TAXI.com

Can you tell on a royalty statement where each piece of music is used? I recently joined the roster of a music supervision company, and signed a non-exclusive deal for all of my works. It says in the contract that they will collect all payments and split everything 80/20. If I place a song on my own/tnrough TAXI/some other way, and this company also places the same piece somewhere else, will they be able to tell what $$ came from their placement and what didn't? Or would they just collect 20% of everything?

I hope that made sense.

The way to separate the royalties from what they places vs. what you place, is by registering each song as two different titles.

What PRO are you associated with?

Regards
Russell Landwehr

I am associated with BMI. Should I go through and register everything twice then? Thanks for the input!

do you know if the library is registering the cues with a unique identifier as a prefix?

if so, you can register the cues yourself using the same titles.

if not, its best to change the name to avoid confusion.

hope that helps.

I would only register my works with BMI if I were getting the "Publishing" share, or if the client requests it.

When I submit to TAXI listings songs that are already signed to other publishers, I change the name of the song for my TAXI listing to save confusion.

This is what works best for me. Everything I write is exclusive to that publisher, regardless of how the publisher views it. I don't rename my tracks and send them somewhere else. Once they are signed, I don't shop them around except for demo purposes.

I know there are many who disagree with me on his, and that's ok. I have decided after a lot of thought and discussion that this works for me. It keeps it very simple on my end to see which track was used where, and by what publisher. And my side of the paperwork/spreadsheet is clean and simple. It also provides a lot of motivation to keep writing new cues.

I'm not saying anyone else should follow this practice, and the excl. vs. non-excl. debat has been well discussed on many threads here. I'm just saying this is what makes sense to me.

Cheers
kc

Hi Kayle - your exclusive approach makes sense. Still trying to get my head around all of the logistics though.

I'm working on building enough songs to start pitching (plan to do this by the end of the year) and wondered are there any caveats or pitfalls to pitching multiple libraries the same re-titled songs?

In other words, I understand for record keeping purposes it would be difficult to keep track of 100 songs re-titled and submitted to 10+ libraries for example. But then I wonder, is there some amount of disclosure you have to provide to new libraries that you've re-titled the same tracks and signed them to other libraries?

Also, if I target 10 libraries that accept new composers, do I send a link to each and wait for a response from the library? Are any of these libraries setup with an automatic process where you submit and they accept the songs and send a contract.

Thx,

Steven

sabalsounds wrote: But then I wonder, is there some amount of disclosure you have to provide to new libraries that you've re-titled the same tracks and signed them to other libraries?

Nah, they don't care about where your songs have been as long as THEY get to shop them.

Russell Landwehr wrote:

sabalsounds wrote: But then I wonder, is there some amount of disclosure you have to provide to new libraries that you've re-titled the same tracks and signed them to other libraries?

Nah, they don't care about where your songs have been as long as THEY get to shop them.

That's not necessarily true. It all depends on the library. An exclusive library won't accept any cues that have been retitled and placed with another library. Some libraries will take both, exclusive and non. Some only take non exclusive. So if you are working only with non exclusive libraries, then true, they tend not to care.

You should know which business model the library is using before you pitch.

Cheers
kc

Thanks Russell and Kayle!