Well known Library taking part of writers share...

[Kolstad]

PMA will come out with a public statement about giving up writers shares soon. Morgan (from PMA) wrote that composers should stand their ground on Facebook earlier in July, so OP could try to contact them. They will help you out on this issue.

Thanks for that info Kolstad. Morgan's a wonderful advocate for us but I hadn't heard the PMA was going to release an official stance on this subject. I did attend some raucous PMC meetings out at the Lowes in the fall of '18 and '19 so I had a general sense of where a majority of the writers that attended that seminar stood.

Here's a case in point for not taking the buyout/dilution of your writer's share from a few months ago..

I was offered the option of a buyout on one of my songs by a huge streaming company, you know the name. The song aired for :45 seconds on an episode in April and the 10 episode show was the most popular show on the network. It was a sync fee of between 5-10k and I had the option to just fill in an amount for the buyout. I opted to keep my back end.
The sweetest part is this placement was through a sync agent. She received 35% of the sync, I received 65% of the sync plus I received 100% of the writers and 100% of the publisher's share.

I know this example may be a bit like comparing oranges to tangerines but my point is to hold on to as much of the interest and control of your creative work as possible.

You are an inspiration, John. Thats an awesome story!

Yes, Morgan from the PMA wrote on FB that she’d be happy to help of anyone had issues with these companies. PMA is working hard at this moment with this, as they have experienced an number of cases lately. Seems some companies have been testing the waters, to see how many would be inclined to accept this type of deals. I guess they know people are under pressure due to Covid19, and try to exploit the situation.

PM me to get the exact quote from Morgan along with her email (not sure if I may post that here)..

Yeah, I guess it’s possible to set up your own shop and get a sync agent, bypassing more middle men. In the end, I think it will be the libraries that will fall in a direct battle of rights with writers/ composers. After all, they dont produce any music. Their only asset is to offer a win-win situation.

[JohnnyP]

PMA will come out with a public statement about giving up writers shares soon. Morgan (from PMA) wrote that composers should stand their ground on Facebook earlier in July, so OP could try to contact them. They will help you out on this issue.

Thanks for that info Kolstad. Morgan's a wonderful advocate for us but I hadn't heard the PMA was going to release an official stance on this subject. I did attend some raucous PMC meetings out at the Lowes in the fall of '18 and '19 so I had a general sense of where a majority of the writers that attended that seminar stood.

Here's a case in point for not taking the buyout/dilution of your writer's share from a few months ago..

I was offered the option of a buyout on one of my songs by a huge streaming company, you know the name. The song aired for :45 seconds on an episode in April and the 10 episode show was the most popular show on the network. It was a sync fee of between 5-10k and I had the option to just fill in an amount for the buyout. I opted to keep my back end.
The sweetest part is this placement was through a sync agent. She received 35% of the sync, I received 65% of the sync plus I received 100% of the writers and 100% of the publisher's share.

I know this example may be a bit like comparing oranges to tangerines but my point is to hold on to as much of the interest and control of your creative work as possible.

You are an inspiration, John. Thats an awesome story!

Yes, Morgan from the PMA wrote on FB that she’d be happy to help of anyone had issues with these companies. PMA is working hard at this moment with this, as they have experienced an number of cases lately. Seems some companies have been testing the waters, to see how many would be inclined to accept this type of deals. I guess they know people are under pressure due to Covid19, and try to exploit the situation.

PM me to get the exact quote from Morgan along with her email (not sure if I may post that here)..


Yeah, I guess it’s possible to set up your own shop and get a sync agent, bypassing more middle men. In the end, I think it will be the libraries that will fall in a direct battle of rights with writers/ composers. After all, they dont produce any music. Their only asset is to offer a win-win situation.

Hey Kolstad, I just found Morgan McKnight’s (PMC) FB post and read the comments. It seems most writers there agree with us and are of the mind that the writer’s share is sacrosanct.
If we as writers, composers and producers do not value and protect our creative content- who will?
And thank you for the kind words Kolstad. I’m only 3 and a half years in on the production music journey. It sure is an interesting one. Best, John

[DesireInspires]

Amen to that, some folks seem to rock up here thinking Taxi is an easy way to make 'mailbox money'.....then you listen to crap they're churning out ...If only these people put a fraction as much effort into learning some music skills as they do promoting themselves.

Making good music is simply not enough.

Well that changes everything!

I'm not talking about people who make good music here

[DesireInspires]

Making good music is simply not enough.

I'm not talking about people who make good music here

Well that changes everything!

[crs7string]

I can’t help but to think that if one agreed to giving up 50% of their writer’s share that, over time, there would be a build up of internal resentment.

The pitch seems to be; You will have more placements because we will be have fewer composers working on each show we provide music to.

Let’s say that comes true. Your income with this library doubles, or even triples. What if the income grows from $10,000 to $ 30,000.

You now may have the nagging feeling that the library took the other half of the writer’s share, in this case $30,000, and essentially turned it over to the production company so that the library could still be whole.

Who wins in this scenario:

Production company: YES

Music library: YES

Composer: ???

[cosmicdolphin]

I can’t help but to think that if one agreed to giving up 50% of their writer’s share that, over time, there would be a build up of internal resentment.

It is disheartening to see others names on cues sheets and PRO statements that didn't work on the tracks.

[JohnnyP]

I can’t help but to think that if one agreed to giving up 50% of their writer’s share that, over time, there would be a build up of internal resentment.

The pitch seems to be; You will have more placements because we will be have fewer composers working on each show we provide music to.

Let’s say that comes true. Your income with this library doubles, or even triples. What if the income grows from $10,000 to $ 30,000.

You now may have the nagging feeling that the library took the other half of the writer’s share, in this case $30,000, and essentially turned it over to the production company so that the library could still be whole.

Who wins in this scenario:

Production company: YES

Music library: YES

Composer: ???

Well said C. There are so many facets of this scenario that are detrimental to the composer. Best, John

[SubRivers]

I can’t help but to think that if one agreed to giving up 50% of their writer’s share that, over time, there would be a build up of internal resentment.

It is disheartening to see others names on cues sheets and PRO statements that didn't work on the tracks.

Actually that raises a point - is the OP's "well known library" asking for a co-write credit ?
Does that mean you assign 50% share of the song copyright as well as 50% of the Writer's royalties to the library ?

[Casey H]

I can’t help but to think that if one agreed to giving up 50% of their writer’s share that, over time, there would be a build up of internal resentment.

It is disheartening to see others names on cues sheets and PRO statements that didn't work on the tracks.

Actually that raises a point - is the OP's "well known library" asking for a co-write credit ?
Does that mean you assign 50% share of the song copyright as well as 50% of the Writer's royalties to the library ?

They don't take the actual copyright AFAIK. They probably re-title the tracks and register the re-titles with them as 50% writer. But still. No one should sign this deal. The more people that say yes to this library and any others, the more this will become the norm and the race to the bottom will have greatly accelerated.

[JohnnyP]

It is disheartening to see others names on cues sheets and PRO statements that didn't work on the tracks.

Actually that raises a point - is the OP's "well known library" asking for a co-write credit ?
Does that mean you assign 50% share of the song copyright as well as 50% of the Writer's royalties to the library ?

They don't take the actual copyright AFAIK. They probably re-title the tracks and register the re-titles with them as 50% writer. But still. No one should sign this deal. The more people that say yes to this library and any others, the more this will become the norm and the race to the bottom will have greatly accelerated.

yep, what Casey said.
As a matter of fact I was contacted today by a brand-new (to me) library out of London that wants to sign about 15 vocal songs. We had this same conversation re U.K. libraries taking 75% of the pie. This company doesn't ask for any of the writer's share. This library owner didn't feel it was fair to do that to songwriters. I hope this continues to be the majority position..