Licensing Music

AFX Industrial (film scores)

This week I'm looking at the subject of music licensing, and how artists are often their own worst enemies when it comes to negotiating licensing fees.

 

 

The concept of licensing music.

If you're new to the idea of licensing music for your film, then I'd really like to help you explore a world of music that you may never have considered using.  For instance, did you know you can use ANY piece of Bach or Mozart or Debussy?  In fact the list of composers is endless!  In fact, I can honestly say that you would never be able to make enough films to incorporate all of the beautiful, scary and thought provoking music available.  There is one massive catch though!  Although the written manuscripts are freely available, let's face it they are pretty useless on their own, I mean how you gonna slot an 18th C. manuscript into your Avid / FCP timeline?  No, the catch is you need a recording of it, and although the music may be in the public domain the rights to the recording will always belong to someone.

Confused already?  Well don't be, as it's really quite simple, depending on which country your production is being made in that is.  In the UK you'll need to wait for 75 years to elapse before a composer's work becomes a public domain work.  So, for guys like Bach (deceased for 263 years) or Mozart (deceased for 222 years) we know that everything they ever wrote now belongs to us all collectively.  This can mistakenly lead film makers to believe that they can just use any old CD version of the piece!  You can't.

As I said earlier, although the music in its purest form is free, if you wanted to use a 1991 recording by the Berlin philharmonic (for example) you'll need a license.  Now, you may wonder why you need a license to use the recording of the music but not the music itself?  Hmm well it's pretty simple really, just think of it as paying the musicians and the recording engineers to do their job, a bit like a plumber or an architect.  I'm sure all of the collected knowledge on how to be a plumber exists for free in a library out there, in fact, the knowledge required to learn most trades can be found for free somewhere.  But, when you pay a plumber it's not for that colossal wealth of knowledge handed down through the generations is it?  No, who cares about that!  Jeez!  It's simply the finished pipework, it's the practical application of that knowledge that you're paying for.  Does this analogy work?  I'd like to know ;0)

Licensing contemporary music.

Anyway, you hate Bach right?  Of course you do, and there's so much contemporary music around right now that you'd love to have in your film ... So, what rules apply to say (the ironic use of) 'Don't Stop Me Now' by Queen?  Well pretty much the same rules apply except in this case, since all of the musicians (except Freddie) are still living, then the music itself will be subject to copyright rules.  But don't let that deter you as EVERY piece of music can be licensed ... For a price of course.

I recently wrapped as the music supervisor on a film and this meant tracking down a license for a particular piece of music by a French DJ.  Being an artist myself I prefer it when film makers bypass my publishers and license scores directly from my company.  The only result when you license from a publisher (who is 'looking after the artist') is they take 50, even 60% or they charge you 50% more!  For example you may want to license my arrangement of Eine Kleine Nachtmusik for your film, sure no problem, AFX will charge you say $595 - but license it through a publisher and you could pay $995!  After the publisher has taken their 60% and the MCPS has taken their cut, I'll end up getting $295!  If I'm lucky.  Wouldn't you rather your money actually went to the artist?  After all what contribution to your film have these anonymous office workers made, except to charge you 50%?

This exact scenario happened with the DJ I mentioned earlier, I offered him the chance to maximize his licensing fee by bypassing his publisher - unfortunately he either forgot to respond with a quote or maybe he felt it was beyond him.  So, we ended up licensing his music through the MCPS and he lost 50 - 60% of that sale!

I've dealt with a lot of publishing contracts and I'm yet to see a clause that states 'the artist shalt not exploit their own work for any monetary gain without giving us half if they do'.  In fact most, if not all publishers (and their aggregates) highlight the exact opposite of this clause, they even promote it as a selling point to entice potential artists.  So artists, really, there's no reason to give 'the suits' half of your money is there?

You see, I thought being an artist was all about breaking down the norms of our corrupt society!  A very simple way to be part of the thought revolution is to read your contracts and maximize your income ... Oh no, sorry, having an income from your art will mean you're as bad as 'the suits', so better then just to let them keep your earnings?  But, if you're not prepared to invest any money back into your art, (especially with music) then it will eventually start to affect the quality of your art ... Especially with music!

So, my arty friends please go after every penny that is owed to you and stop giving it away to corporation 'X'!  If you deny them long enough then corporation 'X' will go out of business, and the individuals who made up that company will be free to pursue their own artistic endeavors ... Then you'll be the gate keeper!  At which point you can keep 50% of their earnings just like they did to you! 

Now my comrades, that is true anarchy!

- David.

iTunes

 Click images to Buy David's music from your favorite store!

Amazon

Please sign up for email updates here.