# Residuals Question for AFM Members



## Ned Bouhalassa (Oct 23, 2009)

Is it true that a composer who is a member of AFM is responsible for gathering residuals world-wide for music that they composed for a tv show or feature film? Or is it the producers' responsibility, but only in so much as the composer hired is a member of AFM? I ask because I always thought that this collecting of royalties was the responsibility of ASCAP, BMI, SOCAN, etc.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Oct 23, 2009)

BTW, I found this in a 2006 post on NS:


> ... the AFM does not regulate, protect, or cover the craft of composing music for film and television.



Now I'm really getting confused!


----------



## dinerdog (Oct 23, 2009)

You can be a member of AFM, but there has to be an AFM contract filed for the project. On commercials for example, the music house will use part of the budget and file a musicians contract with all the players/leaders etc. on it. These are residuals for the musicians playing on the job, not composer royalties. It's part of the airtime budget the company it's for pays. I've done multi-million dollar films with no AFM contract, but most of my commercial work does have one. Though there are more and more buyouts there too. Large films are all union, but there no motivation for lower budget films to pay for union work. It's mostly solo musicians like ourselves. Some of my biggest commercials this year were buyouts without any AFM or ASCAP contracts:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B71g7xGqBdA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qb0vquRcys


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Oct 23, 2009)

Still confused, sorry! 

OK, here's a hypothetical scenario:

- broadcaster has agreement with AFM

- producer agrees with broadcaster that musicians hired by composer for scoring must be AFM members

- 3 musicians are hired, AFM members

Do they (the musicians) get residuals when the tv show/movie plays on tv locally and around the world? And if so, who is responsible for collecting their royalties? 

Is there a forum where AFM members exchange information?


----------



## dinerdog (Oct 23, 2009)

Here's the link to my AFM802 in New York:

http://www.local802afm.org/

It's explains everything. You can call and ask questions too. But for all of this to happen someone (the producer perhaps) has to file one of the contracts with your local AFM specify the show, it's airdate, who's playing on the score and how much each of you gets. You get your initial AFM fee when it first gets filed, and then a smaller percentage of that payment as residuals usually every 13 week cycle that the music you played on is still airing. The producers of the show (who paid for the AFM musicians) pay the contract.

ps:The contracts are a little complicated and I don't know many musicians who know how to file them. It's usually someone who does that for a music house or production company. If you need to file it yourself, you can probably hire someone from a local music house and give him (or her) a line on the contract to file it for you. You might even call a music house and speak to their contract person and find out how it's done in your town.

In fact, there some screencasts on the 802 site on how to file a contract:

http://www.screencast.com/users/Local80 ... 5c7475a48f


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Oct 23, 2009)

So you're basically saying that a film/tv producer (not the composer, the production house) who enters into an agreement with the AFM is responsible for collecting the royalties owed to the musicians? 

And musicians trust all the different productions houses to do this correctly? And who says that every film/tv production company has royalty agreements with all the different broadcasters around the world?

I don't understand why there is no central collector like ASCAP or BMI for musicians' royalties.

Also, as a composer, if you're the only musician working on a given score (say it's all samples) that is with an AFM broadcaster, you get composer royalties _and_ musician royalties?


----------



## dinerdog (Oct 23, 2009)

Your local Canadian chapter looks even more helpful than the NY site:

http://www.afm.org/departments/canadian-office-bureau-canadienne (http://www.afm.org/departments/canadian ... canadienne)


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Oct 23, 2009)

Thanks! I actually got a lot of good information here:

http://www.mnrr.ca/index.html


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Oct 24, 2009)

Hey d! I've missed you in these parts! Here's hoping you'll be around a bit more this Fall... Thanks for taking the time to answer some of my questions.

For clarity's sake, please note that when I speak of 'producers', I'm referring to film/tv producers, not music producers.



poseur @ 24/10/2009 said:


> whomever signs & files the AFM contract is responsible for paying the residuals of which you speak;
> it is the AFM who collects & distributes these residuals.



So if I understand correctly, the AFM acts as a kind of middle-man between the musicians and the producer? AFAIK, when it comes to residuals for composers, it's not the producers who are responsible for collecting royalties, but rather ASCAP, BMI, SOCAN, etc. Why doesn't the AFM do it themselves? 

