Re-titling & Non-Exclusive (part 2)

It’s been quite a while since I’ve posted on this blog, but I’ve been researching as much as possible about my last post regarding Exclusive and Non-exclusive library deals. As I mentioned before there has been a healthy debate online about what some folks feel works best and what writers should be aware of. I’m going to dedicate this post on what I have found works best for “ME” and where I think the library production industry might be heading.

There have been two main discussions regarding music libraries: 1) The issue of re-titling (for more info on what this is, click HERE).  2) Submitting the same songs to multiple libraries.

Re-Titling Libraries:

On the issue of re-titling, I believe that slowly the practice will begin to diminish, and most libraries will go back to either using the original title or simply doing exclusive deals only.  The re-titling practice has the possibility of becoming a copyright headache for publishers if it ever goes to court, and some of the bigger music supervisors are starting to lean away from libraries that do re-titling. There’s also the looming issue of audio watermarking or recognition software, although it doesn’t look like that technology is going to put in place for a LONG time to come.

Since the practice of re-titling is for the benefit of the music libraries to make sure they are getting their share of the publishing (and in most cases I’m not getting any part of that revenue), the responsibility on whether they do get paid or not really falls on their hands and not mines. Now this doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t pay attention to the issues of re-titling. In fact if you happen to be dealing with an unscrupulous library, there are ways that re-titling can cause you to lose out on potential income (but that’s for another post).

I’m personally working with a small handful of re-titling companies that I’ve dealt with for several years and I know they’re very good have produced nice revenues for me, but I’ve decided for now to stay away from submitting to any new companies that re-title.

Same Song Multiple Libraries:

On the subject of sending the same songs to multiple libraries, I admit I was a bit indecisive for a while on whether to do it or not. There are pros & cons to doing this and I weighed them all in order to make my own personal decision on the matter. In my case, the pros outnumber the cons simply because much of the cons didn’t affect me directly. This may not be the case for everyone.

Some writers who are against sending the same songs to multiple libraries argue that doing this creates a problem for the music supervisors in the sense that they receive too many duplicates. Some others argue that if a high profile exclusive deal comes along it will be very difficult (if impossible) to get back your rights from all those other non-exclusive library you sent the song to. Finally there is the perception that sending all your songs to multiple libraries brings down the price and value of the music.

So I approached each of these issues individually to make my decision.

I agree that you shouldn’t go over board and have 20 libraries representing your same songs, but rather you should be selective on who you sign the songs to. Currently I’m offering my songs to only 7 non-exclusive libraries. Will that number go up? Possibly. If they meet my needs and I feel they can get me good placement, I would consider signing them my catalog.

a) On the issue of music supervisors having to deal with duplicates; I’ve heard & read directly from some music supervisors that they are more concerned about duplicates that show up with multiple titles than just simply receiving duplicate songs.  They understand that there are literally tens of thousands of songwriters submitting to multiple libraries. The only way that they will eliminate the problem of duplicates is by either dealing with libraries that only offer exclusive deals or working directly with songwriters (more on this later).

b) In regards to trying to get back the rights of a particular song from multiple libraries, I personally don’t have a problem with this since 90% of what I write is instrumental music and I can always write another song similar to the one that is already signed with the other libraries. I understand this is not useful for songs with lyrics, or writers who don’t have the ability to write & record something new on call, but I know a songwriter who had been offered an exclusive deal for a song that was already licensed to another library. He couldn’t get the rights reversed back to him so he offered to write another song very similar to the original. The client agreed and he wound up not only getting the deal, but the song got placed on a high profile international TV ad. He’s now waiting for some serious back end pay from his PRO…:)

c) As for the devaluation of the music, I have to say that this is not the fault of offering the same songs to multiple libraries, but of offering your music to cheap libraries who sell your music at ridiculously low prices.

While some newer libraries allow you set your own price, there are some out there that are in my opinion “a waste”. Why bother offering your music to a library that will sell your music to a non-broadcasting client at $10 and only pay you half. There is no back end royalties so all you make is a measly $5.00. Sure if you have a catalog of 1000 songs and at least half of that sells on a regular basis, you could make about $2500.00, but imagine if the same songs are on a library that sells them at $60.00. To me this is by far the biggest reason for any devaluation of music, but we do have the power to stop it. Don’t feed the guppies…

So where is it all heading?

As more & more songwriters discover that it’s easier to get your song placed on a TV or film project than it is to get it cut on an album by a major Artist, the production music market will get more crowded. Also as new libraries accept everything that comes through their web portal, you’ll see a lot of music that is “less than adequate” (both in production and craftsmanship) saturating everything and making it more difficult to get heard.  Without a filtering system, music supervisors will be over-whelmed leaving them with two options. (1) Find a filtering system, or (2) Start working with songwriters directly.

The filtering system can be the exclusive libraries themselves; however I’m seeing more songwriters becoming less anxious to sign with exclusive libraries than ever before. After all, there is no guarantee an exclusive library will get your music placed so you’re finding a lot of writers today are not too keen on placing all their eggs in one basket.

Working directly with a handful of select songwriters can be as appealing to the music supervisor as for the songwriters. The songwriter of course gets to keep 100% of his/her publishing. The supervisor doesn’t have to worry about re-titling issues, who owns what or shuffle through piles of CD’s and hard drives from multiple libraries. They can simply put a call out to 15 or 20 songwriters they already have a “professional” working relationship with and see what they have in their catalog or have them produce material specifically for the project.

Of course if they can’t find what they need from their writers or there is a time crunch that doesn’t allow time for new material to be produced, they can always revert to the libraries. But having a direct contact with writers they trust and have already established prices can open up new doors for both the music supervisor and the songwriter. Film directors already have this working relationship with their score composers.

Again these ideas come from my own personal experiences and observations. Some of the things I’ve discussed here may not be agreeable by some folks, but that’s ok. This industry is not a one size fits all…

Advertisement