# BMI or PRS?



## amysteriouskeyboard (Aug 1, 2021)

Hi everyone,
I'd like to start by apologising for any naivety you may perceive from me in this post as I'm very new to the way that the music industry and royalties work.

I've been composing music for a while now and have wanted to make music for a living for a long time. I've decided that this summer, I'm going to put together some tracks that I've been working on and release them as part of an EP, somewhat just for fun but also to possibly try and send my music to promotion channels on YouTube, sort of just as an experiment to see whether or not my music is actually good/listenable. In my case, I'm quite interested in library music and it would be great to successfully make some money from something like that in the future. 

For now, I'm honestly not expecting the EP I'm going to release to make a decent amount of money, which I'm not too bothered about since I'm mostly just doing this as sort of an experiment. Because of this, I don't think I'll register with a PRO just yet, not only because I don't expect to get a lot of royalties but also because from the research I've done, I'm still quite unsure what PRO would be a good choice for me. 

The main two PROs that I've been considering are BMI and PRS. I live in the UK, so it seems like a fairly good idea to join with PRS since they're the local society, however they do also seem quite strict in some aspects (they won't let you give direct licenses to people for music that's registered with them for example). On the other hand, BMI seem to give composers more freedom from the research that I've done (allowing members to give out direct licenses for example), but I'm wondering whether there would be any significant drawbacks from joining a foreign PRO. I know that royalties would take longer to get to me if my tracks were to be broadcast outside of the US, but if I'm looking to make library music I'm wondering whether this would actually make any significant difference. 

There's a chance that I'm probably overthinking the differences between the two of them, but I'm curious to hear what people on this forum think about PRS and BMI if you have any experience with them, and whether it's counterproductive to consider joining an American PRO at all. I think I'm correct in thinking that if I were to join a PRO I wouldn't have to re-release any music that I had released beforehand with a distributor which further reinforces the fact that I don't think it's completely necessary to join one right now, but since I can't find a lot of detailed information comparing the two online and I'd like to know more about them for future reference, would anyone here with experience with either of them be able to outline the pros and cons of each society and possibly give me some advice? 

Thanks.


----------



## Daryl (Aug 2, 2021)

1. How many direct licences are you hoping to sell?
2. What sort of Direct licence are you hoping to sell?
3. Where is the majority of your income going to be made?
4. Have you thought about setting yourself up as a Publisher?


----------



## amysteriouskeyboard (Aug 2, 2021)

Daryl said:


> 1. How many direct licences are you hoping to sell?
> 2. What sort of Direct licence are you hoping to sell?
> 3. Where is the majority of your income going to be made?
> 4. Have you thought about setting yourself up as a Publisher?


Thanks for your response.
So in regards to Question 1 and 2, I was mostly concerned about not being able to give direct licenses since I know that sometimes direct licenses happen with library music but I'm honestly not sure how often they happen and whether this would be a significant issue, so I was wondering whether people on this forum who have experience in that area generally think the inability to give direct licenses is something to be concerned about or whether those concerns are unfounded. I'm just quite keen to make sure that I can maintain a reasonable level of control over my music and that I don't end up limiting what I can do with it.
When it comes to both the library music tracks I'm trying to put together as well as the music I'm going to release in the next few months, I'm honestly not completely sure where most income would be made. Most of the libraries that I've been looking at which may be suitable for my music are based in the US and have placements with US companies, so in that sense I'm leaning toward BMI. When it comes to other music I'd like to release though I'm honestly not completely sure where most income would be generated. In response to your question, I'm wondering whether maybe when I release my music I should try and see where I'm getting the most streams and base my decision partly on that. 
I haven't considered setting myself up as a publisher, just a songwriter/composer.


----------



## Chris Harper (Aug 2, 2021)

I can’t speak for whether PRS or one of the American PROs would be more appropriate. I will let someone address that. But I will offer some friendly advice:

