# A buy-out question



## Ed (Oct 4, 2008)

Damn you and your signature Thonex, I always think theres some kind of little fly on my screen for a moment. :D


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (Oct 4, 2008)

Thonex @ Fri Oct 03 said:


> Salut Patrick,
> I've never signed a 100% buyout... if it ws really a 100% buy out, I turned down the gig, because usually they are not payed enough.
> However, many times the clients are ignorant and they think that they 'have' to have a buyout in order to be able to do what they want with the music.
> Maybe explain to the client that you can draw up a contract that gives them the non-exclusive right to use your music throughout the universe and in perpetuity on the internet game entitled XYZ etc.
> ...



Salut T  ,

thanks for your input.
In this case, the job is well paid but obviously, it involves me doing a turn-key audio production and as such, the high salary is justified.
But, I am not being paid extra for the buy-out.
I agree that I should try to keep the writer's share.

Licensing the music in perpetuity is what I had in mind as well.
One thing I don't understand from your suggestion is how I could get away and not give them exclusive rights?
I don't think they'd like to hear themes that were created for their virtual environment used on a TV commercial.
Giving them exclusivity doesn't seem to be a problem, is it?

Hope you're well, cheers o-[][]-o


----------



## JohnG (Oct 4, 2008)

Exclusivity is tricky because if you are not careful in how you word it, you might lose the ability EVER to use the music elsewhere. 

As an alternative, you can give them a hold-back for, say, two years from the date of the contract or the date of your delivery (not the game's release date, since it might never be released and then you'd never get to use the music elsewhere). If possible, the start date for the hold-back has to begin with an event (like delivery) that is under your, not their, control, or otherwise it may never start. I am told that five years is a common holdback in motion pictures.

You also could mention that they can use it to advertise the game as well.


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (Oct 4, 2008)

JohnG @ Sat Oct 04 said:


> Exclusivity is tricky because if you are not careful in how you word it, you might lose the ability EVER to use the music elsewhere.
> 
> As an alternative, you can give them a hold-back for, say, two years from the date of the contract or the date of your delivery (not the game's release date, since it might never be released and then you'd never get to use the music elsewhere). If possible, the start date for the hold-back has to begin with an event (like delivery) that is under your, not their, control, or otherwise it may never start. I am told that five years is a common holdback in motion pictures.
> 
> You also could mention that they can use it to advertise the game as well.



Thanks John, that's helpful!

As I mentionned, I am getting paid well to do this, so a hold-back clause may not matter as much as in the case one scores an independent film for very little, hoping to re-coup on residuals...


----------



## JohnG (Oct 4, 2008)

well -- I am a little wondering if i was clear.

I meant, in the context of your retaining the copyright and publishing, that to give comfort to your client that people won't be hearing "their" music five minutes after they release their game, you could still keep the rights but agree not to sell to anyone during an exclusivity period of, say, two or three years from when you deliver.

Maybe I was clear but I inferred from your response that perhaps I'd been unclear.

Cheers!


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (Oct 4, 2008)

I got it John, thanks for the clarification...


----------



## Christian Marcussen (Oct 4, 2008)

JohnG @ Sat Oct 04 said:


> well -- I am a little wondering if i was clear.
> 
> I meant, in the context of your retaining the copyright and publishing, that to give comfort to your client that people won't be hearing "their" music five minutes after they release their game, you could still keep the rights but agree not to sell to anyone during an exclusivity period of, say, two or three years from when you deliver.
> 
> ...



It sounds to me that this is a pretty well funded, and pro title that you are working on Patrick? In such case, the kindof deal John mentions here is very unlikely. There is no way a big publisher would allow for any kind of timed exclusivity. If they buy your music, and themes for their game, then that's it... They dont want to hear that music used for anything else - not 5 minutes later, not three years later. 

I guess I'm saying this so that you don't throw away a perfectly reasonable gig because you have gotten the idea that most company's would agree to a time-limited exclussive. You can work such deals with low-budget, up and coming game companies but that's it - in my experience at least... but perhaps I'm a poor negotiator :D


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (Oct 4, 2008)

Hey Christian,

my thought exactly.
I feel this is a in perpetuity exclusive license.

