JPF Home Page Forums General Messages Mentor Questions Forum Publisher Vs. Libraries

I am an independent artist who is releasing his first CD. I'm well known in my area and have hopes of becoming a well known artist with a unique style as well as getting some of songs into movie and TV. A publisher has shown interest in my music and I have been accepted into a music library. The publisher has said that you have to do one or the other, IE you can't have someone publishing your song and then have it in a library.

How do I go about deciding which to do?

The publisher also thinks that the renaming of songs to put in libraries is "a lawsuit waiting to happen" and that it's not wise to submit to them because of that. My thought is that even if different libraries sued each other over some song that it would be there fight and that a publishers opinion on this is obviously influenced by his own interests, am i right?

Also I have been contacting some supervisors directly and have gotten some interest that way. I'm read up on the right questions to ask and such, but in terms of getting the best deal would it be wise to have someone negotiate with them or simply do it myself? Since a publishers job is as I see it 1) to get deals for you in the first place, if you can get your own deals do you not need a publisher?

I paid for the production myself and my producer is "paid off" and I paid a couple of pros, but most of the album is friends of mine who played for "free" but I assume will want a piece if the album is successful. I don't have any money to pay them up front. If I get a song placed for significant income I intend to make a work per hire agreement for each song that gets placed. Does this seem like a workable way to approach the situation?

Thanks for your insight and for such a great board.

Hey DrSad,

You're asking a lot of questions here, so I'll just be blunt and enumerate....

1) If you sign with a publisher, it's exclusive, and they take 50%.

2) If you wish to place your music with a "library", then that may be exclusive, (i.e. the library is taking on the role of "publisher" ) or non exclusive. eg if they place the music, then it's a 50\50 split.

3) Always go for the non-exclusive deal. It's still 50/50, but doesn't tie your music up.

4) If the publisher is the real deal, then sign with a reversion clause. ( In other words, if nothing happens, say, after 2 yrs, you're cut and dried to find another publisher )

5) Be aware that there are "publishers" and there are "publishers". I'm a "publisher", but not in the true sense of the word. If you want a real publisher, check out Dude McClean, http://www.songconsultant.com/ No endorsement here, but just real in terms of songwriting.

Good luck....

cheers, niteshift

Good Mornin', "Sad:"

Niteshift has pointed you in the right direction. IMHO, Libraries don't have the same "rights" as legitimate publishers. They are seldom involved in the legwork of promoting your song. It will simply be available in their list of genres and tags for moviemakers, etc. to peruse and possibly select. Everything I have read indicates that Song Libraries may use your work on a non-exclusive basis. If this particular library wants exclusive rights, they should be willing to pay you significant "up-front" money.

Dude McClean is a good resource and often posts here at JPF.

Best wishes and welcome to JPF.

Dave Rice

http://showcaseyourmusic.com/DaveRice

Doc,

Welcome to JPF.

I thought I'd make a comment on this:





Don't depend on friends to make a verbal committment to sign a "work for hire" agreement. If you want an education, watch Judge Judy. I'd say nearly 3/4 of the folks on there are friends who have opposing ideas as to just what their verbal agreement is. As they say, "A verbal contract is only worth the paper it's signed on."

Buddies and bandmates will often say they are working for the love of music and are not interested in the money. That usually ends the day the money starts coming in. So, if you don't have a contract now that spells out exactly what is owed to whom in return for which, expect trouble.

Besides this, you'll probably find that libraries and/or licensing entities will contain language in their contract or rules that says you must completely own all rights to the recording and may transfer such rights unencumbered. If you get a movie or tv deal that might make a few bucks, and one of your friends holds out for more money, you might kiss that connection goodbye forever.

So, get your deal in writing. Either a "work for hire" agreement or a legal letter of intent that states such an agreement will be signed for x in return at such a time that the work generates money...and I'd strongly recommend you have an experienced entertainment attorney word such a letter.

Finally, make absolutely certain you have either a "work for hire" agreement or a musician's union contract that covers such use with your producer and your pro musicians.

Good luck. Hope you make a lot of money. Keep us posted.


All the Best,
Mike

Thank you all for the responses.

Can I assume from the responses that people think libraries are generally a good idea?

When you sign an agreement to have your songs in a movie or tv or whatever at that point does the person then say "show us your work for hire agreements"? I thought I had read instead somewhere that they have you sign something saying that you own all the work yourself and protecting them from possible lawsuits. So that if a bandmember got angy there only recourse would be to sue me instead of them.

