Dryjoy
Joined: 14/04/07
Posts: 47
Loc: Dorset, UK
|
|
Hi
I hope somebody might be able to help me. I might be being a bit thick, but
I am having trouble understanding the PRS online system.
In order to convey the
problem, I need to give a bit of background.
I've been a PRS member for 11
years, since I was in a band with a major label deal, and a publishing deal. We lasted a
few years then packed it in, and I haven't taken any active interest in my PRS account
till recently, because we shouldn't be due any money until advances etc. are paid off, and
we are probably miles away from that happening - though I haven't really got a clue.
Somehow it recently came to my attention that I could get a PRS online account and
check out what's what with our songs, so I registered, and to my dismay, I have discovered
that somebody else with the exact same name as me is registered as a composer/author in my
place on a few of our songs.
It's funny, because I've been aware of this guy
with for a long time, since way before I was a PRS member. He's in the Birmingham area,
our surname isn't particularly common, and the specific spelling is very unusual, yet the
same in both cases.
I think the error has occured because our publisher has
been in the system amending things over the years, and understandably picked the wrong
guy.
So, I realised that I should be able to amend the affected compositions,
and I've just tried to amend the first one, and that's where I've hit a problem. I've
entered my CAR number, and identified myself, but now it's saying that I must enter a
percentage share of performance royalties before I can continue. But I don't think I
should have a share, because the publisher is in there as 100%, which presumeably is
correct, as my understanding was that they should be receiving all income from the songs
until our advances are paid off, and only at that point would we start to see our share of
any royalties.
The other two composers are in there as composer/authors with no
share, so why can't I be? OR.... is this wrong, and we should be in there with a share of
some sort? I don't think this is the case though, because of the situation with the
advances.
I've tried entering a share of 0 for myself, and it won't accept
that.
I'd like to get this sorted, because one day there could be money to
collect, and I can see that there is usage for all of our songs.
Any help
greatly appreciated - and sorry for the lengthy post, I couldn't seem to make it any more
concise.
Thanks
|
Phil O
member
Joined: 03/09/03
Posts: 838
Loc: Scotland
|
|
For performance royalties, I believe that the maximum publisher share allowed is 50%, the
remainder, the the writers share should be going to you direct. I presume that the
publishing advance is being / should be recouped from the publishers share.
If,
as you say, the writers share has been allocated to the wrong individual due to a clerical
error on the part of the publisher, then they need to correct this and look into getting
hold of the missing royalties.
Get in touch with your publisher ASAP.
http://www.myspace.com/philogg
|
blue manga
Joined: 16/09/06
Posts: 1390
|
|
I work with a lot of publishers - and all of them take 100% of mechanical shares (and then
they pay me my share of mechanicals)
Of the performing share - they take
50% - I take 50% .. but these are standard library splits.
Even the one pub'
with an outstanding advance - has split 50/50 on the performing share .. so it's not that
they assign themselves 100% until they've made the advance back - and then re-assign 50%
of performing back to me ..
(In fact, come to think of it - I'm not sure how they do
go about the initial recoup .. but anyway ..)
Your splits very much
depends on your contract I would imagine .. this sounds like a job for our good old friend
The Telephone
|
feline1
active member
Joined: 23/06/03
Posts: 1879
Loc: Brighton, UK
|
|
Yeah, you need to give them a ring!
You also need to check they haven't been
paying the other guy your money! 
I will also note that this is why it pays to always log
on to PRS and check their database entries yourself.
And why it continues to
irritate me that we can't just see all the payments on our accounts, in the usual 'online
banking' fashion.
--------------------
~~~ www.feline1.co.uk ~~~
|
Dryjoy
Joined: 14/04/07
Posts: 47
Loc: Dorset, UK
|
|
Thanks for the advice. I have sent them an email this morning, and if I haven't heard
anything in a few days I'll give them a call.
The problem is that I have not been in
touch with this publisher for a long time, and they have since merged with another
company, so I don't have any contacts any more. I am but a minnow to this huge
organisation.
|
blue manga
Joined: 16/09/06
Posts: 1390
|
|
Quote Dryjoy:
The problem
is that I have not been in touch with this publisher for a long time, and they have since
merged with another company, so I don't have any contacts any more. I am but a minnow to
this huge organisation.
That's as maybe - but no matter how large or small the amounts we are talking about they
have an obligation to make sure the payments are accredited to the right person ..