I appreciate everyone helpful advice very much.

Thanks a lot guys.
We'll see what the client's next move will be...


----------



## Daryl (Oct 5, 2008)

With a project I did last year, I had to give an exclusive, in perpetuity licence. However, I kept all Publishing on the grounds that if the music couldn't be used for anything else ever again, then the Company couldn't fulfil the obligations of a Publisher.

However, I also get a Royalty for every performance (and every DVD sale).

D


----------



## Thonex (Oct 5, 2008)

Daryl @ Sun Oct 05 said:


> (and every DVD sale).



Nice one!


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (Oct 5, 2008)

Daryl @ Sun Oct 05 said:


> However, I kept all Publishing on the grounds that if the music couldn't be used for anything else ever again, then the Company couldn't fulfil the obligations of a Publisher.
> D



Hey Daryl,

could you alleborate a bit on the arguments that you brought forth to demonstrate this point to your clients?

Thanks so much!


Patrick


----------



## nikolas (Oct 5, 2008)

Not sure if there are royalties in computer games sales... Especially in internet based ones (I mean, imagine a guy entering the site 20 times per day and paying royalties every time he does that?).

But not sure really, so anyone else with more experience on this?

As far as I know, what John says, is rather unlikely to bigger size games. Although it does make sense, it still means that one will always be afraid to (re-)hear the Morrowind theme to another game, which would, potentially, suck!


----------



## Christian Marcussen (Oct 5, 2008)

nikolas @ Sun Oct 05 said:


> Not sure if there are royalties in computer games sales... Especially in internet based ones (I mean, imagine a guy entering the site 20 times per day and paying royalties every time he does that?).
> 
> But not sure really, so anyone else with more experience on this?



Computer games are the lousiest of all media when it comes to rights and royalties. I doubt any composers in this day and age (perhaps 10-20 years ago) get royalties. There may be a few who have the bargaining power to get this but I'm guessing it's a handful at most. 



> As far as I know, what John says, is rather unlikely to bigger size games. Although it does make sense, it still means that one will always be afraid to (re-)hear the Morrowind theme to another game, which would, potentially, suck!



Right. Which was what I was trying to say... It ain't gonna happen


----------



## nikolas (Oct 5, 2008)

Christian Marcussen @ Sun Oct 05 said:


> Right. Which was what I was trying to say... It ain't gonna happen


I thought to echo you, I guess!


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (Oct 5, 2008)

Dudes, my concern is certainly not royalties from the online game but future (very slim) possibilities for movie development.
In case this ever happens, I wanna be covered and not feel that I shot myself in the foot...


----------



## Christian Marcussen (Oct 5, 2008)

Patrick de Caumette @ Sun Oct 05 said:


> Dudes, my concern is certainly not royalties from the online game but future (very slim) possibilities for movie development.
> In case this ever happens, I wanna be covered and not feel that I shot myself in the foot...



Ah... I see our psychic abilities failed to unearth this fact :mrgreen: 

Ok. Well... Surely it's fair to negotiate some kind of deal for that. They could turn you down on it, but I reckon that if you have some kind of specific clause to cover that case, that they would be cool with it. 

Try see if you can limit the buyout to concern your music, for the specific product and related advertising of that product. Then tell them how your understand completely that you cannot use the music (or themes) for anything else, but neither can they. So if a movie comes up, then its all up for discussion.


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (Oct 5, 2008)

Thanks Christian.
I was thinking along thoses lines myself...


----------



## Christian Marcussen (Oct 5, 2008)

Patrick de Caumette @ Sun Oct 05 said:


> Thanks Christian.
> I was thinking along thoses lines myself...



I recently tried though, and they wouldnt have it. I wanted to ensure that only I could use my themes in case of a sequel... But no go. So now I have to count on them liking my work instead! :D


----------



## Waywyn (Oct 5, 2008)

Just a few more thoughts here.
As Christian already said, there are hardly any royalties in game music. To some companies you can sell your stuff non-exclusive, but basically you provide music to a game as the graphics guys his 3d models and the story writer his ideas.

