You are here

Amurco and non-exclusive rights agreements

Advice on everything from getting your music heard to setting up a label and royalties.

Amurco and non-exclusive rights agreements

Postby molecular » Sat Jun 02, 2012 3:27 pm

Has anyone had any dealings with a library/stock music distributor called Amurco?

Either that, or do you have any advice on the agreement they have just sent me. I've read through some of the relevant other threads below, but this is one is unlike the one's discussed in that it's non-exclusive, but I would only be paid 35% of their total earnings on the tracks used. The only other thing of significance is that they are asking that none of the tracks be registered with the PRS.

Like previous posters, this would be my first pop at doing anything other than commission work, so I'm not sure at all of the norms.

I can't quite get my head around the non-prs thing: does this mean they will just sell the tracks on as totally copyright free or does it mean they will register them themselves? (I searched for "amurco" as a publisher on prs database and it brought up nothing!?). Both of these options strike me as going against the non-exclusivity thing, as they both severely limit my ability to earn money from the track elsewhere. Or perhaps this is quite usual for certain kinds of distributor? If it wasn't for this, I would feel that I might as well submit some tracks that didn't get used for a few other projects on a "what have I go to lose?" basis.

Any advice / thoughts very gratefully received!
User avatar
molecular
Frequent Poster
Posts: 969
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 12:00 am
Location: The turn off where the main road goes over the river. If you're at the post box you've gone too far.

Anto mo Ninja, Watashi mo Ninja
http://www.hectormacinnes.com


Re: Amurco and non-exclusive rights agreements

Postby Phil O » Sat Jun 02, 2012 3:53 pm

There's a number of businesses now licensing music direct to businesses outwith the PRO model. Sounds like this could be one of them. Basically, it requires non PRO registered composers / repertoire thus enabling the licensee business to dispense with a PRO license with a consequent saving to them.

Note : As you say you have looked on the PRS database, I assume YOU are PRO registered. In which case you cannot usually license direct as you have assigned all collection rights already.
User avatar
Phil O
Frequent Poster
Posts: 780
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 11:00 pm
Location: Scotland

 


Re: Amurco and non-exclusive rights agreements

Postby blue manga » Sat Jun 02, 2012 4:04 pm

35% - wow. Not only are they stiffing writers / composers by eroding royalties - they are actually stiffing you over again by taking even more than half of the revenue they will make (most likely peanuts) from YOUR compositions.

Unfortunately Channel 5 / FIVE - are trying to stiff musicians, right royally at the moment - by backing up their already cheap and nasty image - with cheap and nasty music.

Because Channel 5 are doing this - a whole load of 'otherwise would be failing flat' stock music brokers - are suddenly popping up - trying to grab complete royalty free rights to music - so that the owners of these companies (and only the owners - the musicians wont make sh*t) - can have a hope in hell of deriving an income.

Because they sure as hell couldn't cut it as traditional high quality licensors of rights controlled music.

Things to bare in mind are :

1) What kind of professional musician is not going to want broadcast royalties from their work ?
(answer - none - hence it's all going to be crap)
2) If you are registered with PRS or any other PRO - you can not opt out of them collecting broadcast royalties on your behalf.

When you join a PRO - you give them the right to collect on all your works.

Now think of this - ok - so maybe you are not with a PRO now.
- and you give this lot - or any of the other little pop up cheap and nasties some stuff ..

- then, say for instance in a couple of years - you create a piece of music which gets - say 1FM air play - well - do you want your royalties from that ? Damn right you do !
One airing on 1FM will earn you more than 100 tracks used 100 times each with one of these cheap and nasties.
- so what do you do ?

- you join a PRO - and then the PRO has right to collect on ALL your works.
- but the cheap and nasty agent has sold your stuff for 3p to Channel five who are happily airing it - 10 times a day - for which u are not seeing jack ..
- but the PRS now has right to collect on that ?

Messy ?
- I'm not entirely sure how it works with respect to PRS collecting on past works - works sold for peanuts to these types of bandits -
but I think it could be.

The short version of my response to these A$$h0les (including Channel 5 - total f*kkin bandits) - is stay well a way - their only aim with this policy is to strip writers and composers ENTIRELY of any kind of reasonable income / recompense.



Shame on you Channel 5
Shame on you.