I personally would have no qualms about getting in touch via phone - finding out
from front desk which person in the organization you need to talk to.
Also -
NEVER - email PRS (you will NEVER hear back from them) - only phone writer relations.
|
feline1
active member
Joined: 23/06/03
Posts: 1879
Loc: Brighton, UK
|
|
The irritating thing is that PRS have now REMOVED the member contact telephone number from
their website, and replaced it with an "service request" online form for you to fill in
instead.
Pretty much every time I fill this is in, I just get a "thank you, we
have received your request" auto-reply, then never hear anything more whatsover.
Perhaps violence would be more successful. 
--------------------
~~~ www.feline1.co.uk ~~~
|
Dryjoy
Joined: 14/04/07
Posts: 47
Loc: Dorset, UK
|
|
Cheers again.
Quote feline1:
Perhaps violence would be more successful.
You're probably
right. I might skip the phone call, and go straight up to the offices with my spade.
|
Marbury
active member
Joined: 28/08/03
Posts: 1077
Loc: Cheshire, UK
|
|
I hardly ever log into the PRS online account because it's pretty much impossible to
understand. Call me thick too but it's so complicated.
I have
tracks with Pump Audio but they don't show as specific tracks. I did a search for the
songs I have with Pump and they don't all come up. Any reference to Pump still doesn't
show track names. Pump asked for my CAE number so they are supposed to be legit.
Come to think of it, my PRS statements don't show ANY reference to Pump at all and Pump
are where I get most of my earnings.
--------------------
http://www.myspace.com/ianhubball
|
blue manga
Joined: 16/09/06
Posts: 1390
|
|
Quote Marbury:
I hardly ever log
into the PRS online account because it's pretty much impossible to understand. Call me
thick too but it's so complicated.
I have tracks with Pump Audio
but they don't show as specific tracks. I did a search for the songs I have with Pump and
they don't all come up. Any reference to Pump still doesn't show track names. Pump asked
for my CAE number so they are supposed to be legit.
Come to think of it, my PRS
statements don't show ANY reference to Pump at all and Pump are where I get most of my
earnings.
Well that
is weird.
Unless u are just seeing the license fees but the royalties
are not coming through ?
Have you tried using the 'check unpaid performances'
feature.
FWIW - I LOVE the PRS data base. Sure - perhaps it could be improved -
but have Buma got anything like this ? Gema ? Ascap ? - from what I have seen of their
websites - nothing even remotely close.
|
Marbury
active member
Joined: 28/08/03
Posts: 1077
Loc: Cheshire, UK
|
|
From what I have been told, the PRS have to be badgered to chase the overseas money owed
and it cn take up to 2 years.
--------------------
http://www.myspace.com/ianhubball
|
Oops!
Joined: 31/08/05
Posts: 1050
|
|
Quote blue manga:
FWIW - I
LOVE the PRS data base.
Yeah, it's lovely innit.
I spend hours on there - fascinating. The more
tracks you have out there the handier it is. Useful for so many things - not least seeing
what shows you've been used on. Having said that, there seems to be no obvious pattern to
when that part of the database (the one you get by clicking on the little green square) is
updated. i.e. from what I can make out, it isn't updated at the same time as when the 'y'
flags change to indicate a usage (this updates about a week before distribution). Also,
this seems to be about a year behind.
Another good thing about the database is
it's kind of secret - it's a mystery how much of it works so it makes me feel like I'm in
the Masons.
|
blue manga
Joined: 16/09/06
Posts: 1390
|
|
Quote Rich T. Lass:
Quote blue manga:
FWIW -
I LOVE the PRS data base.
Yeah, it's lovely innit.
I spend hours on there - fascinating. The more
tracks you have out there the handier it is. Useful for so many things - not least seeing
what shows you've been used on. Having said that, there seems to be no obvious pattern to
when that part of the database (the one you get by clicking on the little green square) is
updated. i.e. from what I can make out, it isn't updated at the same time as when the 'y'
flags change to indicate a usage (this updates about a week before distribution). Also,
this seems to be about a year behind.
Another good thing about the database is
it's kind of secret - it's a mystery how much of it works so it makes me feel like I'm in
the Masons.
hehe .. yeah ..
dark arts and aw dat
|
Marbury
active member
Joined: 28/08/03
Posts: 1077
Loc: Cheshire, UK
|
|
Good grief I have been asleep for far too long and need to WAKE UP !!!