I'm asking because I'm thinking that some smaller producers might say to themselves, "Hmmm... so if I sign this AFM composer/musicians to do my score, the AFM will hound me for years for royalties, I'll have to hire people to just look after the collecting, and do the research to forge relationships with various broadcasters around the world, bug them for moneys, etc. Screw it, I'll hire Joe Blow instead."

In the case of composers' royalties, ASCAP, BMI, SOCAN, SACEM, etc, are in the business of collecting royalties. They have a system in place, tons of employees, contacts with all the other societies in the world. Not the case with film/tv production houses, again AFAIK. Correct? If so, it sounds silly to be asking the producers to do this.



poseur @ 24/10/2009 said:


> ... union-members pay the AFM to collect these residuals in annual dues & work-dues.



But are we just talking about making regular phone calls/emails to producers, asking where the money is? Seems like that's not the bulk of the work. Most of the work, IMO, is in following the broadcasts of a given show/movie around the world, staying on top of the various broadcasters and performance rights societies, right?



poseur @ 24/10/2009 said:


> ... many/most productions will simply not agree to become signatory to the AFM when there is one, single composer+musician involved, in my experience,
> since it does
> a) create accounting paperwork for them, and
> b) create further costs for them: they're responsible for making the residual payments.



So because the AFM forces the producers to do the collecting, there may be cases where AFM members are penalized, not hired, because it's too much work? How does that help AFM members get more work? I can't imagine being refused a composing gig because I'm a member of SOCAN. Then again, the producers don't have to make a single phone call to collect...

Also, how does having a single composer+musician make it more work for the producers than having a composer + a bunch of hired musicians?

Thanks for any answers. :wink:


----------



## Kennith Nichol (Oct 24, 2009)

Musicians do not collect risiduals.
The AFM pays musicians based on contract for number of rehearsals and performances. They are not a royalties company so far as I know.

In any case musicians would never get risidual or royalty income. Only the composer would.

At least that's what I recall.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Oct 24, 2009)

KNichol @ 24/10/2009 said:


> In any case musicians would never get risidual or royalty income. Only the composer would.
> 
> At least that's what I recall.



Not according to this information (good for Canada as well, btw):

http://www.mnrr.ca/faq.html


----------



## Brian Ralston (Oct 24, 2009)

One has to understand what the royalty is for and who is paying it. Composer "performance" royalties are not paid by the production company. For the composer, that was taken care of through the mechanical licensing of the music...or the work for hire agreement to compose it in the first place. The performance royalty for a composer is paid by the broadcaster who is broadcasting that creative work over the public airwaves. 

In contrast...the royalty for the musicians is more akin to the upfront mechanical fee for a specific use. That is the reason this is paid by the production company that hired them. The original agreement per union contract is for the recorded music performance of that musician to be used in a specific format/market. I.e...for a film score for theatrical release...or DVD....or TV. There are sometimes different rates for different uses. When the recorded material then gets used in a different venue (i.e. is no longer married to the soundtrack of the original release of the film...but is now in a "secondary market"...or CD soundtrack isolated from the film), that is where their union agreement say that another payment (or royalty) must be paid to use that musician's performance in that secondary market. This is why that is paid by the production company who had the original agreement to license that musician's performance....and not the broadcaster. When a theatrical release film goes to DVD...there is another fee paid...when it goes to TV, there is another one. The AFM has an entire fund and department for collecting money for secondary markets and that is the responsibility of them to collect from the production companies that became signatories to the union agreement upfront.

And yes it is true that many independent films will simply not become signatories to any union agreements. They will with SAG...because they pretty much have to if they are going to use any known actors who are all in SAG. But other than that...they will frown upon it. 

We used SAG actors in the short film I produced and under the SAG indie contract, it cost us next to nothing to do that...BUT...if we were to sell the film commercially or release it on TV, etc...there would be pretty large fees to be paid to SAG on behalf of the actors in the film and thus...it has prohibited us from ever selling or releasing our short outside of the film festivals it participated in. So...the film just sits there and we give it away for promotional reasons and that is about it. Imagine beign a signatory to multiple unions that would require multiple payments for releasing product in other markets and venues...it would even be harder. This is why many indie projects will not become signatory to any more unions than they absolutely have to and yes...why sometimes being a union member will keep them away from using you on these smaller projects. (If everyone is playing by the rules). :wink: 

There is a push for legislation in the US for broadcasters to also have to pay a royalty to the musicians and performers on recordings that are broadcast over their airwaves, but I believe the way the law is currently written, that is not in place. But that fight may soon happen. I have heard radio commercials about it from the radio stations, arguing against having to pay such a royalty saying that it will force radio stations to stop playing music due to cost.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Oct 24, 2009)

Thanks for chiming in with such details, Brian - much appreciated! The picture is getting clearer and clearer for me.  



