PROs
philr
4 Aug 2015 10:41
That's performing rights organisations, not professionals.
I hate to jump on the bandwagon of complaint here, but most PROs are not making themselves very popular, especially in the world of independent filmmaking. The problem isn't necessarily the price; it's the bureaucracy. Often it's practically impossible to work out what the fees are will be, even if you can answer their questions. And of course, you can't answer their questions. How many people will see my short film? I have no possible idea. What's the intended use? Well, I don't know, it's a short film. Perhaps the fees will be US$50. But I might cut a trailer. Oh, a trailer, you say? Right, that's now advertising, and that'll be US$5000.
I should point out that this is not hyperbole and it is not made up. I have worked on productions that paid one amount for the PRO fees for the actual production, and a hundred times as much for the trailer. It's absolutely absurd.
But as I say, the problem is not so much the money. The tariffs are so complicated it's more or less impossible to tell when you are following the rules and when you're not, so you work on your production, put it up on the internet, and live in constant fear that some PRO somewhere will arbitrarily decide, on a whim, that you haven't done it properly. Naturally, the first you hear about this is when the lawyer's letter hits the doormat, at which point you effectively lose your production as well as paying whatever extortion the PRO demands to leave you alone. Dealing with PRO-licensed music is like walking across a very thinly-iced lake, while carrying all your production master material. You're out on a limb. You're taking a risk that the PRO might at any time choose to simply delete your show for you, or at least make it impossible to distribute, which is the same thing.
I have heard all the counterarguments. I'm aware of the financial position of many independent musicians. I'm also aware of the financial position of, say, motion graphics people, visual effects artists, software engineers, and directors of photography, who work in very similar ways. There is - usually - no expectation that these people, who put in similar amounts of effort and have a similar amount of influence on a production, will get paid repeatedly for having done the same work. There is no natural justice at play here. It's just about what people can get away with, and who had the best lawyers when the standard contracts were drawn up. Please, let's not pretend that this is about starving artists. It isn't. It's about musicians getting a vastly better deal than other people who deserve it at least as much.
But frankly, I'm not here to argue that point.
I'll pay the fees to make the PRO go away. But what I do expect is a simple, reasonable fee structure that creates a binding, iron-clad assurance that I can make a reasonable effort to follow the rules and distribute my production without being legally harassed by a huge, faceless organisation with infinite money for lawyers.
Until that happens, my searches on pond5 and other libraries will, unless it's absolutely unavoidable, exclude PRO-affiliated composers.
Not because it's unfair (though it is). Not because it's too expensive (though it can be). But just because it is so complicated and so difficult that it creates too much of an administrative burden and too much of a risk that I will try to do everything properly, in good faith, and then lose my production because a PRO doesn't like me.
I can't do that.
Sorry.
PR
I hate to jump on the bandwagon of complaint here, but most PROs are not making themselves very popular, especially in the world of independent filmmaking. The problem isn't necessarily the price; it's the bureaucracy. Often it's practically impossible to work out what the fees are will be, even if you can answer their questions. And of course, you can't answer their questions. How many people will see my short film? I have no possible idea. What's the intended use? Well, I don't know, it's a short film. Perhaps the fees will be US$50. But I might cut a trailer. Oh, a trailer, you say? Right, that's now advertising, and that'll be US$5000.
I should point out that this is not hyperbole and it is not made up. I have worked on productions that paid one amount for the PRO fees for the actual production, and a hundred times as much for the trailer. It's absolutely absurd.
But as I say, the problem is not so much the money. The tariffs are so complicated it's more or less impossible to tell when you are following the rules and when you're not, so you work on your production, put it up on the internet, and live in constant fear that some PRO somewhere will arbitrarily decide, on a whim, that you haven't done it properly. Naturally, the first you hear about this is when the lawyer's letter hits the doormat, at which point you effectively lose your production as well as paying whatever extortion the PRO demands to leave you alone. Dealing with PRO-licensed music is like walking across a very thinly-iced lake, while carrying all your production master material. You're out on a limb. You're taking a risk that the PRO might at any time choose to simply delete your show for you, or at least make it impossible to distribute, which is the same thing.
I have heard all the counterarguments. I'm aware of the financial position of many independent musicians. I'm also aware of the financial position of, say, motion graphics people, visual effects artists, software engineers, and directors of photography, who work in very similar ways. There is - usually - no expectation that these people, who put in similar amounts of effort and have a similar amount of influence on a production, will get paid repeatedly for having done the same work. There is no natural justice at play here. It's just about what people can get away with, and who had the best lawyers when the standard contracts were drawn up. Please, let's not pretend that this is about starving artists. It isn't. It's about musicians getting a vastly better deal than other people who deserve it at least as much.
But frankly, I'm not here to argue that point.
I'll pay the fees to make the PRO go away. But what I do expect is a simple, reasonable fee structure that creates a binding, iron-clad assurance that I can make a reasonable effort to follow the rules and distribute my production without being legally harassed by a huge, faceless organisation with infinite money for lawyers.
Until that happens, my searches on pond5 and other libraries will, unless it's absolutely unavoidable, exclude PRO-affiliated composers.
Not because it's unfair (though it is). Not because it's too expensive (though it can be). But just because it is so complicated and so difficult that it creates too much of an administrative burden and too much of a risk that I will try to do everything properly, in good faith, and then lose my production because a PRO doesn't like me.
I can't do that.
Sorry.
PR