Although, to be fair - you are & have always been known as the cheap and nasty channel.
User avatar
blue manga
Frequent Poster
Posts: 544
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 11:00 pm

Re: Amurco and non-exclusive rights agreements

Postby molecular » Sat Jun 02, 2012 4:04 pm

Thanks Phil,

Yes I am a PRS member, and on closer inspection I found the contract specified I can't be, not just that the tracks are not registered.

Interesting - I hadn't fully appreciated that joining the PRS might in any way limit who I could flog myself out to. Also strange that companies would try this model, though? Are there really a large enough number of composer/producers willing to not be PRS members?
User avatar
molecular
Frequent Poster
Posts: 969
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 12:00 am
Location: The turn off where the main road goes over the river. If you're at the post box you've gone too far.

Anto mo Ninja, Watashi mo Ninja
http://www.hectormacinnes.com


Re: Amurco and non-exclusive rights agreements

Postby Guest » Sat Jun 02, 2012 4:08 pm

Never heard of them and their website is erm, a bit basic. Surely, if they were any good with any track record whatsoever there would be music, credits, video examples, 'our composers'...all sorts of promotional stuff on there telling potential clients what they've done and how wonderful they are. You can't even audition any trax! Has a distinct whiff of 'one chappie in a bedroom' about it.

Tbh mate, speaking generally, i wouldn't touch any of these non-exclusive 'libraries' (in the loosest sense of the term) with a bargepole. If you want to make any decent wonga then placing yer stuff with one of the few premier league exclusives is, unfortunately, the only way to go. And deals are usually 50/50.

I think we've all been through that 'what have i got to lose' mentality and one thing you have to lose is self-respect. In order to move onwards and upwards, it's best to aim for the stars rather than these perpetually proliferating bottom feeders who are buggering up my industry and who couldn't give two 5hits about you or your music.

If you are keen to pursue this avenue however, please be sure to check em out first! I.e do a whois search, then company check and lots of googling to build up a picture of what they're about.

May i ask, how did you hear about them?

Good luck with it anyway.
Guest

Re: Amurco and non-exclusive rights agreements

Postby molecular » Sat Jun 02, 2012 4:09 pm

And thanks Manga - you've just answered the rest of my questions!

No way I would part ways with the PRS as I have a band which gets BBC airplay from time to time - as you say, it's one of things that does actually pay out!

Everything you said just makes me wonder more why any musician would opt to be a part of a non-PRO thing?
User avatar
molecular
Frequent Poster
Posts: 969
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 12:00 am
Location: The turn off where the main road goes over the river. If you're at the post box you've gone too far.

Anto mo Ninja, Watashi mo Ninja
http://www.hectormacinnes.com


Re: Amurco and non-exclusive rights agreements

Postby Guest » Sat Jun 02, 2012 4:10 pm

And 35%!! ??

Tell em to stick it up their ar5e mate.
Guest

Re: Amurco and non-exclusive rights agreements

Postby Guest » Sat Jun 02, 2012 4:13 pm

blue manga wrote:35% - wow. Not only are they stiffing writers / composers by eroding royalties - they are actually stiffing you over again by taking even more than half of the revenue they will make (most likely peanuts) from YOUR compositions.

Unfortunately Channel 5 / FIVE - are trying to stiff musicians, right royally at the moment - by backing up their already cheap and nasty image - with cheap and nasty music.

Because Channel 5 are doing this - a whole load of 'otherwise would be failing flat' stock music brokers - are suddenly popping up - trying to grab complete royalty free rights to music - so that the owners of these companies (and only the owners - the musicians wont make sh*t) - can have a hope in hell of deriving an income.

Because they sure as hell couldn't cut it as traditional high quality licensors of rights controlled music.

Things to bare in mind are :

1) What kind of professional musician is not going to want broadcast royalties from their work ?
(answer - none - hence it's all going to be crap)
2) If you are registered with PRS or any other PRO - you can not opt out of them collecting broadcast royalties on your behalf.

When you join a PRO - you give them the right to collect on all your works.

Now think of this - ok - so maybe you are not with a PRO now.
- and you give this lot - or any of the other little pop up cheap and nasties some stuff ..

- then, say for instance in a couple of years - you create a piece of music which gets - say 1FM air play - well - do you want your royalties from that ? Damn right you do !
One airing on 1FM will earn you more than 100 tracks used 100 times each with one of these cheap and nasties.
- so what do you do ?