Right,
I have phoned the PRS about my Pump earnings and they say that there are only a few
references to Pump. Some have track titles, others don't. My name appears as the writer
as either Ian David Hubball or Ian Hubball (unidentified).
In the work status
flags column all Pump entries have "1st Lic Referral" whatever that means.
As I said earlier, I have not had one single Pump related payment on my PRS statement
but I have had payments from Pump.
I know I may sound naive but I am new to
this and any help will be much appreciated.
Thanks.
--------------------
http://www.myspace.com/ianhubball
Edited by Marbury (03/11/09 10:32 AM)
|
Oops!
Joined: 31/08/05
Posts: 1050
|
|
I dunno, would the pump payments be like MCPS as paid by the pub? And maybe no performing
royalties have been collected becauuse of sampling or the kind of usage the license was
bought for?
Just a thought - I dunno much about pump.
EDIT: I
was on the PRS database anyway so decided to do a publisher search for 'pump audio' - I
checked through a few pages of entries and it is interesting to note that no one seems to
be using them apart from MTV! Which might explain a lack of PRS.
|
blue manga
Joined: 16/09/06
Posts: 1390
|
|
I've noticed before there's lots of unpaid Pump performances in the 'unpaid performances'
section .. but that prolly doesn't mean you - it just means that Pump are a bit sloppy
when it comes to collection .. more money than sense I reckon ...
|
feline1
active member
Joined: 23/06/03
Posts: 1879
Loc: Brighton, UK
|
|
One of my favourite PRS stories was when a band I know did everything by the book when
releasing their own EP on their own label, registering all the songs with PRS/MCPS,
joining PPL, and uploading the details of the EP to PPL and getting them to send it over
to MCPS for an AP2 license.
MCPS told them that they couldn't release
recordings of these songs because the writers had refused permission.
They were like
"er, but we ARE the writers. You didn't ask ask us. Is you brain made of antimatter?"
--------------------
~~~ www.feline1.co.uk ~~~
|
Dryjoy
Joined: 14/04/07
Posts: 47
Loc: Dorset, UK
|
|
Guys, thanks for your suggestions.
I phoned the publisher today. At first, I thought
I was going to be banging my head against a brick wall. The guy who answered the phone on
the MAIN just answered with "Yeah?".
Me: "Is that abc Music?"
Him: "Yeah."
Me: "My songs were published by xyz, and I gather that you took them over, so you must
be my publisher now?"
Him: "We ain't xyz no more."
Me: "I know, but you took
them over?"
Him: "Yeah."
They're a massive global company, and I couldn't
believe they would talk to me like that.
After that, I got put through to
someone, and they've been mega helpful, several people are on the case about different
aspects of my query, and have sent me loads of info already.
The thing is
though, that I and my colleagues have been really naive f***wits. It seems that quite a
bit of money may have been paid to our ex-manager over the last 9 years, and we've had
nought. All the statements have been going to him, everything, and for some reason we just
thought that the publisher was supposed to take all our royalties until the advances were
paid off. Maybe someone told us that at some point, but now I've seen some statements.
The thing is that I just backed away from the music industry for a long time, for
lots of reasons. I have basically just done music for fun really for about the last 8
years, and I've had virtually no contact with industry people at all. Now my ambition is
coming back and I've also started to get the desire to look into these sorts of things
Now I don't know if we'll get any of it back, but at least we can sort it out for
the future, and these publishing guys have been really great, once I got through to
them.
I'm so much more business-savvy these days. I wish I had been back then.
The other guys are still like I was back in the day, but I quite enjoy sorting this stuff
out.
|
Dryjoy
Joined: 14/04/07
Posts: 47
Loc: Dorset, UK
|
|
Oh, and I meant to add that the publisher confirmed that they had supplied all the correct
info to the PRS, but PRS royally f***ed up and registered the wrong guy against some of
the songs.
|
shirkethic
Joined: 07/03/06
Posts: 244
|
|
Quote feline1:
One of my
favourite PRS stories was when a band I know did everything by the book when releasing
their own EP on their own label, registering all the songs with PRS/MCPS, joining PPL, and
uploading the details of the EP to PPL and getting them to send it over to MCPS for an AP2
license.
MCPS told them that they couldn't release recordings of these songs
because the writers had refused permission.
They were like "er, but we ARE the
writers. You didn't ask ask us. Is you brain made of antimatter?"