It is different from the movie, tv and advertising world.
The videogame Sacred 2 was released this week and amongst other composers my part was writing around 90 minutes of the ingame for it. So there would be a lot of royalties for me if there would be some ... but why just me and others don't? I understand on movies and advertising, but regarding the gaming world, what makes us composers so special in terms of the whole product?

Of course I would be glad if there would be royalties or games.
If so I would to do only online roleplaying game music.
Considering the fact that a player logs into an mmo game around 3 to 4 times a week and I would get like 10 cents for each time they login and listen to my music it would be 40 cents per player and week ... and 1,20 Euro per player in a months. If there are just 100k players playing this game I would earn like 120k every months. Kinda cool huh?

Now imagine World of Warcraft with 10mio accounts


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (Oct 5, 2008)

It would be a beautiful thing indeed :D


----------



## Brian Ralston (Oct 5, 2008)

Waywyn @ Sun Oct 05 said:


> It is different from the movie, tv and advertising world.
> The videogame Sacred 2 was released this week and amongst other composers my part was writing around 90 minutes of the ingame for it. So there would be a lot of royalties for me if there would be some ... but why just me and others don't? I understand on movies and advertising, but regarding the gaming world, what makes us composers so special in terms of the whole product?
> 
> Of course I would be glad if there would be royalties or games.
> ...


 Who, in your mind, would pay those royalties in that scenario you outlined Alex? Just curious. Who is the broadcaster here?


----------



## Brian Ralston (Oct 5, 2008)

Christian Marcussen @ Sun Oct 05 said:


> Try see if you can limit the buyout to concern your music, for the specific product and related advertising of that product. Then tell them how your understand completely that you cannot use the music (or themes) for anything else, but neither can they. So if a movie comes up, then its all up for discussion.



The two legal terms dealing with these issue would be using the music "in context" of the game only...and the other one would be phrasing stating that "in the event" a movie were to be based on the game, there would be further negotiations "in good faith" to deal with the music issues. 

A production company in most cases would probably not want to use the game soundtrack music unless it was so iconic to society that it would not make sense without it. Especially if it were a studio level film...then the only composers who would be offered the job would be "studio approved" composers. And there are literal lists at the various studios that are hard to get on. And no one on the list is going to be forced to use someone else's themes, etc...It really is the director's hire anyway. So whoever would get the eventual directing gig would have the final say on the music direction of his film...with the caveat that he can be overruled by the studio/money people above him. So either way Patrick, i would say that your concerns for them using the music in a film without your permission...or the opposite...for possibly wanting a first right of refusal to be considered for working on an eventual film would both probably not happen for the reasons above. But they are good points to discuss with them and the phrasing outlined above is how those things should be approached in the contract.


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (Oct 5, 2008)

Very helpful Brian, thanks!

Yes, the film scenario is very unlikely.
But there are other possibilities that I can't discuss yet and that make me want to anticipate the issues discussed above...

Cheers o-[][]-o


----------



## nikolas (Oct 5, 2008)

I don't know how big we're talking about here, but I don't think there are more than... 10 films taken from Computer Games. Lara Croft, Doom, and maybe a few others. WOW is NOT a movie (is it? :S), and tons of very successful are not films (yet). 

Of course, Patrick, you did mention the "very slim" possibilities, but just want to make sure you know that the chances are even less than very slim. 

There's always hope, and one cannot be too prepared, legally, for any chance, but it still is a long shot! 

(Just read your very last post): Indeed, I can imagine many other places to be used, in which case you should try and discuss everything. Maybe not a film, but everything else included, so...


----------



## Christian Marcussen (Oct 5, 2008)

nikolas @ Sun Oct 05 said:


> I don't know how big we're talking about here, but I don't think there are more than... 10 films taken from Computer Games. Lara Croft, Doom, and maybe a few others. WOW is NOT a movie (is it? :S), and tons of very successful are not films (yet).
> 
> Of course, Patrick, you did mention the "very slim" possibilities, but just want to make sure you know that the chances are even less than very slim.
> 
> ...



