# Synch Licensing



## DKeenum (Sep 15, 2010)

I need some advice. I am looking at the possibility of some of my music being licensed for a DVD/CD release, so I'm wondering what I specifically need to know about that. Is there a per-unit license, or is a buyout accepted? I guess we're talking about a Sync License. And just to clarify, I do not currently have an offer.

I'm somewhat familiar with libraries. I have licensed some music through a music library. But this area (sync License) has me a little perplexed, and I want to do some quick research. I know I'm showing my inexperience in this area, but I want to go into this with some knowledge. I don’t even know what to ask.

Thank you.


----------



## Mike Greene (Sep 15, 2010)

With major studios, it's rare that we would get a per-DVD royalty, so your fee would all be in the "up front" amount. I think a big reason that the biggies shy away from a royalty structure is that the accounting would be a nightmare with a zillion different song writers and record companies and publishers all having songs on films or TV shows that go to DVD. The accounting alone would be a significant expense, as well as obligation that the studio would be on the hook for forever. Plus the legal expenses to negotiate these deals would be significant. Since the biggies have plenty of cash, it's easier to just pay you a fair fee now and be done with it.

But with smaller independents, deals can be structured just about any way you (and they) want. They likely don't have much money left right now, so a per-DVD royalties is a possible alternate way to handle it. Or maybe they might want to make it a combination of up-front plus a per-DVD royalty. There are no rules in this because situations can be so wildly different.


----------



## DKeenum (Sep 15, 2010)

Thanks Mike! What you said makes sense. Can you give me any advice of what to look for? I have no clue as to what a fair rate would be.


----------



## Mike Greene (Sep 15, 2010)

No rules on that, either. It's mostly just a matter of what they have. As far as a per-DVD rate would go, I have no idea, because I've never done one like that.

If I had to make totally wild guess at a rate, I think I'd ask for either a nickel or dime per DVD (assuming this is one song.)


----------



## DKeenum (Sep 15, 2010)

Again, thanks. So maybe it would be best to see what they offer.


----------



## Narval (Sep 15, 2010)

Mike Greene @ Wed Sep 15 said:


> With major studios, it's rare that we would get a per-DVD royalty


So, if they don't pay royalties for your music on their DVDs, then what do they pay royalties for? - theater releases and "possible" TV airing?

Also, I don't get this idea: if the biggies, having the money, are unwilling to pay royalties for the tracks they are licensing, then why should the indies? 

It goes without saying that buyouts and upfront one-time payments are easy and convenient for producers, but I think it's more a matter of the artist being so eager to give up their rights for upfront peanuts.


----------



## DKeenum (Sep 15, 2010)

The reason I am asking is that I'm not interested in giving my work away. I realize that times are tough, and fees may be lower. But I want to treated fairly, and I feel that is my responsability.

... or at least as fairly as possible.


----------



## Mike Greene (Sep 15, 2010)

Narval @ Wed Sep 15 said:


> Mike Greene @ Wed Sep 15 said:
> 
> 
> > With major studios, it's rare that we would get a per-DVD royalty
> ...


Well, upfront "peanuts" has bought me a pretty nice house and studio.  

To your first question, the studios don't pay royalties for airings or theatrical showings. That's up to the PRO's who collect money from TV stations and networks, radio stations, and (in Europe) theaters. That's a completely different type of royalty.

On your second question, the reason why an indie might pay royalties for DVD sales isn't because they're being fairer than the big studios, it's because they are less likely to have much money up front. So instead of a normal upfront license fee, they make an alternate "back end" deal. 99 times out 100, this will wind up being a *worse* deal for a composer. Personally, I'll take up front over back end every time.


----------



## Narval (Sep 15, 2010)

Thanks for your answers, and congrats for the nice house and studio!  I am really happy, for you, that upfront payments work well, for you. However, small or big, upfront payment is just peanuts, from the producer's pov. Even if you're happy with the "big peanuts" ("big" in your case), I still think you are entitled to more than peanuts, and that you are giving up your legit royalties rights by allowing them to fly right into the producers' pockets instead of yours. You think that's fair?

It's about a principle. Considering that producers get their profits from selling products (DVDs in this case) that contain music written by you, the royalties principle that governs music playing should ensure that they would cut a slice to you, the musicwriter, for every sold unit. It's not about what's good enough for you, I'm talking about what would be fair for every musicwriter (or any other creator, like directors and scriptwriters) contributing to a commercial product.


----------



## Mike Greene (Sep 15, 2010)

I think you're confused about how the process works. First, there are no "legit royalties rights" I'm giving up. I keep my writer's performance royalties and I keep my name on the compositions and all that. Under no circumstance does anyone ever put their own name on any of my songs and under no circumstance has a producer ever collected money that should have been mine. (Granted, a studio will generally designate themselves publisher, but that's just standard business. The same thing happens to John Williams and Danny Elfman.)

Second, there is no music royalty structure (or "rights" as you say) in place for DVD sales where some special monies would be "flying right into a producers' pockets." Royalties for DVD sales simply don't exist. They never have. This isn't CD's we're talking about (for which we *would* get a royalty if there's a soundtrack album.)

Heck, there aren't even royalties for the actors or directors, who, let's face it, contribute a heck of a lot more to the film than we do. (Yes, in very rare mega-deal instances, an actor or director may see a piece of the back end, but that has more to do with compromises to get movies made than anything else. And even then, the deals aren't structured as per-DVD royalties.)

There's not even a _precedent_ for a royalty on DVD sales. It's not like composers used to get royalties on DVD (or even VHS) sales and then studios decided to get greedy and stopped. So when I, like every other composer before me, signs a contract that has no provision for a royalty on DVD sales, then what you claim I'm "giving up" is something that never existed in the first place.

When an independent production company does go the "back end money" route, it's not because they're being fair and generous. It's because they don't have any cash to pay you now. I don't know anyone who would prefer back end pay over front end.

So do I think the system is fair? Sure. The studios pay me, the checks clear, they get their music, everybody's happy (except for the audiences who have to sit through the swill I generally work on.)


----------



## Narval (Sep 15, 2010)

You are right on all points (except for the "swill"). I was speaking from an idealistic point of view. Sorry for the rant.


----------



## Mike Greene (Sep 15, 2010)

No, the only point I'm *sure* I'm right about is the "swill" part. :mrgreen:

Don't apologize for the rant. I do my share of it too.


----------



## DKeenum (Sep 16, 2010)

Actually, both of your "rants" :wink: have helped me see this area more clearly. I think I was confused by the CD/DVD aspect of it all. You clarified it quite well.


----------



## DKeenum (Oct 5, 2010)

As an update, an offer was made. It is for a buy out, exclusive owner.


----------

