TAXI.com

Hello,
So I was reading in a contract sent by a music library that even though the composer/writer grants the right of using his name and stuff, he's also aware that his work is intended primarily as production music that is customarily licensed on terms which are inconsistent with the exercise of moral rights (the right to be identified as the author or the right to object to derogatory treatment)..
I am not really sure I understand this.. any ideas?

https://www.artslaw.com.au/info-sheets/ ... al-rights/

Maybe this will help?

For 'normal' artists/writers, it is normal for them to retain moral rights, and they can effectively opt-out of certain types of usages for their song (prescription drug ads, porn, smoking, alcohol, political parties etc...) or require approval over licenses. The article posted above shows some other moral rights.

The contract is basically saying that as a production music library, they can't go through the trouble of contacting each writer to approve each license usage or keep records of what a writer does and doesn't approve. For most production writers, this is totally fine, as we don't have a personal brand associated with music like Lady Gaga might and generally want the company to be able to issue as many licenses as possible.

It just means that because it's production music, you can't block Hobby Lobby or some astroturf Koch brothers PAC from licensing it, nor keep it out of a Jello commercial that also features Bill Cosby. Not that he'll be representing Jello again any time soon. Unless they come out with Jello brand Spanish Fly.

"Selling out" is a common idiomatic pejorative expression for the compromising of a person's integrity, morality, authenticity, or principles in exchange for personal gain, such as money.[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selling_out

I'm not sure if there is a non-pejorative expression for compromising integrity,morality, authenticity or principles in exchange for personal gain, such as money?

It is common in production music to waiver moral rights. As Scott writes there are some dubious areas, but mostly it means that the library can use the music in a commercial without asking you if you are ok with that. That is not common with some artists who historically has turned down use of their music in commercials due to that might hurt their public image and credibility ect.

Thank you all for chiming in.. I really appreciate