TAXI.com

Hi All! This is our second contract, the first one was nice and fair and no red flags. This one is from a very reputable company with placements all over cable and network TV. I'm new, and not sure about proper form, but I'm guessing it's in poor form to disclose the name of the library. If not, I will and ask about other people's dealings with them.

They state in their contract that they pay no up front license fees. All money we would get is performance royalties paid by the PRO. Seems unfair that they get paid for the use of our music, and we don't. They can also do whatever they want with it, like re-record it.

What do you experienced people think? Is it an instance where we get our foot in the door, or do we wait for something fair?

Thanks!
Josie

License fees are typically paid, or not, by the production companies that are clients of the libraries. It could be this library doesn't pay any license fees to composers unless they actually get paid some by their clients. License fees are not as common these days as you might think, it seems. Some shows pay them, some don't. Many reality shows are low budget and use a lot of music and so they pay no license fees and it's all back end. I'm in several situations like that myself.

So you might want to dig a little deeper and see if there's a place in the contract that states that they would split some license fees if they actually do get paid some.

As far as them being able to do anything they want with your music: they probably won't re-record it, they won't have the time or the budget to do that, If your music wasn't already well produced, they wouldn't be signing it. These days the music has to be ready to go. I'm pretty sure this is boilerplate legal language, but I'm not an attorney and so that statement wasn't meant to be legal advice. But there's other things you want them to do with your music like make edits the clients request and so forth. You want them to do that because you want them to get your music to their clients and you want them to make it sellable or placeable. If they need to make an edit, then they need the legal freedom to do that to exploit your music the best ways possible.

Another thing to think about all this, particularly about them getting paid for the use of your music and you not getting paid: It's like deciding to sell your house yourself to avoid paying a realtor a commission. Do you really have the time, energy and experience to sell a house? Do you have the connections, the marketing department, the willingness to work at it as your full time job until it sells? A realtor does, I doubt that you do. It's the same with a music library. If you want to keep all the money potentially you could make from your music, then you'll have to nurture those relationships with clients (do you live in LA where the production companies are so you can do lunch with them?), you'll have to spend a lot of time marketing and doing research on outlets for your music, you'll have to know publishing, licensing and all that goes with that, you'll need a good attorney, and so on. Do you want to do that or do you want to write music? The libraries are already set up with all that infrastructure, even if they're a small operation with great connections, and they deserve to get paid for their efforts. Also, there's more of us than there are of them, so if you decide to not sign the contract, there's plenty of other composers who would love to get their foot in the door.

The license fees might be a negotiable item but I suggest you scour the contract first before you make a counter offer.

Good luck,

Mazz

Hi Josie,

That actually seems like a typical deal. It would be a good idea to hire a contract attorney to explain the terms if you're not comfortable with it. You don't need a high-price entertainment attorney to interpret a contract, just someone who's good with the legalese.

Here are some basic terms about fees that composers and artists really need to understand, so maybe this will clear up some confusion you may have. There is a difference among Licensing Fees, Upfront Fees, and Royalties.

LICENSINC FEES: These are the fees a client pays to "borrow" music from the music library. It's like getting a fishing license. There is no such thing as an "upfront" licensing fee -- that's explained below. You will NEVER get any upfront licensing fees because the client has to first want to use your piece of music. It's like going to a Blockbuster video store and renting a video (remember those?). You don't pay to rent the video until you select the movie from the shelf. Your music is on a "virtual shelf" and when the music library's client wants to "rent" your song, THEN they pay a fee to the music library, which is the licensing fee. Next, the music library will split this fee with the composer/songwriter. Most libraries have a sliding scale of how much to charge for your music, depending on the placement. For example, if a music library places 3 minutes of your song in a corporate video, you'll get a much smaller fee than if a client uses 15 seconds of your song in a major motion picture.

UPFRONT FEES: Upfront fees are paid to the composer in "work-for-hire" music libraries. The upfront fee can range from $100 per track/song to as much as $1,000 per track/song. On average, it's $250-$500 per track, depending on the style of music, the music library, the composer's credits, etc. Of the thousands of music libraries in the world, only a few libraries are work-for-hire and pay upfront fees. Because of this, it's VERY competitive and tough to get into these libraries. In most cases, the composer will NOT be entitled to any licensing fees and will only receive "royalties" from their Performing Rights Organizations (PRO). In addition, the composer will not own the copyright to the song, and the work-for-hire will be able to do whatever they want with the song, usually forever, and there is no reversion clause. So, it's a trade-off.

ROYALTIES: This is the money you will receive from your PRO (ASCAP, BMI, SESAC, etc.). These payments are quarterly. You'll ONLY get this money if your music was used in a broadcast, which is: TV, film (but not in the U.S.), on the radio, or in a concert. If your music is used on YouTube or on other internet sites, you will probably not receive any royalties, as it stands right now. Where it gets confusing is typically libraries call the money they collect for the composer "royalties" when in fact, they're the "licensing fees." Most music libraries will pay you this money on a quarterly basis. We're in a few music libraries that pay us twice a year, and one music library pays us once a month, which is very cool.

Hope that helps!

~ Tracey & Vance

Thanks for the input.

Here's what it says: "We offer no up front fees for any blanket licenses...

We split with the composers the up-front proceeds from any single track license."

I think I'm getting it. If they place a single song and receive a fee for it, do they split that and then we'll also get performance royalties? But they don't split any blanket licenses, which is a fee they collect for use of the whole library, so then we get performance royalties.

BTW, I did have a lawyer look at the contract. He didn't like it. He's been practicing law for 35 years, but entertainment law for 2. I don't think he knows yet what is industry standard. That's where you guys come in!

JosieQ

Either way, license fee or blanket, you still get performance royalties if the uses are tracked by the PROs. Typically broadcast.