#989496 - 03/31/04 09:16 AM
Attempting to pay the fiddler
|
blas
Gold Member
Registered: 03/06/01
Posts: 517
Loc: St. Louis, MO. USA
|
Offline
|
|
I've built a fair portion of our studio's income on location recording for local high schools and colleges, mostly concert performances. They of course, have paid their proper royalities or user fees, but I'm continuing to have a problem with our end! I've made attempts to get an answer from Harry Fox folks, and thru ASCAP (as I'm a member). My emails have yet to be answered. I've been waiting over 8 months. The problem seems to be, the low disc count. Most these project come to an order of 50 - 100 disc total. It seems no one that collects writers fees wants to take the time to worry about the little bit I would generate!!! ANY SUGGESTIONS??
I've lost several chances to record because I can't give possible clients an answer when they ask about fees.
Help us if you can.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#989497 - 04/01/04 02:34 PM
Re: Attempting to pay the fiddler
|
AlanThomas
Gold Member
Registered: 07/22/02
Posts: 534
Loc: Burbank, CA
|
|
Offline
|
|
It seems like you really shouldn't be the one worrying about the licensing.
In my experience that is an issue for the client to settle. Not the recordist or duplicator.
I think if you did that for your clients, it could be considered an additional, billable service...
HFA's Limited Quantity Licensing requires a minimum of 500 units. At the minimum statutory rate, the licensing would cost $42.50 (plus a $2.00 or so HFA service fee) for that quantity.
You can do the licensing on-line, charge your client for the licensing fee (plus your own service fee) and explain to the client that their licensing is covered up to 500 units (that way, even though they may only be doing 100 right now, they can get a reprint done later & not have to worry about the licensing).
Anyway, you probably should consult an attorney, but I thought I'd just throw in my two cents.
Cheers
_________________________
Signatures can appear at the bottom of your posts. This option may be disabled by the message board administrators at any time, however. You may use UBB Code in your signature, but not HTML. UBB Code Images are permitted.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#989498 - 04/01/04 04:04 PM
Re: Attempting to pay the fiddler
|
blas
Gold Member
Registered: 03/06/01
Posts: 517
Loc: St. Louis, MO. USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Alan, When you said a $42.50 fee is that per song or performance or what? I'm glad to run into someone that has some degree of knowledge in this area.
Thanks, 
blas
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#989499 - 04/01/04 06:17 PM
Re: Attempting to pay the fiddler
|
Calfee Jones
Senior Member
Registered: 09/25/00
Posts: 395
Loc: Memphis USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
The fee is for a mechanical license to reproduce the song on media that you create.
So, for instance, you pay the $42.50 for a mechanical license for "Louie, Louie". You can then legally create up to 500 copies of your recording of "Louie, Louie" (not the original Kingsmen recording - this requires a separate negotiation with whoever owns the original recording). Those are copies you can sell or give away.
The money from the mechanical license is split between the publisher and songwriter(s).
So, if you were doing a CD with 10 songs that you didn't write (and they have been previously recorded and released by someone) the mechanical licenses would cost you $425.00. You could then legally create and distribute up to 500 copies of the recordings.
You can license Harry Fox stuff online here at SongFile.com
_________________________
- Calfee Jones
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#989500 - 04/01/04 07:08 PM
Re: Attempting to pay the fiddler
|
AlanThomas
Gold Member
Registered: 07/22/02
Posts: 534
Loc: Burbank, CA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Yup, what Calfee said...
Also, I think we're really talking about two distinct types of licensing here: Performance rights (acquired by the performer through ASCAP, BMI, etc.) required to publicly perform the work and Mechanical rights (like you get through HFA) required to license the rights to distribute recordings of the work.
So if a local high school orchestra is doing an arrangement of Zoot Suit Riot by Cherry Poppin' Daddys, they (or the venue they're performing in) needs to clear the right to perform the piece live through ASCAP. If they (or their agent, i.e. you) record the performance and wish to distribute copies of it, they need to clear those rights through either the publisher directly or through HFA.