Brian Ralston @ 24/10/2009 said:


> The AFM has an entire fund and department for collecting money for secondary markets and that is the responsibility of them to collect from the production companies that became signatories to the union agreement upfront.



But if it's the producers' responsibility to pay the AFM, why does the AFM need a department for secondary markets? What I mean is, whether the producer puts out the music for the tube, radio, recording, AFM just has to call them (the same producer) each time. They don't have to chase the performances... or do they?



Brian Ralston @ 24/10/2009 said:


> ...if we were to sell the film commercially or release it on TV, etc...there would be pretty large fees to be paid to SAG on behalf of the actors in the film and thus...it has prohibited us from ever selling or releasing our short outside of the film festivals it participated in. So...the film just sits there and we give it away for promotional reasons and that is about it.



Now that's sad.



Brian Ralston @ 24/10/2009 said:


> I have heard radio commercials about it from the radio stations, arguing against having to pay such a royalty saying that it will force radio stations to stop playing music due to cost.



That's OK. More time for Rush Limbaugh! >8o


----------



## cc64 (Oct 24, 2009)

Hi Ned,

what happens is that most independent producers don't want to become signatories of the AFM agreement. In general the composer becomes signatory of the AFM agreement. Pretty weird if you ask me but...

The AFM in Canada does offer a session rate wich is slightly higher, 30-40$ per session, and this gets you a complete international buyout. Nobody can come back and ask for more money later...Neighbouring rights(Droits voisins) etc...

I'm not sure how it works if a CD is produced but in most contracts i sign, it is specified that the producer/composer shall negotiate in good will to determine a normal street price for producing the album.

Also, althought it is true that doing AFM contracts on some gigs is more of a hassle than anything else, remember that if you do not contribute to your pension fund for more than 2 consecutive years, you lose some privileges(not your money) but for example you won't be allowed to collect your pension at 55 but just at 65. Not that we wish to stop working at 55 but you may start collecting at 55 and continue working wich is cool for slower periods.

HTH


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Oct 24, 2009)

IDTYVM *

Are all the major broadcasters AFM? By that I mean, does ABC, CBS, CBC, CTV, etc only work with producers who hire composers who are AFM? Or who only hire AFM musicians?






* it does, thank you very much


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Oct 24, 2009)

This pdf is particularly enlightning. Note some of the text of Page 2. Also, if I'm an independent producer, already stretched to the limits in terms of how many hours I can pay my lawyer (notice the singular), I would think twice after reading this agreement:

http://www.fmsmf.org/producerresources/ ... 8_9_04.pdf


----------



## poseur (Oct 24, 2009)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Sat Oct 24 said:


> This pdf is particularly enlightning. Note some of the text of Page 2. Also, if I'm an independent producer, already stretched to the limits in terms of how many hours I can pay my lawyer (notice the singular), I would think twice after reading this agreement:
> 
> http://www.fmsmf.org/producerresources/ ... 8_9_04.pdf


you might note, though,
that what the afm/fmsmf receives is *"1% of the* *Producer's Adjusted Gross* _of the *secondary* markets...*NOT* the THEATRICAL markets_".
key words: "adjusted gross", "non-theatrical".
(NB: the document you read is from 2005, for some reason.)
unlike any of the other Unions & Guilds á propos filmmaking,
many adjustments are _continually_ being made by the AFM in order not to stress the productions any further.
these are agreements that can easily be explained by any good AFM music contractor
directly to the producers in a simple meeting, before the music stage of post-.
and, when the producers see the actual numbers as they may be affected,
they're often shocked by its absolutely minimal negative impact, in opposition to the impact made 
by, again, the other Unions & Guilds.
just saying.

i do support the AFM, the FMSMF & the RMSMF.
i would, of course..... since the bulk of my actual living was made under their 
(often disorganised & disgruntling, but still effective) protection from 1988-2002,
and i have a pension & benefits, there, still.

dt


----------



## The_Dark_Knight (Oct 25, 2009)

So, sure there's not one more hoop we need to jump through to get our money? Maybe a few backflips while standing on a tooth pick would help. 0oD 


:evil:


----------