- you join a PRO - and then the PRO has right to collect on ALL your works.
- but the cheap and nasty agent has sold your stuff for 3p to Channel five who are happily airing it - 10 times a day - for which u are not seeing jack ..
- but the PRS now has right to collect on that ?

Messy ?
- I'm not entirely sure how it works with respect to PRS collecting on past works - works sold for peanuts to these types of bandits -
but I think it could be.

The short version of my response to these A$$h0les (including Channel 5 - total f*kkin bandits) - is stay well a way - their only aim with this policy is to strip writers and composers ENTIRELY of any kind of reasonable income / recompense.



Shame on you Channel 5
Shame on you.

Although, to be fair - you are & have always been known as the cheap and nasty channel.


Well, we will just carry on making class music pal and leave em to their crap music on their crap programs.
Guest

Re: Amurco and non-exclusive rights agreements

Postby molecular » Sat Jun 02, 2012 4:16 pm

White Car Man wrote:their website is erm, a bit basic. Surely, if they were any good with any track record whatsoever there would be music, credits, video examples, 'our composers'...all sorts of promotional stuff on there telling potential clients what they've done and how wonderful they are. You can't even audition any trax! Has a distinct whiff of 'one chappie in a bedroom' about it.

My first impression as well...

White Car Man wrote:I think we've all been through that 'what have i got to lose' mentality and one thing you have to lose is self-respect.

Also a fair point - I suppose as it was "non-exclusive" I was thinking I could just send them a few tracks and then get on with other projects.

White Car Man wrote:
May i ask, how did you hear about them?

I was approached by them on elance after submitting demos for a commission.

White Car Man wrote:And 35%!! ??

Tell em to stick it up their ar5e mate.

Well I'll have to anyway coz of PRS innit - but again, I took that to be on account of the non-exclusivity, and I'm still getting to grips with what the usual is,

so thanks for the advice everyone!
User avatar
molecular
Frequent Poster
Posts: 969
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 12:00 am
Location: The turn off where the main road goes over the river. If you're at the post box you've gone too far.

Anto mo Ninja, Watashi mo Ninja
http://www.hectormacinnes.com


Re: Amurco and non-exclusive rights agreements

Postby blue manga » Sat Jun 02, 2012 4:21 pm

White Car Man wrote:Never heard of them and their website is erm, a bit basic. Surely, if they were any good with any track record whatsoever there would be music, credits, video examples, 'our composers'...all sorts of promotional stuff on there telling potential clients what they've done and how wonderful they are. You can't even audition any trax! Has a distinct whiff of 'one chappie in a bedroom' about it.

They are literally one of many all popping up - to try to sell musicians out to Channel 5.

That is pretty much, the entire business model.
User avatar
blue manga
Frequent Poster
Posts: 544
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 11:00 pm

Re: Amurco and non-exclusive rights agreements

Postby blue manga » Sat Jun 02, 2012 4:23 pm

White Car Man wrote:

Well, we will just carry on making class music pal and leave em to their crap music on their crap programs.
Yes pal !
User avatar
blue manga
Frequent Poster
Posts: 544
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 11:00 pm

Re: Amurco and non-exclusive rights agreements

Postby DJW » Sat Jun 02, 2012 6:00 pm

I've sent this company an email...I'll be ignoring their reply...if I get one!
DJW
Regular
Posts: 258
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2000 12:00 am
Location: W. Mids. England, Great Britain, Earth, Universe

Duncan J. White


Re: Amurco and non-exclusive rights agreements

Postby Daft Dave » Sat Jun 02, 2012 6:00 pm

Impressive office as well...
User avatar
Daft Dave
Poster
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 12:00 am

Re: Amurco and non-exclusive rights agreements

Postby blue manga » Sat Jun 02, 2012 9:55 pm

User avatar
blue manga
Frequent Poster
Posts: 544
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 11:00 pm

Re: Amurco and non-exclusive rights agreements

Postby Guest » Sat Jun 02, 2012 10:10 pm

Interesting...

http://www.writertap.com/index.php/songwriting

Do a whois search for writertap.com. Do a whois search for amurco.com

Then have a look at the writertap 'testimonials'...
Guest

Re: Amurco and non-exclusive rights agreements

Postby petev3.1 » Sat Jun 16, 2012 10:21 am

Odd thing. I can't see any info on subscription fees or royalty payments on writertap.
petev3.1
Frequent Poster
Posts: 688
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 11:00 pm


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests