TAXI.com

I've seen this stipulation often. I don't understand it. Why is released music not appealing to some people? What's the down side of licensing a piece of music or song that is publicly available? Does anyone know?

ambrosiamusic wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 23, 2022 8:47 am

I've seen this stipulation often. I don't understand it. Why is released music not appealing to some people? What's the down side of licensing a piece of music or song that is publicly available? Does anyone know?

This is usually a provision of those who wish to sign music exclusively. They may wish to have 'first run' music that isn't widely known, but the real crux of the matter is likely publishing (ie, the publishing share of royalties) and copyright administration. Music published on Spotify, through CD Baby, on Youtube, and so on, may be excluded due to the licencing agreements on those platforms. Basically, they don't want any hassle in the future because you published your work before submitting it to them.

This topic was recently discussed here - topic148938.html
and would be a good read

A lot of musicians that release their own music via the likes of CDBaby - Tunecore etc, assign them as publishers often without even realising.

The LIbrary needs to be able to grant the proper rights to it's clients and collect their publishing which might not be possible if you've ticked the wrong box at your digital distributor. So it can open a whole can of worms for a an Exclusive LIbrary and just cause untold hassle that they don't need.

Far safer to only accept music written specifically for Sync.

In addition to what others said... Besides the possibility that you may have given some publishing admin rights to a distribution company like TuneCore, CDBaby, etc., there is basic nature of some deals. Some are all encompassing signing over of your copyright to the publisher (as opposed to just the right to sync your music) such that they will be the only ones that can exploit your track(s). I haven't come across this much with the music libraries I've been exposed to, just one to date. But there are deals like this out there. Now signing over your copyright may sound like this awful thing but you have to weigh it all. Are they better equipped to get your song placed? You still would generally earn 50% of placement revenue. So it depends on your own comfort and situation.

Also, some libraries want control over any streaming releases in case they want to tie a major placement and streaming release together. These are generally fairly high end placements.

Casey

ambrosiamusic wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 23, 2022 8:47 am

I've seen this stipulation often. I don't understand it. Why is released music not appealing to some people? What's the down side of licensing a piece of music or song that is publicly available? Does anyone know?

Beyond what others have mentioned, there is also one specific thing in copyright law that comes into play. Specifically, the owner of a copyright has the right of first release. However, after that first release, there is a compulsory mechanical license. In the case of songs meant to be pitched to artists, this means the publisher can charge a higher mechanical rate than the rate set out for compulsory licensing in copyright law. (At least in the USA -- I don't know if this applies elsewhere in the world.)

Rick