[Fmpro] Fwd: This Week in FMW: FTV Music Conf, NeKo Demo, New SESAC Office, ASCAP UK Awards

[Mark Northam]

Hi Kerry -


On 10/24/07 5:04 AM, "Kirbyko3 at aol.com" <Kirbyko3 at aol.com> wrote:

> What I would love to see on
> this list is perhaps a breakdown of the music libraries that are out there and
> what their biz model is.   I'm not talking about a contact list or compendium,
> just a list with several categories, like A = preferable biz model, B=
> questionable biz model, C= avoid like the plague (for the copyright grabbers).
> So 
> No-Fee Music Library would fall into "B" -- they don't pay you anything, but
> at 
> least they don't take your copyrights. TRF would fall under "C" -- a Pump
> Audio or APM or Killer Tracks would fall under "A" -- a breakdown like that.

Sounds like a great idea. However, how would you categorize libraries that
share no sync fees with their composers (they keep all the sync fees)?

> Is there anyone else out there that would be interested in seeing something
> like that? I can't be the only one who's put off by this issue.   As bad as it
> is to get $.20 on the dollar from the PROs, the only thing worse is to have
> your music used without any payment at all.

Like it is by multi-million dollar highly profitable broadcasters when the
PROs decide not to track certain types/times/channels. It's effectively free
music, plain and simple, because the writer/publisher is not compensated for
the performance. And make no mistake - it's a choice by the PROs. The
technology exists to track far more music than they track now. The real
question is: who would benefit from more tracking, and who would lose?

Mark Northam


---------------------------------
Mark Northam, CEO
Global Media Development Group

http://www.FilmMusic.net - Film & TV Music Job Listings

1-800-774-3700 ext. 702 / 310-645-9000 ext. 702
http://www.gmdgroup.com
Yahoo/Skype: marknortham  /  AIM: mnortham