[Fmpro] FMN JobWire Posting

[Mark Northam]

On 8/29/07 2:57 PM, "kirbyko3 at aol.com" <kirbyko3 at aol.com> wrote:

> <<As far as sync fees go, there are many libraries who keep them, and many who
> share them. But in this case, the sync fee is a set fee (very, very low -
> under $50)>>
> 
> Mark, are you saying that any placements this library makes will be a maximum
> of a $50 sync fee? I can't imagine that that's the case. A network promo, a
> placement in a reality show... those things garner more than $50 fee.

Yes, that's exactly right. It's a fixed-price library. That's why in this
case the sync fees far less important than the writers and publishers shares
of performing rights.

> And while FMN can't legitimize or de-legitimize an industry, you can't deny
> that it doesn't help the cause at all.?

Fair enough. But if you want to see composers have any real leverage over
working conditions and deals, we need a strong organization that is
well-funded, and NO funding from the PROs, please! Sadly, composers overall
don't seem to have any interest in creating such an organization, at least
not when it comes to giving time and money to make it happen. And the big
guys are too tied in to the PROs to dare say anything negative, not wanting
to hurt their "deals".

> Maybe an interesting thing for FMN to put together would be a comparison of
> all of the major production music libraries and their business models.? There
> are plenty of legit ones out there that are happy to split the sync fees and
> the publisher's share of performance royalty $$.? A great format would be
> "Highly Recommended"? "Recommended"? "Not the best deal in town"? "Avoid like
> the plague"

We're actually working on a music library directory and want to include as
much info on their deals as possible. Problem is, many libraries have
different deals for different composers... Lack of standards, etc.  But
others are consistent, however with the biggest ones, it's "all negotiable."


Thanks,

Mark