Sparky wrote:Have you seen the contract yet? If not, ask them (nicely!) to send it to you immediately. I've got a friend who knows a lot about this dark art if you want me to ask.

Thanks! Yeah, "dark art" is the word I'd use.

Adam CR wrote:Are they offering to act as your 'publisher' or merely wanting to buy (accept as a gift) your track?

I don't even know the answer to this question to be honest.

Earwicker wrote:You should be signing a master use license agreement and a synchronisation license agreement. The writer signs the first and the publisher of the music signs the second but there really is no reason why they should want the full publishing rights.

If you are both the publisher and writer then you sign both.

At the end of it you should still own all the rights to your song but they just have the right to use it in the film.

Yeah, this kind of arrangement is what I'd originally hoped for.

It's becoming clear to me that I need to answer many questions before I should hassle you lot again! Thanks so much for your input. I'll put together an email, send it to them, and will be back with news.

This is why people should consider MU membership; free legal advice.

It's quite possible that, despite the London speak, they aren't really sure what they're talking about.

If they are a small outfit and are avoiding £200 an hour entertainment lawyers they might have just got the wrong end of the stick and think the Synch agreement means the Publishing Rights.

I can empathise with them to be honest. Just try and see through the London speak - I agree it can be intimidating at times.

Then again it could be 20th Century Fox or something and I should shut up.

Name names, for Christ's sake!

simmo wrote:It's being used in a film though, and apparently my signing the contract consenting for it to be used requires me signing over the publishing rights as well.

I am not a lawyer, and I'm certainly not qualified legal counsel in the United Kingdom, but I'm willing to bet my right thumb that everything after the word apparently in the quote above is absolute bullshit.

vockins wrote:

simmo wrote:It's being used in a film though, and apparently my signing the contract consenting for it to be used requires me signing over the publishing rights as well.

I am not a lawyer, and I'm certainly not qualified legal counsel in the United Kingdom, but I'm willing to bet my right thumb that everything after the word apparently in the quote above is absolute bullshit.

Bullshit maybe but not necessarily a deliberate attempt to deceive. Like I said the film people may just have got mixed up - which I strongly suspect they have.

It's difficult for a none legal type to get their heads round the fact that you don't only need the permission of the person who wrote the song but also the person who publishes it. It's not easy to understand what a publishing right is.

The problem with a lot of film types is they feel they have to talk as if they always know what they're on about even when they don't. Asking questions can be seen as a sign of weakness and people frown on that in film land (or so it seems to me).
This can be confusing because a lot of the time someone might sound like they know something when really they're just winging it - especially at the low budget level.

Also there are an awful lot of really arrogant people in low budget film land who are afraid to admit they don't know something because their ego will collapse if they do.

Does an organization like Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts exist in the UK?

If so, ask them to help you understand the contracts when you get them.

As someone who wrote those contracts for Huge Worldwide Record Label for a few years, I urge you to get an actual lawyer to go through the contract with you - even if it is just to explain things to you in laymen's terms - because publishing rights are the last thing you want to give up.

Simmo, fistly it's great that your song is going to be used in a film. Wow.
Secondly, think it through. Is someone other than you likely to make money from having the publishing rights to this song? If so, fuck them.

Earwicker wrote: The problem with a lot of film types is they feel they have to talk as if they always know what they're on about even when they don't.

I work in tv and film, and a more accurate and far-reaching case of hitting the nail right on the head would be very very hard to find. Mr Earwicker, I salute you!

if they demanded the full publishing rights for the song then you are being buggered. You only need to license them the rights to use the song for the movie and possibly the mechanical rights for them to place it on a soundtrack and use it in commercials ..promotion etc. So,eone else owning the publishing rights means that other than live performance of the song, they own it. Do not sell your publishing rights unless you can retire on them ala David Bowie.