[Fmpro] Webcasts/free music

[Mark Northam]

On 6/4/08 4:21 PM, "Michael Leahy" <writestuff at chello.be> wrote:

> I can't believe I'm reading this on a professional mailing list.
> Whatever about the issues of Ascap and BMI, direct licensing is usually
> a very bad idea for all the reasons that we mentioned in the "why isn't
> there a composers' union?" thread. It's the reason we're getting $3000
> for cuts in video games instead of getting full mechanical rights worth
> four or five times that.


Hi Michael -

I agree. Problem is, when ASCAP or BMI refuse to pay us for our
performances, it might as well be "free music" from our point of view -
except with broadcasters, it's massive corporations making hundreds of
millions of dollars of profit from our music instead of some dinky nightclub
owner. And with that kind of precedent, never mind the movie theaters
precedent caused by ASCAP in the 1940s, we've got massive corporations using
music without compensation to the composer, and ASCAP and BMI remain
virtually silent on these free music usages. No protests, no indignant
speeches by Marilyn Bergman or John LoFrumento on how unfair it is that
movie theaters pay no longer pay performance royalties to ASCAP or BMI,
nothing. Silence. One can only wonder why that might be.

And composers? For all the great talent that's out there that we have been
discussing this week, name one of those great master composers that cares
about the industry enough to use their public notoriety and position to help
our industry and fight the obviously unfair issues that all composers face.
One can only wonder why they too remain virtually silent on important
business issues. Once a composer (or composer organization) has been bought
off by advances, grants, or whatever financial "compensation" flows from the
performing rights organizations, it's interesting how not a word is said
about blatantly unfair composer practices. It's why we desperately need a
union or guild that is NOT sponsored by the PROs or anybody else, run by
professionals who do not take royalties from the PROs and can remain
financially independent without any conflicts of interest.

Is direct licensing better? Of course not. But just because direct licensing
is worse than the ASCAP/BMI system shouldn't give ASCAP and BMI a blank
check for the kind of massive financial abuse composers face at the hands of
songwriters and their publishers who have rigged the royalty system in every
conceivable way to enrich themselves at the expense of composers - the
people who actually have the most music broadcast on television.

Free music, in all its forms, should be unacceptable for composers. When
composers are not compensated for music performances, especially for
performances by highly profitable corporations, everybody loses. That simple
truth seems to be lost on many of those people we pay to collect our
royalties and pay us fairly and commensurately with how the money is
collected. 

And always remember: when the money is collected from broadcasters, there is
NEVER a difference in the amount paid by the broadcasters for a minute of
score compared to a minute of song within a show.

Best,

Mark Northam


--------------------------------------------
Mark Northam, CEO  |  mark at gmocorp.com
Global Media Online, Inc.

http://www.FilmMusicInstitute.com - Film Music Courses and Seminars

1-888-910-7888 ext. 702 / 310-209-8263 ext. 702
Yahoo/Skype: marknortham  /  AIM: mnortham