Most likely they erroneously ticked the
'First Lic Referral' box when registering the titles with MCPS/PRS..
Schoolboy
error!
--------------------
------------------
www.synesthesia.net
|
feline1
active member
Joined: 23/06/03
Posts: 1879
Loc: Brighton, UK
|
|
Quote shirkethic:
Quote feline1:
One of my
favourite PRS stories was when a band I know did everything by the book when releasing
their own EP on their own label, registering all the songs with PRS/MCPS, joining PPL, and
uploading the details of the EP to PPL and getting them to send it over to MCPS for an AP2
license.
MCPS told them that they couldn't release recordings of these songs
because the writers had refused permission.
They were like "er, but we ARE the
writers. You didn't ask ask us. Is you brain made of antimatter?"
Most likely they erroneously ticked the
'First Lic Referral' box when registering the titles with MCPS/PRS..
Schoolboy error!
You
misunderstand. They DID tick that box.
That means MCPS are meant to ASK THEM if
someone can release a recording of the song.
MCPS told them they had ask them and
they'd said no.
Which they hadn't.
See?
--------------------
~~~ www.feline1.co.uk ~~~
|
shirkethic
Joined: 07/03/06
Posts: 244
|
|
Quote feline1:
Quote shirkethic:
Quote feline1:
One of my
favourite PRS stories was when a band I know did everything by the book when releasing
their own EP on their own label, registering all the songs with PRS/MCPS, joining PPL, and
uploading the details of the EP to PPL and getting them to send it over to MCPS for an AP2
license.
MCPS told them that they couldn't release recordings of these songs
because the writers had refused permission.
They were like "er, but we ARE the
writers. You didn't ask ask us. Is you brain made of antimatter?"
Most likely they erroneously ticked the
'First Lic Referral' box when registering the titles with MCPS/PRS..
Schoolboy
error!
You misunderstand.
They DID tick that box.
That means MCPS are meant to ASK THEM if someone can release
a recording of the song.
MCPS told them they had ask them and they'd said no.
Which they hadn't.
See?
Had they already registered as members of MCPS (**not just PRS**)?
I
suspect not. Here from the guide to registering works on the PRS/MCPS website::
Quote:
The First Licence
Refusal option is only applicable if you are an MCPS member. If checked, you will be
notified before an MCPS licence can be granted on that particular work (NB: An FLR
should be used with caution as it will delay the licensing process and, consequently, the
collection of royalty payments).
If they weren't registered with MCPS thats prob ballsed the whole thing up.
--------------------
------------------
www.synesthesia.net
|
feline1
active member
Joined: 23/06/03
Posts: 1879
Loc: Brighton, UK
|
|
Quote shirkethic:
Had
they already registered as members of MCPS (**not just PRS**)?
I suspect not.
If they weren't registered with MCPS thats prob ballsed the whole thing up.
No,
they were
registered with MCPS,
who managed to balls the whole thing up by themselves.
--------------------
~~~ www.feline1.co.uk ~~~
|
shirkethic
Joined: 07/03/06
Posts: 244
|
|
Quote feline1:
No,
they were registered with MCPS,
who managed to balls the whole thing up by
themselves.
Fair enough. It does beg the
question why did they tick the 1st lic ref box if they were doing all this to release
physical product. I would imagine its most commonly used for songwriters sending out demos
to various artists to ensure that the first release of a track is not out of their
control.
Once they have released a physical product its moot anyway..
--------------------
------------------
www.synesthesia.net
|
blue manga
Joined: 16/09/06
Posts: 1390
|
|
Some of my Library tracks are ticked FLR - and I have no idea why ..
Hope this
helps.
|
Oops!
Joined: 31/08/05
Posts: 1050
|
|
Quote blue manga:
Some of my
Library tracks are ticked FLR - and I have no idea why ..
Hope this helps.
That means "Fruity Loops
Recording".
Hope that clarifies things.
|
blue manga
Joined: 16/09/06
Posts: 1390
|
|
Quote Rich T. Lass:
Quote blue manga:
Some of my
Library tracks are ticked FLR - and I have no idea why ..
Hope this helps.
That means "Fruity Loops
Recording".
Hope that clarifies things.
Oh yeah that would also explain why some are labeled CTMUOFGL
(Crap Track Made Using Only Factory Garageband Loops)
... there's a lot
of those actually ..
|
shirkethic
Joined: 07/03/06
Posts: 244
|
|
Quote blue manga:
Quote Rich T. Lass:
Quote blue manga:
Some of my
Library tracks are ticked FLR - and I have no idea why ..
Hope this helps.
That means "Fruity Loops
Recording".
Hope that clarifies things.
Oh yeah that would also explain why some are labeled CTMUOFGL
(Crap Track Made Using Only Factory Garageband Loops)
... there's a lot
of those actually ..
Bet
those are the hot ones! A rejected demo I made for a certain fast food chain found its way
in an 'extended' version into a library and has been one of my most successful tracks so
far with multiple usages all over the bleedin place.
Happy daze!
--------------------
------------------
www.synesthesia.net
|
blue manga
Joined: 16/09/06
Posts: 1390
|
|
Quote shirkethic:
Quote blue manga:
Quote Rich T. Lass:
Quote blue manga:
Some of my
Library tracks are ticked FLR - and I have no idea why ..
Hope this helps.
That means "Fruity Loops
Recording".
Hope that clarifies things.
Oh yeah that would also explain why some are labeled CTMUOFGL
(Crap Track Made Using Only Factory Garageband Loops)
... there's a lot
of those actually ..
Bet
those are the hot ones! A rejected demo I made for a certain fast food chain found its way
in an 'extended' version into a library and has been one of my most successful tracks so
far with multiple usages all over the bleedin place.
Happy daze!
Yes it's quite true .. those
factory sounds can really help a chap capture that illusive middle ground
|
feline1
active member
Joined: 23/06/03
Posts: 1879
Loc: Brighton, UK
|
|
Quote shirkethic:
Quote feline1:
No,
they were registered with MCPS,
who managed to balls the whole thing up by
themselves.
Fair enough. It does beg the
question why did they tick the 1st lic ref box if they were doing all this to release
physical product. I would imagine its most commonly used for songwriters sending out demos
to various artists to ensure that the first release of a track is not out of their
control.
Once they have released a physical product its moot anyway..
I don't personally think it begs
any questions whatsoever other than "PRS? Muh?"
--------------------
~~~ www.feline1.co.uk ~~~
|
shirkethic
Joined: 07/03/06
Posts: 244
|
|
Quote feline1:
I
don't personally think it begs any questions whatsoever other than "PRS? Muh?"
--------------------
------------------
www.synesthesia.net
|
feline1
active member
Joined: 23/06/03
Posts: 1879
Loc: Brighton, UK
|
|
Look, in all seriousness:
MCPS had no clue that it was the band themselves
applying for an AP2 license for an EP of their own songs:
they just rejected
the AP2 application, on the basis that they'd asked the songwriters, and the songwriters
had refused permission.
If it *had* been the scenario you'd said was more
sensible, MCPS would have refused a 3rd party permission for an AP2, and the
band/songwriters themselves would have been blissfully unaware.
So, in actual
fact, it was bloody lucky they were the first people to wanna release a recording of the
tune, otherwise they'd never have found out what total incompetant d1cks MCPS were being.
--------------------
~~~ www.feline1.co.uk ~~~
|
Marbury
active member
Joined: 28/08/03
Posts: 1077
Loc: Cheshire, UK
|
|
Quote blue manga:
Quote Marbury:
I hardly ever
log into the PRS online account because it's pretty much impossible to understand. Call me
thick too but it's so complicated.
I have tracks with Pump Audio
but they don't show as specific tracks. I did a search for the songs I have with Pump and
they don't all come up. Any reference to Pump still doesn't show track names. Pump asked
for my CAE number so they are supposed to be legit.
Come to think of it, my PRS
statements don't show ANY reference to Pump at all and Pump are where I get most of my
earnings.
Well that
is weird.
Unless u are just seeing the license fees but the royalties
are not coming through ?
Have you tried using the 'check unpaid performances'
feature.
FWIW - I LOVE the PRS data base. Sure - perhaps it could be improved -
but have Buma got anything like this ? Gema ? Ascap ? - from what I have seen of their
websites - nothing even remotely close.
I just got this from Pump. Hope it means a nice
cheque from the PRS ;-)
Hi Ian-
We’ve
updated on our end all of your tracks with your CAE #. If you have royalties owed to you,
you will receive them.
Thanks!
Pump Audio.
--------------------
http://www.myspace.com/ianhubball
|
Gear Reviews
Previous
Topics
Next
Threaded
Help with PRS online please!
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: 
