#61802 by Kramerguy
Mon Mar 30, 2009 8:13 pm
Mon Mar 30, 2009 8:13 pm
Protecting your music
The industry is going through a cyclic change. Fans get bored by the "same old" and start looking at grassroots efforts, regional bands, and want more organic and real music as opposed to "sanitized and plastic".
The differences between a publisher and a licenser are this:
- A licenser just sells for you, basically throws everything at everyone and sees what sticks. Usually doesn't negotiate high (lowballing as part of the seeing what sticks) and CAN be a good way to break into the scene, but overall is less connected to you and your art, and you would probably not make a living off it. I believe the split is in the area of 70/30 (you get the 70). Licensed music sales are a one-time paid fee to use your art and are not affected by the success of the film they appear in.
- A publisher is part of the ownership and is solidly vested in seeing it succeed. The usual split on royalties is 50/50, but the negotiated price is usually much higher than the licensed sale. Publishers are also more detailed in contracts, so if your music ends up in an indie film that becomes a 300mil blockbuster, you would benefit from the success by the way of sales-volume royalties; it would be built into a publishers contract with the film-makers.
Many musicians and singer/songwriters choose to license their art for use in film and TV. The folks inside the TV/film studio who choose and propose the sounds/music for scenes are "supervisors". Supervisors are also, and more importantly responsible for all legals pertaining to the music. They have to worry about the bassist who quit the band 3 years ago, that claims he contributed to the song in the movie. For this reason alone, they tend to stick with mid-level (no start-ups) libraries and publishers with solid reputations, who can deliver 'clean' material to them with no legal tie-ups.
For the artist, this means that these publishers will expect you to "have your sh*t together" (discussed in the publicity & press section), by owning the copywrights, not only to the original music, but to the masters. Apparently, the music you wrote and it's copywright belong to you, but the master recordings are the creation of the studio, and everyone in that studio who contributed to that project. You MUST protect yourself, get an entertainment lawyer and have contracts drawn that give you exclusive ownership of the masters. No studio should have an issue with that, and some of the less reputable ones might fight you on signing such a contract (they will want their piece of the pie), but they really have no justification for expecting such. Protect yourself.
You should also during your studio time have them create the following:
- Master recordings (complete mastered songs)
- All vocal tracks with just vocals and FX.
- All instrumental tracks without FX added.
Publishers will be more likely to sign you on if you have those, and if there are any contributions to the songwriting, just make sure your ent. lawyer draws up a 50/50 (or other ratio) contract for dual copywright ownership. No supervisor or publisher will want to touch your art without full ownership details (it's ok to have dual or more people as contributors, so long as it's all contracted).
There are exclusivity and non-exclusicity contracts you can sign with publishers. Exclusivity will get you a better relationship and more visibility with your publisher, and he/she will in turn promote you more to the supervisors than if you are non-exclusive to him/her. Non-exclusivie contracts can also be valuable, but are generally less rewarding. Exclusive contracts are much harder to get, simply becuase the publishers are careful about who they get behind. Your art has to be top notch, and you have to have a consistent relationship with them.
In summary, there really aren't right and wrong ways to approach the publishing models, but what's necessary to get started is solid songwriting, a full catalog (50-100 songs), positive and consistent relationships with publishers, licensers, and writers, critics, sound techs, and obviously - other musicians. The best way to do most of it is to attend conferences and meet these people. They offer mentoring, adcive, critiques, seminars, and generally are very helpful and approachable.
Also, I am NOT posting this info anywhere else but here, just because you guys on these forums are really cool and deserve to know. I'd not want to share this on other forums and show competing bands how to get ahead of me
So don't go spreading this around pfft!
The industry is going through a cyclic change. Fans get bored by the "same old" and start looking at grassroots efforts, regional bands, and want more organic and real music as opposed to "sanitized and plastic".
The differences between a publisher and a licenser are this:
- A licenser just sells for you, basically throws everything at everyone and sees what sticks. Usually doesn't negotiate high (lowballing as part of the seeing what sticks) and CAN be a good way to break into the scene, but overall is less connected to you and your art, and you would probably not make a living off it. I believe the split is in the area of 70/30 (you get the 70). Licensed music sales are a one-time paid fee to use your art and are not affected by the success of the film they appear in.
- A publisher is part of the ownership and is solidly vested in seeing it succeed. The usual split on royalties is 50/50, but the negotiated price is usually much higher than the licensed sale. Publishers are also more detailed in contracts, so if your music ends up in an indie film that becomes a 300mil blockbuster, you would benefit from the success by the way of sales-volume royalties; it would be built into a publishers contract with the film-makers.
Many musicians and singer/songwriters choose to license their art for use in film and TV. The folks inside the TV/film studio who choose and propose the sounds/music for scenes are "supervisors". Supervisors are also, and more importantly responsible for all legals pertaining to the music. They have to worry about the bassist who quit the band 3 years ago, that claims he contributed to the song in the movie. For this reason alone, they tend to stick with mid-level (no start-ups) libraries and publishers with solid reputations, who can deliver 'clean' material to them with no legal tie-ups.
For the artist, this means that these publishers will expect you to "have your sh*t together" (discussed in the publicity & press section), by owning the copywrights, not only to the original music, but to the masters. Apparently, the music you wrote and it's copywright belong to you, but the master recordings are the creation of the studio, and everyone in that studio who contributed to that project. You MUST protect yourself, get an entertainment lawyer and have contracts drawn that give you exclusive ownership of the masters. No studio should have an issue with that, and some of the less reputable ones might fight you on signing such a contract (they will want their piece of the pie), but they really have no justification for expecting such. Protect yourself.
You should also during your studio time have them create the following:
- Master recordings (complete mastered songs)
- All vocal tracks with just vocals and FX.
- All instrumental tracks without FX added.
Publishers will be more likely to sign you on if you have those, and if there are any contributions to the songwriting, just make sure your ent. lawyer draws up a 50/50 (or other ratio) contract for dual copywright ownership. No supervisor or publisher will want to touch your art without full ownership details (it's ok to have dual or more people as contributors, so long as it's all contracted).
There are exclusivity and non-exclusicity contracts you can sign with publishers. Exclusivity will get you a better relationship and more visibility with your publisher, and he/she will in turn promote you more to the supervisors than if you are non-exclusive to him/her. Non-exclusivie contracts can also be valuable, but are generally less rewarding. Exclusive contracts are much harder to get, simply becuase the publishers are careful about who they get behind. Your art has to be top notch, and you have to have a consistent relationship with them.
In summary, there really aren't right and wrong ways to approach the publishing models, but what's necessary to get started is solid songwriting, a full catalog (50-100 songs), positive and consistent relationships with publishers, licensers, and writers, critics, sound techs, and obviously - other musicians. The best way to do most of it is to attend conferences and meet these people. They offer mentoring, adcive, critiques, seminars, and generally are very helpful and approachable.
Also, I am NOT posting this info anywhere else but here, just because you guys on these forums are really cool and deserve to know. I'd not want to share this on other forums and show competing bands how to get ahead of me
So don't go spreading this around pfft!