll be listening to it thinking " man..this sucks..no wonder it never got placed..my current stuff is so much better "

So as long as the Library seem to have a decent track record then I wouldn't worry personally. Like D.I. said..make more..your ability to create is not a finite resource.