Music Licensing and Music Licenses

This blog references the term, music licensing, quite a bit.  Generally, when we talk about licensing, we are referring to licensing music for film and television, or “synch” licenses.  However, in nearly every aspect of music use, there is a license involved.  Licenses are required to sell, broadcast and play live music.  Confusion arises when songwriters, artists, broadcasters and even club owners don’t know if they are properly licensed in their area of music involvement.

Here are some of the most basic licenses needed:

Mechanical Licenses

Performance Licenses

Digital Licenses

Synchronization Licenses

Master Use Licenses

Mechanical Licenses are required when a song is recorded and sold, either digitally or physically.  These ensure that the songwriters and publishers are paid when a recording is sold. The Harry Fox Agency (HFA) is the largest administrator of mechanical rights in the U.S, handling over 15.2 million licenses for nearly 36,000 publishers.

Mechanical fees shared between songwriters and publishers are paid at a rate of 9.1¢ per song and 24¢ for ringtones.  Fees for streamed uses are still negotiated individually with each service. Without mechanical licenses in place, it is illegal to release a CD or digital recording.

Performance Licenses grant the rights to publicly perform a musical composition. These licenses include live performances and broadcast via a sound system radio or TV.  These rights administered via performing rights organizations, such as BMI (Broadcast Music, Inc), ASCAP (American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers), or SESAC.

People incorrectly assume that it is the responsibility of musicians and entertainers to obtain performance licenses.  However, it is the business owner who must obtain the license. Just like insurance and other business licenses, paying music license fees is simply another cost of doing business. Not properly licensing an establishment could be quite costly as damages can range from a minimum of $750 to a maximum of $150,000 per song played!

Fortunately, the licensing fee is determined by the size of the establishment, and the manner in which the music is performed, i.e., live, jukebox, videofeed, etc. Concert rates are based on the seating capacity, college and university rates are based upon the number of full time students and retail store rates depend upon square footage, etc.

Radio stations and television networks usually apply for blanket licenses that allow them to publically perform any song that the PRO’s administrate.  The fees they pay are based on the station's listener numbers and ad rates.

Digital Licenses are for Internet websites, and mobile applications. Companies that stream recorded music digitally—such as Internet radio services and webcasters must have licenses to digitally transmit music to listeners. SoundExchange administers these types of licenses for artists and labels. The PRO’s have special digital rates for publishers and songwriters.  The rates are much lower than the terrestrial broadcast rates. BMI has even created special “Live365” blanket licenses for “microcasters” and “minicasters.” Additionally, HFA licenses interactive streams for one cent (.01¢) per stream via Songfile.

Synchronization or Synch Licenses allow a song to be synchronized with pictures, and is the type of license required to use a song in a film or on television.  A Master Use license is required to use a recording in a film. These two licenses are required when a record is used, the Synch license to allow the use of the copyright and the Master use license to use the actual recording.  

Even though each of these documents is called a license, each has a specific purpose. Only the correct license can give you the protection you need, and grant the permissions you seek.  These licenses also make sure that each entity involved in a piece of music, i.e., songwriter, artist, publisher or label, receives compensation for the work that they assisted in creating.

Music Submission Sites

I recently read a very long LinkedIn group thread about the pros and cons of music submission sites.  Most of the posts were against the sites.  Some posters cited glowing testimonials, to be forcefully rebutted by someone with a completely different experience.  So, should musicians use these sites, or avoid them like the plague? 

I think that answer is different for each artist, songwriter and musician.  Additionally, many of these music submission sites have valuable access to placement opportunities, so to determine if it is the right choice for you, I’d recommend that you ask a few questions and base your decision on how the answer affects you and your objectives.

Do they charge a membership fee?

Do they charge a submission fee?

Do they allow you to submit your songs in answer to an existing opportunity, or require that you submit blindly and promise to find an opportunity?

Are they specific about music needed, or simply ask that you submit?

Do they promise to critique the submitted music? 

Do they give you a time frame to receive a response?

Do you know anyone who has used the service?

Were they satisfied with the experience?

I have a personal aversion to paying for opportunities, so that would be a major factor in my choice of which submission site to use.  I don’t mind sharing a percentage of earnings from an actual placement, so a service that utilized this type of collection arrangement would get a second look from me.  I have subscribed to lead sheets, and a site that charges a fee for access to those leads is similar.  However, it feels like double-dipping to me, if after paying a membership fee, I still have to pay a submission fee to send music to one of those leads I have already paid for! 

As someone who has received an unending parade of submissions, when I sat on that side of the desk, I know what happens to blind submissions – nothing.  A song has a much better chance of being used if it is received in response to a request.  So I would rather submit a song for a specific use, than submit blindly and hope. So this would be another factor that would determine which site I would work with.

Many of these services promise to critique the music. Critique services are valuable because music supervisors don’t want to sift through a sea of low quality submissions to find something usable, so a site may critique submissions to assure that what is actually passed forward is usable.  There are sites that no longer exist because supervisors and producers could no longer rely on the quality of the submissions.  I look at critiquing as a completely separate service, and one that is valuable to someone new to submitting for television and film.  There are standards, which may be quite different from those required by radio or A&R departments.  But professional songwriters and musicians, just looking to expand their opportunities may not need a critiquing service, so why pay for one?  Just something else to consider when choosing a submission site.