I would not personally release any song for any purpose without registering it with a PRO first. One of my best friends works at BMI, and you would not believe some of the stories I have heard. It is not uncommon that some unscrupulous person runs across a song that has been released, checks the database and sees it has not been registered, registers the song claiming they own the rights and begins collecting royalty checks. In many cases, the songwriter isn’t even aware the song is earning royalties, sometimes for years. When the songwriter tries to register their song, it will either be flagged by the society where it is already registered when it gets reviewed for issuance of an ISWC # (if the criminal actually listed the correct songwriter and if they are lucky), or the songwriter’s submission of the song would be registered with a totally different ISWC # if nobody notices the discrepancy. In that case, the song may already be earning royalties under a separate ISWC number, which are getting paid to the fraudster. Since song titles are not unique, the PRO may have a difficult time matching the fraudulent registration with the legitimate one. Either way, this usually results in a very serious legal mess that could take months or years to resolve. The songwriter will have to convince the PRO that they are rightful owner of the song, then possibly end up having to file a lawsuit. And the type of person that fraudulently registers songs usually doesn’t have any money, so the songwriter will probably never be able to get paid the royalties that were rightfully theirs, even if they win a judgment in court. Well, at least that’s my understanding of how US law works. I have no idea about UK law. 

The system has improved now that BMI and ASCAP have a shared database and the ISWC system has improved, but it’s very complicated. Often, someone in works registration does notice potential issues, but the sheer volume of songs being registered, re-titled, re-registered, assigned/re-assigned to different publishers means that they have a monumental task of managing data, and things can slip through the cracks.

This has even happened with very famous songs. You wouldn’t believe me if I told you. Especially in the days before PROs could share digital databases, it was common for criminals to register very famous songs at ASCAP that were already registered at BMI, and vice-versa, and be paid tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars before they were caught. If the song as co-written by a BMI artist and an ASCAP artist, then it could be legitimately registered at one PRO and fraudulently at the other, with the criminal registering themselves as the publisher or some other scheme. Thankfully, this loophole has been closed since they share databases. In a lot of those cases, the PROs basically had to eat the royalties, since they were paid twice.

I personally register a song as soon as I render a master. I don’t write a lot of music with lyrics, but if I did I would register them even before I finished recording them. I don’t wait for a song to be released. Any MP3 sitting on my computer has the ISWC # already tagged as soon as I receive it. Paranoid? Perhaps. But it’s a habit I will always keep. I’ve heard too many stories. It’s also a ritual of celebrationfor me. Another song completed, another work registered.


----------



## Daryl (Aug 2, 2021)

amysteriouskeyboard said:


> Thanks for your response.
> So in regards to Question 1 and 2, I was mostly concerned about not being able to give direct licenses since I know that sometimes direct licenses happen with library music but I'm honestly not sure how often they happen and whether this would be a significant issue, so I was wondering whether people on this forum who have experience in that area generally think the inability to give direct licenses is something to be concerned about or whether those concerns are unfounded. I'm just quite keen to make sure that I can maintain a reasonable level of control over my music and that I don't end up limiting what I can do with it.
> When it comes to both the library music tracks I'm trying to put together as well as the music I'm going to release in the next few months, I'm honestly not completely sure where most income would be made. Most of the libraries that I've been looking at which may be suitable for my music are based in the US and have placements with US companies, so in that sense I'm leaning toward BMI. When it comes to other music I'd like to release though I'm honestly not completely sure where most income would be generated. In response to your question, I'm wondering whether maybe when I release my music I should try and see where I'm getting the most streams and base my decision partly on that.
> I haven't considered setting myself up as a publisher, just a songwriter/composer.


1. Direct licences are perfectly possible to PRS members. It all depends on what sort of Direct licence you want, as to the cost.
2. Have you actually written any library music yet?
3. Do you know that the libraries you are targeting actually want your music?
4. It is also possible to be a member of more than one PRO. Just not in the same territory.


----------



## amysteriouskeyboard (Aug 2, 2021)

Chris Harper said:


> I can’t speak for whether PRS or one of the American PROs would be more appropriate. I will let someone address that. But I will offer some friendly advice:
> 
> I would not personally release any song for any purpose without registering it with a PRO first. One of my best friends works at BMI, and you would not believe some of the stories I have heard. It is not uncommon that some unscrupulous person runs across a song that has been released, checks the database and sees it has not been registered, registers the song claiming they own the rights and begins collecting royalty checks. In many cases, the songwriter isn’t even aware the song is earning royalties, sometimes for years. When the songwriter tries to register their song, it will either be flagged by the society where it is already registered when it gets reviewed for issuance of an ISWC # (if the criminal actually listed the correct songwriter and if they are lucky), or the songwriter’s submission of the song would be registered with a totally different ISWC # if nobody notices the discrepancy. In that case, the song may already be earning royalties under a separate ISWC number, which are getting paid to the fraudster. Since song titles are not unique, the PRO may have a difficult time matching the fraudulent registration with the legitimate one. Either way, this usually results in a very serious legal mess that could take months or years to resolve. The songwriter will have to convince the PRO that they are rightful owner of the song, then possibly end up having to file a lawsuit. And the type of person that fraudulently registers songs usually doesn’t have any money, so the songwriter will probably never be able to get paid the royalties that were rightfully theirs, even if they win a judgment in court. Well, at least that’s my understanding of how US law works. I have no idea about UK law.
> 
> ...