If I go to my friends now and say "I want you to sign an aggrement to pay you $200 a song if sell the song" and then I get a deal that's for very little money that I want to take what do I do.

My project required only about an hour or two per song recording time from most people but involved more then a dozen musicians. Most of whom were good, but not pro musicians. How do I go about setting a rate of payment. My general thought is that I want to pay them more then the standard "rate", since they believed in me and were willing to work without any money up front.

I'm tempted to just set a figure, like $200, and tell everyone that's what they'll get paid on a song by song basis. I come from a fairly tight community of people in my city and I think if I tell everyone that's what everyone else is getting (and imply I could always re-record their parts if they don't play ball) then it would be fine.

But I'm still concerned about all this, any further thoughts would be appreciated.

This is a bit tricky but I will try. Since you are the Artist and it will be your recordings that may be used from a music library I might go for that and forgo the Music Publisher.

Or you can require a clause in the Publishing Contract(s) that allows you to exclude the publisher from any Music Library royalities and also not allow a music library to pitch to an artist but only use your original recordings in any placements.

The Publisher would not have any rights anyway to your Sound Recordings so you may be able to work it all out as long as everyone agrees and it is put in writing in the agreements.

When you sign a Publishing Contract the publisher owns the copyright but you can keep some rights, you just have to spell it out. Good luck!

Yes if it is a real deal then yes, it is exclusive. But it's not always 50/50. A good co-pub would be. But a first deal doesn't always work out that way. Alot of times with new writers the deal is more like they get 100% publishing, you get 100% writers. Which I suppose is 50/50, sort of. Only you don't retain ownership. Of course later on, there's an option to buy it back. But the reality is most publishers aren't giving out co-pubs to unproven people, and alot wont do it period. They may give you a deal, but a co-pub would be asking alot of a publisher for a first deal. Unless you were also an artist. Then it would only seem fair to 50/50 it, for songs you actualy cut.

Thanks to all who have responded to this thread. I'm still debating how to pay my musicians (I have no upfront money to give them having spent all my money on making the album).

I'm coming around to simply giving everyone a "point" of the Master Use Fee (not the synch fee), this will come to 10% on some songs since I have so many musicians, but I'm happy to do it since they all did such a great job and I'll be keeping the Sync Fee For myself. There's is an sample contract at the end of the CRAFT AND BUSINESS OF SONGWRITING book which says how to do this.

One thing that worries me though is a sentence in the book "it could compromise or preclude your ability later to make a deal with the publisher or others who placed your song, with whom you need to share all or part of the master use fee."

ARGH!

I don't have a publisher/library right now but have some interested generated. I'm pretty sure that I can get people to sign off of the 1% deal but now I read this. Anyone have any suggestions as to how I might structure a deal so that I can pay everyone but not preclude my ability to make deals with publishers/etc.

Piece of cake, Doc. Make the cut you give to the musicians a cut of your net profit. I doubt if any publisher or library will care what you do with your net profits.

All the Best,
Mike

An addition, make sure you have it in writing that you are the only party who can enter into negotiations about the song. You should have sole ownership, just that you agree to share the net profit you make.

Well my thought was to use the contract at the back of "The Craft And Business Of Making Music" which states that I own I rights but that I'll give them 1% of the Master Use Fee that's paid to me, NOT the SYNC FEE (which is where A lot of profits are as I understand it because this is paid on reruns and the master use fee isn't).
To give people 1% of the total profits might be a much bigger amount.
So I'm still inclined to go with the 1% of the Master use fee, this would at most be 10% (on some songs with alot of players) and I'm hoping that's a percentage that wouldn't cut into a publishers profit, I mean they typically wouldn't take 100% of the master use fee would they?

I got accepted at Pumpaudio and I was all ready to sign with them, then I heard from someone that they are "cheap", IE they don't get alot of money for the artists. I don't mind them taking 50% of a deal or whatever, but if the money they get is less then what you might otherwize get then that is doubly disapointing, anyone have any thoughts?

Just one thing

Yes if you can get your deals yourself you do not need a Publisher, in effect you are The Publisher, the song or songs can be registered as Copyright Control, in general music for films are not suitable for the charts, so you are not losing out of course you can as the owner put your songs with a top Publisher at a later date.
Yes there are exceptions to the rule some songs written solely for films can chart.

Lamorna
Lamorna

The Test with any so called Publisher is ask him what songs he has placed with Chart Groups or solo acts

Lamorna