JPF Home Page Forums General Messages Industry Message Forum Music Library Alert...

"As for something being too hard to track, that's a bunch of BS" - Sausagelink

Partly BS. Here's a blanket deal scenario (from my experiences):

Library X makes blanket deal with the Food Network. The Food Network pays Library X $3,000 licensing per quarter for access to a catalog of 50,000 tracks and 1,000 composers.

The Food Network uses 250 tracks in the first quarter (with 175 composers involved).

Since the Food Network signed a blanket deal, they don't want to be bothered with sending a detailed accounting of every track sold. The simplicity of a blanket deal is what makes it so appealing. Without this detailed accounting, it’s very difficult to distribute the licensing fees justly to the rightful composers (the ones whose music was placed). Not to mention the duration of each track used. One composer may have had 2 minutes of a track used, where another only had 2 seconds of a track used. This would also have to be calculated. Yes, I think this detailed accounting should be mandatory.

So okay, the composers don’t receive upfront licensing. Many music libraries don’t offer that anyway. The writer is still entitled to PRO royalties though. Unfortunately, PRO royalties don't exist under Scripps Network. So usually the composers are left out in the cold in blanket deals.

Here’s the math on the $3,000 blanket deal scenario if the library decides to split 50% of the licensing with the writers: Since there’s no detailed accounting, the library decides to split 50% of $3,000 with all the writers in their catalog (since the library has no idea what tracks/ writers got placed). So $1,500 divided by 1,000 writers gives each writer $1.50.
This is only one scenario. There are many variations thereof.

John