Not to mention that none of those films feature the composer from the games


----------



## Waywyn (Oct 6, 2008)

Brian Ralston @ Mon Oct 06 said:


> Waywyn @ Sun Oct 05 said:
> 
> 
> > It is different from the movie, tv and advertising world.
> ...



That's why I went a bit ironic on that 
The broadcaster for the music would be the game company itself, because it releases the game CD/DVD. It wouldn't simply be possible to have royalties in games because the game company would be broke within hours if the game goes well.

In my example above I used Sacred 2. The prequel, Sacred1, was sold around 2 million times around the world. If I would get just 1 cent for every of the 90 minutes of music I have written, it would be 90 cent for a single DVD. Then x2mio  Not possible.

Technically there is a soundtrack on the CD, but it is implemented in the game. Therefore it is just part of the game which had to be printed on CD.

So I am babbling here. All I wanted to say that the game industry works different and if Patrick does a kind of a virtual world project it might be as treaten as a game, no? Just guessing here.

@nikolas: Yes, WoW is not a movie YET! 
I heard rumors that Peter Jackson might direct an upcoming one, but I might me completely wrong. All I hope is that they DON'T do a movie about WoW :D


----------



## Christian Marcussen (Oct 6, 2008)

You could do some form of royalty... like a set fee per sold unit. Or a bonus if the game sells more than x copies. 

Would be dooable, but why would they? Perhaps if game-musicians were organized... But even if we were you would still have some unorganized bimbo using pirated software to underbid you


----------



## nikolas (Oct 6, 2008)

bonus is a possibility that could go well... 

Thing is that if I understand correctly Patrick is not looking about fees regarding the game itself or anything connected to the game industry. He's already said that he's getting paid well for what he's doing. He is worried about the game expanding outside the game industry. Right?


----------



## Christian Marcussen (Oct 6, 2008)

Right, I'm just going replying to Alex... Don't expect me to be on-topic all the time! :D


----------



## Waywyn (Oct 6, 2008)

Christian Marcussen @ Mon Oct 06 said:


> You could do some form of royalty... like a set fee per sold unit. Or a bonus if the game sells more than x copies.
> 
> Would be dooable, but why would they? Perhaps if game-musicians were organized... But even if we were you would still have some unorganized bimbo using pirated software to underbid you



Hehe, yeah ... download some cracked version of Cubase and GPO and you are a game composer, "Hey, I am working for 5 bucks a minute" :D

But regarding royalties I don't know it different. Music for games is just part of the product as everything else too. There is nothing more special to the music than to the coding, graphics etc. ... and I have no problem to sit within that development team like everyone else too.


----------



## Christian Marcussen (Oct 6, 2008)

The difference is that most of those assets (graphics, code, etc) are done inhouse, and they often do get some kind of royalty.


----------



## nikolas (Oct 6, 2008)

Chrisitan (no worries about off topic :D), I think that, while composers still are freelancing around, the inhouse ones are rising at dangerous levels (which I happen to not like as an idea).

EDIT: Too many B&W avatars in the last few posts! :D


----------



## kid-surf (Oct 6, 2008)

If you want to know the 100% buy-out routine, lemme know... :D


BTW... I think it's fuggn' lame that there is no "option period" where the music reverts back to the composer if they fail to use it. Aside from that, there should be "standard" deal points + bonuses. 

Good luck on the gig.


----------



## Thonex (Oct 6, 2008)

kid-surf @ Mon Oct 06 said:


> BTW... I think it's fuggn' lame that there is no "option period" where the music reverts back to the composer if they fail to use it.



Well, that can be included in the contract. 

Someone once gave me this very valuable advice: "You get what you negotiate, not what you deserve."

T


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (Oct 6, 2008)

That's a valuable piece of advice indeed...

The sad thing about buyouts is that due to the fact that composers have a hard time making a living, in a very competitive field, the promise of money on the table is strong enough to sway them to give away their writers' share.


----------



## nikolas (Oct 6, 2008)

I find royalties very complicated...