What's “the buzz” on the service?  If the bulk of comments about a site are negative, there may be a good reason for the “bad buzz.”  I’d stay away.

Let’s look at a few:

Music Submit

Music Submits promises to promote to radio stations, blogs, podcasts, music webzines, social media and other outlets.  They charge monthly for their submission services, starting at $9.95 each month.  I do have a problem with the promo pictured below, telling site visitors to create a free account.  You can register for free, but have to be a paid member to utilize any of the site's benefits.  That feels like bait and switch to me.

photo: https://www.musicsubmit.com/genres.cfm

Music X-ray

Music X-ray works like an aggregator, a middleman for companies offering various opportunities and setting their own prices for submissions.  I know a number of the “industry professionals” who use the site to enlist talent.  There are many really cool opportunities to be found on this site, but the professionals are not vetted, so do your homework before spending your money on an opportunity here – know who you’re dealing with!

Crucial Music

Crucial Music is a placement service.  I read their “deal” and it is very similar to the agreement that I have with my artists.  They do not charge for services and take a percentage of the earnings from music placed.

Magnatune

I’m not very familiar with Magnatune, but their tagline is “We are Not Evil” and their submissions page states that ‘we don't do business with labels and we will not send money to a lawyer or manager.’

Is this a red flag?

Photo: http://magnatune.com

They charge $15 per month for their services.

Film Music Network

Film Music Network probably has the best film and television leads, but the site charges $11.95 a month to join and 1.99 for each submission.  Non-members pay 5.99 to submit a track.  (I have not used the site – you know how I feel about double dippers!)

Taxi

Taxi is the most expensive and unfortunately, the service that has garnered the most complaints.  I have not used them, but they are double dippers in a big way, $300 to join and $5.00 for each submission.

Music Dealers

photo: http://www.musicdealers.com/

I know I shouldn’t play favorites, but I do have a favorite music submission site.

Music Dealers meets all of my criteria.  The site is free to use, they allow you to submit for specific opportunities and they take a percentage of actual placements.  They are easy to deal with, communicate with artists on a regular basis and let you know when there is an opportunity that may work for your music. 

So that’s my two cents.

Infrastructure

In addition to the proverbial ‘village,’ we discussed last month, nurturing a budding film industry requires infrastructure.  Without entertainment infrastructure, i.e., stages, studios, facilities needed to create film, television or recording projects, large production companies cannot function effectively, so will generally find a location to shoot that can provide the needed infrastructure. Additionally, “soft infrastructure,” i.e., experienced production and post-production professionals, and a favorable tax incentive structure are fundamentals of a thriving film industry.

The development of the Tennessee film industry has taken several years and a number of state administrations. David Bennett, who was Film & Music Commissioner from 2003 to 2007, championed a tax incentive program to combat the loss of revenue going to bordering states like Louisiana, Georgia, and North Carolina.  However, he was faced with a state regime that did not share his vision and relinquished his post.  Not much happened until a pro-industry administration assumed power in Tennessee and pushed for a more profitable industry structure in the state.  (Nashville Scene)

Eric Close, TV Mayor of "Nashville" and
Karl Dean, the real Mayor of Nashville   

The current Film Commissioner, Bob Raines, has worked hard to create a film-friendly environment where shows like “Nashville” can be produced and maintained in the state.  To accommodate the needs of producers, his office has joined forces with Nashville’s Mayor Karl Dean, the Office of Economic & Community Development, the Metro Arts Commission, Film Nashville, and a number of film oriented organizations to form the Nashville Film Television Transmedia Council, similar to the Music City Music Council, which was organized in 2009.  The mission of the council is to create more film and television opportunities in the state and ensure that the required infrastructure is in place, including trained, talented production personnel.

The educational/training component includes colleges and universities such as Middle Tennessee State University (MTSU), Lipscomb University, Columbia College and Belmont, plus film schools that specialize in film and TV production.

“The industry is here,” says Read Ridley of Columbia College. “There’s a need for skilled film technicians. This is what needs to happen in order to steer more opportunity and build a diversified workforce for the film market in Nashville.”

"It's a chicken and egg situation," says Loucas George, producer of the series, “Nashville.” "Without the infrastructure you don't attract the business. … Without the business, the infrastructure doesn't develop. … Now the infrastructure is developing."

The positive financial impact of "Nashville" is felt all over the city, and the show has spent more than a $1 million to build a suitable sound stage facility that could attract more projects to the area.

“The show has employed actors, music artists and production workers,” says Mayor Dean. “It has also generated increased tourism dollars that can be applied to many areas of our city's budget.”

Because of the financial advantages, new state incentives have been initiated to bring in smaller film and television productions. Originally, only projects with million dollar budgets qualified for the program, but the minimum per project or per episode budget has been lowered to $200,000. (Music Row)

At a recent event, members of the local film community gathered to salute the mayor for his efforts in establishing and reinforcing Nashville’s entertainment infrastructure.  Representatives from the actor’s unions (SAG/AFTRA), the production unions (IATSE), public television, film festivals, and support organizations, including Women in Film & Television, Film Nashville and the Arts and Business Council all pledged support. 

Eric Close, who portrays Mayor Teddy on “Nashville” summed it up by saying, “So many have been impacted by the show. ‘Nashville’ is just the tip of the iceberg.  There is so much more to come!”