Daryl
Senior Member
They can. They just don't want to.Yes, I know, as it should be imo. It's frowned upon by the PROs here but they can't stop it.
They can. They just don't want to.Yes, I know, as it should be imo. It's frowned upon by the PROs here but they can't stop it.
And sometimes I rather take 50% of a lot than 100% of nothing at all. For the sake of clarity, this obviously relates to broadcast not mechanical. It’s just not as black and white as some make it to be.
That would be quite frankly to extreme to answer that. But there are several out there that nag a share of the writers.So let's hear it! What's its name?
Just wanna say that this discussion should not stick to the ideal but also to the reality that is out there. There are libraries out there that take a part of your writers. It’s not nice and if this doesn’t suit you then you’re free to walk away. But sometimes it can be still beneficial. I had my fair share of tracks with these kind of libraries where I also have given away writers in this case 50%. But these cues have been placed well in various TV formats and have amounted to significant royalties over the years. I don’t want to defend this practice but I’m still left with a choice. And sometimes I rather take 50% of a lot than 100% of nothing at all. For the sake of clarity, this obviously relates to broadcast not mechanical. It’s just not as black and white as some make it to be.
Jeez... And I was going to try and get in with those guys too! I'll stick with EMI. Money upfront (though it's an advance) and standard 50/50 otherwise.That would be quite frankly to extreme to answer that. But there are several out there that nag a share of the writers.
I'm not going to call them out on a public forum but I will say that the info wasn't hard to come by a few years ago when they were in their heyday.So let's hear it! What's its name?
I agree. They have the power but not the will. I do believe though that the practice is actually illegal in the UK? i'm pretty sure it's not here, regardless of ethics.They can. They just don't want to.
Just wanna say that this discussion should not stick to the ideal but also to the reality that is out there. There are libraries out there that take a part of your writers. It’s not nice and if this doesn’t suit you then you’re free to walk away. But sometimes it can be still beneficial. I had my fair share of tracks with these kind of libraries where I also have given away writers in this case 50%. But these cues have been placed well in various TV formats and have amounted to significant royalties over the years. I don’t want to defend this practice but I’m still left with a choice. And sometimes I rather take 50% of a lot than 100% of nothing at all. For the sake of clarity, this obviously relates to broadcast not mechanical. It’s just not as black and white as some make it to be.
This whole thread has been about mechanicals.
Are you telling the truth? Show us your royalty statements!
I need to prove to you that I made 25k each of the past two years from a bunch of cues? C'mon now.
Yes, please prove it.
I am not making my royalty statements public. Sorry, I just won't do that. You have the right to believe what you would like.
It's illegal in the UK, for PRS members, because PRS actually owns your Writers' share. Therefore legally only they can agree to give it up. That's why those shady companies that try to take it insist on putting themselves down as co-writers. Without telling that lie, they have no access to your Royalties.I agree. They have the power but not the will. I do believe though that the practice is actually illegal in the UK? i'm pretty sure it's not here, regardless of ethics.
It's illegal in the UK, for PRS members,
It's up to ASCAP and BMI to stick their collective necks out.Wish it was illegal in the USA as well.
So let's hear it! What's its name?
What??? I thought that was was illegal? But I guess you can always give away your share voluntarily, right? They can't coerce you into giving away more than 50% of the publishing though. So the choice is yours. I guess it really comes down to what library you are dealing with! I can see that some cases this might make sense. I'd question the morality of this practice though. It's not only about receiving money IMHO.I have a number of production music albums with libraries and I've written directly for shows through production companies and in the latter scenario, where the production company or the network acts as publisher, there is never a music library involved. That scenario makes no sense to me at all, just like the others are saying.
There *is* a well known US library that requires that all writers split the writer's share with the owner (not ethical imo) but it's not the same thing, that library also keeps the publishing. There's also a library I know of that routinely splits their *publisher's* share with production companies but the writers retain 100% of the writer's share. Those scenarios are the only ones I know of that resemble what you are describing but they are not the same thing.
I'd question the morality of this practice though. It's not only about receiving money IMHO.
What??? I thought that was was illegal? But I guess you can always give away your share voluntarily, right? They can't coerce you into giving away more than 50% of the publishing though. So the choice is yours. I guess it really comes down to what library you are dealing with! I can see that some cases this might make sense. I'd question the morality of this practice though. It's not only about receiving money IMHO.