Fuzzmeister
Joined: Jan 06, 2008
Posts: 163
Canberra, Australia
|

Posted on Apr 23 2014 03:55 AM
For licensing for sales in the U.S. I used Limelight / Rightsflow. Easypeasy. Cost about 30 bucks per song (i seem to remember - can look it up if you want) based on pressing 500 copies. Then I had to get a separate licence for sales here in Australia through APRA / AMCOS. And I believe you have to get separate licences for every territory you sell them in, e.g. For Germany through GEMA, etc etc
— http://www.reverbnation.com/spaceparty4
|
MorningGlass
Joined: Sep 17, 2007
Posts: 18
San Diego
|

Posted on Jun 11 2014 11:29 PM
I've used the Harry Fox Agency. It was simple and straight forward. It's about 10 cent per song, per album. The rate goes up if your recording goes over 5 minutes, so keep them shorter......
https://www.harryfox.com/
Last edited: Jun 23, 2014 01:04:01
|
vintagesurfdude
Joined: Nov 28, 2011
Posts: 795
Prescott Valley, AZ
|

Posted on Jun 12 2014 09:18 PM
EJ wrote:
..... I do wonder wonder how they handled this back in 1st wave days though ..lots of great songs,covers,bands and labels.This internet business is quite tough though.
A lot of folks got screwed.... About the same as the old blues guys.
|
Aaron
Joined: Sep 13, 2011
Posts: 100
|

Posted on Jun 16 2014 04:02 PM
EJ wrote:
I am in the licensing business and I can tell you that when your lively hood depends on royalties derived from your original efforts to feed your family and continued creative efforts it's a crime for someone else to capitalize on it no matter how big or small or until they get caught etc.I had someone once tell me that imitation was the highest form of flattery and I said ok where's my money.(Just a rant )I'm sorry I'm in a lawsuit right now over this very issue.
Intellectual property rights, specifically copyright, are out of control in the modern age. A 14 year, once renewable, term is reasonable. Life plus 70 years or 120 years is outrageous. If you are actively trying to market your original work, you should have exclusive right to it, I suppose, but those who haven't made any attempt to capitalize on a work in over 30 years don't need their works protected.
It ultimately boils down to promoting and stifling creativity. A short copyright gives creative types an incentive to create. A long copyright prevents others from building on the past.
The "my family deserves to eat" moral high-ground is just a smokescreen for personal greed.
|