I mean with the TV, there is "airtime", and end of story. With films (and possible series) you get DVDs and sales, end of story. With computer games it does seem a tad more complicated, especially with online based and whatnot. No airtime. You can't know how much time the player played and if he stuck on level 3 fighting for 30 minutes before carrying on. Sales are also weird, since online does NOT have sales (lots of very successful online games are based on the fact that they are 'free' with subscription though). 

But, my relief is that computer games does make rather decent fees, as far as I'm concerned. At $1,000 per minute (which is NOT unapprochable as it would seem at first), you get a somewhat decent annual income which... kinda makes up...

Then again I'm a gamer and always have been so... :-/

T: Excellent advice indeed!


----------



## kid-surf (Oct 6, 2008)

T-

Excellent advice.

It's funny you your buddy used the word "deserve". That word always rubs me the wrong way, too. I respond better to the word "earn".  

Lotta folks talk about deserving this and that... but did they earn it?


----------



## Waywyn (Oct 6, 2008)

nikolas @ Mon Oct 06 said:


> But, my relief is that computer games does make rather decent fees, as far as I'm concerned. At $1,000 per minute (which is NOT unapprochable as it would seem at first), you get a somewhat decent annual income which... kinda makes up...



Problem is 1000 bucks a minute is not really standard payment 
Of course it happens, but not at the average game project.


----------



## poseur (Oct 9, 2008)

nikolas @ Mon Oct 06 said:


> Chrisitan (no worries about off topic :D), I think that, while composers still are freelancing around, the inhouse ones are rising at dangerous levels (which I happen to not like as an idea).
> 
> EDIT: Too many B&W avatars in the last few posts! :D


hmmm.
if we write without respect for our potential copyrights,
then we are, indeed, functioning as in-house composers.....
..... but without any right to any of the 
potential "perks" that in-house employees may receive:
guaranteed contracted salaries,
paid vacations, sick leave & family time,
pension & insurance benefits,
union representation (all where applicable. of course)
& etc etc etc.

hey! 
it sounds like the beginning of 
a very sweet lose/lose situation, to me.
o 

d


----------



## Waywyn (Oct 9, 2008)

poseur @ Thu Oct 09 said:


> nikolas @ Mon Oct 06 said:
> 
> 
> > Chrisitan (no worries about off topic :D), I think that, while composers still are freelancing around, the inhouse ones are rising at dangerous levels (which I happen to not like as an idea).
> ...



.. but I highly doubt that an inhouse composer earns more money than a freelance one working on more or less bigger games. Of course I might be proven wrong, but I simply can't imagine.


----------



## Will Loconto (Oct 9, 2008)

Waywyn @ Thu Oct 09 said:


> .. but I highly doubt that an inhouse composer earns more money than a freelance one working on more or less bigger games. Of course I might be proven wrong, but I simply can't imagine.



I spent several years as an in-house composer/audio director at 2 game companies. As a freelancer, as long I consistently find new jobs, there is opportunity to make far more money than I could in-house. Being able to work on projects for several companies simultaneously is a primary reason. Earlier this year I was lucky enough to work on a game that paid me more in 2 months than I made in a year in-house.

Having to pay 100% for my own benefits (health insurance) isn't that great, but being able to set my own hours is nice. If I need family time, I take family time and there is nobody checking to see if I spend enough hours at my desk.

I don't particularly care for the buy-out model for game music, but all the game publishers are used to doing it that way, and unless you have some real leverage, it's hard to get a different deal.


----------



## poseur (Oct 9, 2008)

Will Loconto @ Thu Oct 09 said:


> I spent several years as an in-house composer/audio director at 2 game companies. As a freelancer, _*as long I consistently find new jobs*_,


right: in comparing freelancing w/inhousing,
one needs to look at the differences in potential "stability".

but, don't get me wrong:
i'm a freelancer,
all the way, for approx. 35+ yrs.
and:
i do pretty well, for an aesthetically broken punkassed b•tch.
increasingly, i seem to do well
owing to my attachment
to my copyrights &, wherever possible,
to my publishing.

in the past 20 yrs, i can count on 3 fingers
the instances in which i was "willing" to work on a 
completely "buy-out" basis.

here, and in my previous post,
i only mean to posit that:
while i'm fully aware that it's not always possible,
i _*believe*_ that composers-for-hire should always have
--- at the root of their non-defensive "negotiating postures" ---
the desire/need to maintain
their author's copyrights, as a _*right*_.....
those copyrights being the links to our works,
& the links --- to whatever degree --- to our financial futures,
and those of our families.

that's all i was trying to say.
o-[][]-o 

d


----------



## Will Loconto (Oct 9, 2008)

poseur @ Thu Oct 09 said:


> here, and in my previous post,
> i only mean to posit that:
> while i'm fully aware that it's not always possible,
> i _*believe*_ that composers-for-hire should always have
> ...



I completely agree with you. The trouble in game audio is that the publishers will tell you a buy-out is how they've always done it and if you won't take a buy-out they have about 20 other composers that want the job that would do it as a buy-out.


----------



## Waywyn (Oct 9, 2008)

[quote:6c8288e994="Will Loconto @ Thu Oct 09, 2008 2:57 pm"][quote:6c8288e994="poseur @ Thu Oct 09, 2008 7:38 am"]
here, and in my previous post,
i only mean to posit that:
while i'mò±   ‡É‡±   ‡Éˆ±   ‡É‰±   ‡ÉŠ±   ‡É‹±   ‡ÉŒ±   ‡É“±   ‡É”±   ‡É•±   ‡É–±   ‡É—±   ‡É˜±   ‡ÉÁ±   ‡ÉÂ±   ‡ÉÃ±   ‡ÉÄ²   ‡É²   ‡ÉŽ²   ‡É²   ‡É²   ‡É‘²   ‡É’³   ‡É³³   ‡É´´   ‡É™´   ‡Éš´   ‡É›´   ‡Éœ´   ‡É´   ‡Éž´   ‡ÉŸ´   ‡É ´   ‡É¡´   ‡É¢´   ‡É£´   ‡É¤´   ‡Éµ´   ‡É¶´   ‡É·´   ‡É¸´   ‡É¹´   ‡Éº´   ‡É»´   ‡É¼´   ‡É½´   ‡É¾´   ‡É¿´   ‡ÉÀµ   ‡ÉÇµ   ‡ÉÈµ   ‡ÉÉµ   ‡ÉÊµ   ‡ÉËµ   ‡ÉÌµ   ‡ÉÍµ   ‡ÉÎµ   ‡ÉÏµ   ‡ÉÐ¶   ‡ÉÅ¶   ‡ÉÆ¶   ‡ÉÑ¶   ‡ÉÒ¶   ‡ÉÓ¶   ‡ÉÔ¶   ‡ÉÕ¶   ‡ÉÖ·   ‡É×·   ‡ÉØ·   ‡ÉÙ·   ‡ÉÚ·   ‡ÉÛ·   ‡ÉÜ·   ‡ÉÝ·   ‡ÉÞ·   ‡Éß·   ‡Éà·   ‡Éá·   ‡Éâ·   ‡Éã·   ‡Éä¸   ‡É¥¸   ‡É¦¸   ‡É§¸   ‡É¨¸   ‡É©¸   ‡Éª¸   ‡É«¸   ‡É¬¸   ‡É­¸   ‡É®¸   ‡É¯¸   ‡É°¸   ‡É±¸   ‡É²¸   ‡Éå¸   ‡Éæ¸   ‡Éç¸   ‡Éè¸   ‡Éé¸   ‡Éê¸   ‡Éë¸   ‡Éì¸   ‡Éí¸   ‡Éî¸   ‡Éï¸   ‡Éð¸   ‡Éñ¸   ‡Éò¸   ‡Éó¸   ‡Éô¸   ‡Éõ¸   ‡Éö              ƒæ   82¹   ‡Êh   83º   ‡ÊÙ   84¼   ‡ËJ   85½   ‡Ë¹   86À   ‡Ì,   87Â   ‡Ì   88Ä   ‡Í   89Æ   ‡Í}   8:É   ‡Íô   8;Ë   ‡Îg   8<Ë   ‡ÎØ   8=Î   ‡ÏG   8>Î   ‡Ï¸   8?Ð   ‡Ð)   [email protected]Ó   ‡Ðš   8AÓ   ‡Ñ   8BÕ   ‡Ñ|   8C×   ‡Ñí   8DÙ   ‡Ò^   8EÜ   ‡ÒÏ   8FÜ   ‡Ó@   8GÞ   ‡Ó±   8Hà   ‡Ô


----------



## madbulk (Oct 9, 2008)

Can't find any argument to anything poseur has said. Philosophically he's dead on, and regardless of the realities of the game industry, that should continue to be our standard.
The publishing has a value. Might be zero. Might be a lot. But it's yours to sell and to pretend that in any particular industry it can be done away with as a concept is ridiculous if pragmatic. Last I checked even EA doesn't make you give up your writers share.
Patrick, I'll be very interested to hear how this went for you. I would love to see you ask them to back away from the buy out (maybe not explicitly), offering perpetual exclusivity in return, and then ask them to list their intended uses of your art.
They can say, "we want the rights to use your music in the movie version that we'll never actually make." Then give it to them if you want, never gonna happen anyway. But at least you know what rights you've given up.
Alex, your argument has never made sense to me. Copyright is copyright. If an artist or a plumber wants royalties, let him negotiate it. Not my problem. But nobody is buying my plumbing, attaching it to their faucet, and then publicly performing that plumbing all over the world for their own gain unless we've negotiated it. Or something like that. I don't even know what I just said.
Music isn't the same. That's what I said.
As Brian said, you can be forthright and simply promise to negotiate in good faith any areas you don't specifically cover here.
But at least if you make them spell out intended uses, you can negotiate your price. That the game industry is different, that they'll never go for it, etc is besides the point. The question is what will we go for. You should know what you're pricing, however modestly you price it.


----------



## Waywyn (Oct 9, 2008)

madbulk @ Thu Oct 09 said:


> Alex, your argument has never made sense to me. Copyright is copyright. If an artist or a plumber wants royalties, let him negotiate it.



To set this right. I am not against royalties. Of course it is also his/her right to negotiate royalties and if the company wants to pay some, even better. But most companies would think like the following I am saying here:

... but I was just asking (and again I do) shouldn't the graphic guys also receive royalties for their models? What about the riggers, they make a model move in a unique way. What about the skinners/texture guys? The coders, who make the game run, .. you could go on with that list forever 

... or to make it short. What makes US (not U.S. but we/us ) musicians sooo very special compared to other jobs (in the game industry)?


----------



## Dan Selby (Oct 9, 2008)

Whenever I've been commissioned on video game projects I've retained all the publishing rights and licensed the use of the supplied sound recordings, across all territories in perpetuity. The degree of exclusivity of the licence and also the limitations of the licence (whether or not it extends to more than one SKU or includes sequels or not, whether it covers TV advertising campaigns or not etc) has varied from project to project depending on requirements/negotiations.

The starting point for all negotiations (IMHO) should be to grant the client the rights the reasonably need for their project (at a price that reflects these rights)... *but no more!*

A lot of the rights clauses in games contracts that I've seen are clearly boilerplate (so they can cover art or any other IP) and come from legal departments that often don't necessarily understand the licensing of music and they are, basically, covering their arses.

In my experience, if you ask the client what rights and assurances they need for their project and you draft terms that reflect that (but don't offer more) it isn't usually too problematic.

Dan


----------



## madbulk (Oct 9, 2008)

Waywyn @ Thu Oct 09 said:


> madbulk @ Thu Oct 09 said:
> 
> 
> > Alex, your argument has never made sense to me. Copyright is copyright. If an artist or a plumber wants royalties, let him negotiate it.
> ...



It's not that we're special, but there are peculiarities to the type of work we do versus the graphics guys. (And if they model something to move a certain way, they can, I dunno, persue a patent if they want.) We instead have publishing law. For one, you maybe wrote the Sacred 2 theme and produced on your rig and gave them a finished performance of it. They can play that performance on the radio. Or they can have it re-orched for Video Games Live. Or they could pay me to do a cocktail piano version of it. You still wrote the song. And you're entitled to be paid again for the usage of that IP regardless of the finished form.

I know you I'm not telling you anything here, Alex. And I don't disagree that this would be the stance of a game company, but I don't think we should defend it. They don't see the whole picture. They just heard from their lawyer, "get a buyout, so we never have to think about any of this ever again." They can be rerouted.


----------



## Will Loconto (Oct 9, 2008)

madbulk @ Thu Oct 09 said:


> They just heard from their lawyer, "get a buyout, so we never have to think about any of this ever again." They can be rerouted.



That's exactly what happens. Most of the time they just don't know any better.

If your work for hire agreement doesn't involve removing your name as the composer, you aren't giving up your writer's share. I'd never sign something that gives that up. I've personally passed on some TV gigs where they were asking me to do that. That shouldn't even be an option in my opinion.


----------



## JohnG (Oct 9, 2008)

Will Loconto @ 9th October 2008 said:


> If your work for hire agreement doesn't involve removing your name as the composer, you aren't giving up your writer's share.



Will, unfortunately, I'm pretty sure that is incorrect, at least stated quite as categorically as you've done. By definition, if your contract stops at the 'work for hire' concept, you are giving up everything, including the writer's share...

....EXCEPT,

most such contracts later, or elsewhere say something like, "notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this agreement, Composer will receive his so-called 'writer's share' of any royalties [blah blah]"

So your agreement certainly has to have language that concedes back to you your writer's share if, previously, or overall, you've agreed to a work for hire arrangement. It also typically has some lingo in it regarding BMI and ASCAP and cue sheets and plenty of other stuff.

So, no big deal; I realise it's a chat board and one doesn't write a treatise, but there may be newbies who don't have your level of experience and might think they're automatically protected when they are not.

---

Separately, just because the lawyers like work for hire doesn't mean that you always, in every instance, have to settle for that. A perpetual, "throughout the universe" license that also allows the company to use the music in advertising gives them the same "we can forget about it" license that they need, without conceding publishing or ownership. They can do anything they are at all likely to want to do.

Ok, if it's EA or Warner Brothers, that's a different story, but not every gig is of that stature.


----------



## madbulk (Oct 9, 2008)

Yeah, that was my understanding too. But Patrick gave me pause. 
I didn't think you could give up your writers share just by giving up your publishing. I've always used the phrase "gave up my publishing," meaning "gave up HALF of it."
It's begging the argument certainly. "OF COURSE, I didn't un-write the thing. I'm always gonna be the writer."


----------



## madbulk (Oct 9, 2008)

JohnG @ Thu Oct 09 said:


> Will Loconto @ 9th October 2008 said:
> 
> 
> > If your work for hire agreement doesn't involve removing your name as the composer, you aren't giving up your writer's share.
> ...



Like me, evidently. Although fortunately my "work for hire" template does contain that language John describes, I thought it was an example of being careful and explicit. I didn't think it was signed away by default. Is there a lawyer in the house?


----------



## Will Loconto (Oct 9, 2008)

JohnG @ Thu Oct 09 said:


> So your agreement certainly has to have language that concedes back to you your writer's share if, previously, or overall, you've agreed to a work for hire arrangement. It also typically has some lingo in it regarding BMI and ASCAP and cue sheets and plenty of other stuff.



Yes, I believe you do have to have that language in there. I know ASCAP won't pay a writer's share to anyone other than the composer of record.


----------



## poseur (Oct 9, 2008)

madbulk @ Thu Oct 09 said:


> I didn't think you could give up your writers share just by giving up your publishing.


well, it's all:
a) in the nature of the negotiated understanding, and
2) in the actual, signatory LANGUAGE of that "understanding".



JohnG @ Thu Oct 09 said:


> Separately, just because the lawyers like work for hire doesn't mean


well, just to be clear:
_*my*_ lawyer certainly disapproves of buy-outs:
ha!
i hope your lawyer does, as well.
:D 

though he will negotiate a buyout for me if pressed to do so,
my lawyer has always strongly advised against it:
and, yeah:
i've def benefited from his advisements over the course
of 20+ yrs together.
d


----------