Thanks for letting me know about this. I knew this sort of thing happened but I didn't realise it was that complex to resolve. Perhaps I will join a PRO before releasing music then.


Daryl said:


> 1. Direct licences are perfectly possible to PRS members. It all depends on what sort of Direct licence you want, as to the cost.
> 2. Have you actually written any library music yet?
> 3. Do you know that the libraries you are targeting actually want your music?
> 4. It is also possible to be a member of more than one PRO. Just not in the same territory.


Ah, sorry I must have misunderstood their writers' agreement. If it is indeed possible to do direct licenses then I suppose there's nothing to worry about in that aspect.
I have written some library music tracks but I'm trying to get a decent number of tracks together before I try submitting music to libraries. I'll be honest and say I really don't know whether I'll get accepted to the ones that I'm looking at right now. I'm taking a while to put tracks together mainly because I want to make sure that I'd only be putting forward my best music, at least at the beginning anyway. I'm hoping that in the process of making these tracks I'll naturally improve my composition and production skills so that it wouldn't take this long to put decent music together. It's not a huge deal if I get rejected from a few at the beginning - I'll just keep trying my best to improve my music. 

I wasn't actually aware composers could join two PROs - at least BMI don't seem to want songwriters who are members of PROs elsewhere from looking at their site. If I can join both BMI and PRS I'll definitely consider joining both, maybe initially BMI and then PRS once I'm eligible (I think members' music has to be broadcast on television or performed live or meet other requirements before they can join).


----------



## Daryl (Aug 2, 2021)

You have the choice of what territories the PRO is responsible for. Some film composers join PRS, but have ASCAP exclusively for the US, for example. Don't worry about PRS eligibility. That's a throwback to the olden days.

In terms of direct licences, you ned to be more specific, because that term covers a multitude of sins.

Just so you know, the best libraries are unlikely to accept any of your music you send them. Not because it isn't good enough, but because they brief composers themselves, and the tracks are written to these bespoke briefs.


----------



## amysteriouskeyboard (Aug 2, 2021)

Daryl said:


> You have the choice of what territories the PRO is responsible for. Some film composers join PRS, but have ASCAP exclusively for the US, for example. Don't worry about PRS eligibility. That's a throwback to the olden days.
> 
> In terms of direct licences, you ned to be more specific, because that term covers a multitude of sins.
> 
> Just so you know, the best libraries are unlikely to accept any of your music you send them. Not because it isn't good enough, but because they brief composers themselves, and the tracks are written to these bespoke briefs.


Thanks for this. I think what I may do is just upload my music to Soundcloud or distribute it, use that as my evidence for PRS eligibility (assuming that would be enough) and then register those tracks with them.
I think I'm correct in assuming that I shouldn't have to reupload or re-release my music through my distributor once I register it with a PRO. I think a major upside of PRS is that I think members can leave anytime so if I really regret my decision I can always just move to BMI instead. For some reason I'm struggling to find the full members' agreement for PRS that I saw a few days ago that mentioned direct licensing but I don't think there was anything else on there that stuck out as a concern.

When you describe direct licenses as covering a 'multitude of sins', are you implying that direct licensing isn't a good idea or just reflecting upon how PRS see their members doing direct licensing? Also, this may be a stupid question but if I were to send my music to a promotion channel on youtube, agreeing to remove any content ID claim, would this count as a direct license?


----------



## GtrString (Aug 2, 2021)

You should register locally, so your work will be covered by local laws. Otherwise you will need to consult with American lawyers, fees and whatnot in case you need to sort anything out. that can be very expensive and risky for you.


----------



## amysteriouskeyboard (Aug 2, 2021)

GtrString said:


> You should register locally, so your work will be covered by local laws. Otherwise you will need to consult with American lawyers, fees and whatnot in case you need to sort anything out. that can be very expensive and risky for you.


That's a very good point which I didn't think about before - thank you.


----------