Doing it directly can be a big pain in the ass: letters of notification of intent to distribute, monthly royalty statements/payments, yearly royalty statement, etc. The advantage is that you only pay the royalty after you actually distribute the copies.
The easier way to to go (for small, limited quantities anyway) is to do it through Harry Fox. In this case, you're just paying as though you have distributed each and every copy. And since you pay up front, there are no monthly statements, no letters, etc. Much cleaner and easier.
_________________________
Signatures can appear at the bottom of your posts. This option may be disabled by the message board administrators at any time, however. You may use UBB Code in your signature, but not HTML. UBB Code Images are permitted.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#989501 - 04/02/04 12:44 AM
Re: Attempting to pay the fiddler
|
blas
Gold Member
Registered: 03/06/01
Posts: 517
Loc: St. Louis, MO. USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Sooooooooooooooo, Now in a situation where the disc is only produced for 20 orders, why would anyone want to pay for 500? I can see paying for what is produced but not for something that isn't. I would assume you should be able to break that fee down by 500 units, correct? So if
$42.50 covers 500, then if there are 10 songs and only 50 disc ordered, the total due should be $42.50.
The old 'pay for what you do thing', right?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#989502 - 04/02/04 01:07 PM
Re: Attempting to pay the fiddler
|
AlanThomas
Gold Member
Registered: 07/22/02
Posts: 534
Loc: Burbank, CA
|
|
Offline
|
|
I think it depends on the clients plans for the release. If they expect to do a few re-orders & wind up distributing close to 500 then it might be worth doing the licensing up front so they don't have to do the paper work.
On the other hand, if they're never going to come close to 500 (and assuming they want to stay legal) their only choice is to do it themselves: write the letters, do the monthly statements, etc.
Or they could just blow it off, and assume that the publisher isn't going to bother coming after them for the publishing royalty on a small number of units. I mean, the publishing royalty for one song, under 5 minutes in length, for 20 units is $1.70. That's not even worth making a phone call for.
They can also negotiate directly with the publisher to try and get whatever terms they think are appropriate for their situation. But I think most schools & such probably just blow it off.
_________________________
Signatures can appear at the bottom of your posts. This option may be disabled by the message board administrators at any time, however. You may use UBB Code in your signature, but not HTML. UBB Code Images are permitted.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#989503 - 01/27/05 11:57 AM
Re: Attempting to pay the fiddler
|
cherri
Gold Member
Registered: 09/10/03
Posts: 731
Loc: N. MI USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Adding to this thread rather than start another one. This is today's ironic licensing story.
Deep in the process of finalizing our Cd release. Originally we recorded ten originals and two covers. As we approached the completion of the CD, I popped in to the HFA licensing website to purchase licenses for the two cover tunes.
First cover tune - available, easy, paid the fee and we're able to include that song on our CD.
The other cover tune, a jazzy blues number by a huge icon rock star, was not listed on the song database. Few people even are aware that she put out a blues CD, and this was her only original on that CD.
We're approaching the final mastering on the CD, and at studio fees, I had to make a decision - do we continue on that song, and hope the license becomes available, or do we save our studio time and $$ and skip that tune?
A few weeks ago, I contacted HFA regarding the song, and they sent me a form to fill out, requesting that the tune be added to their licensing database. I also contacted the artist's management, had a nice chat with her manager; contacted the record label and completed their form as well.
In the meantime, our deadline is looming. I checked back at HFA the day we went to the studio for the final mixdown. The song had been added to the database, but the notation read: "This song is not available for license."
I altered the CD cover art, and we made a band decision to leave the song off this CD. I'm picking up the final master tomorrow and it's off to the manufacturer this weekend.
Irony strikes: today, just for the heck of it, I revistited HFA. Wonder of wonders, the song IS available. Three days too late, but it's available. We would not be able to get into the studio to mixdown that tune in time for me to get the master off to the manufacturer. I realize now that I should have begun the licensing process a month or two sooner than I did.
It's honestly a better live song than studio - we had a tough time getting a good vibe on it. So as we play the various festivals and shows this summer, we will try to get a sweet sounding live take of it, and licenese it for the future.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: bdbklyn
|
|
|
