US publishers want payment from VEVO

the Beastie Boys iconic 'Sabotage' promo

David Israelite, CEO of US's National Music Publishers Association (NMPA), has called for a number of changes to the way the US music publishing business runs, both in the way publishers licence digital rights, and in the way American copyright law applies to digital licensing and the way collecting organisations operate. In particular the NMPA boss was critical of American record labels who are utilising contract clauses to avoid giving publishers their share when they are paid by online video sites, in particular VEVO, which includes major labels Sony and UMG amongst shareholders. 

In February we blogged about comments from indie publisher Matt Pincus, who had said his company was receiving no income from the booming music video service, because in the US VEVO had deals with the record companies (including Sony and UMG) that put the obligation to pay publishing royalties onto the labels, rather than paying royalties direct to the publishers - and the labels used contract clauses relating to promotional videos to say that the payment of song writing royalties could be avoided. An unhappy Israelite took this a stage further saying  "Today you have VEVO talking about reaching $150 million in revenue and wanting to grow to $1 billion, and a large amount of the music videos being played are not getting licensed [by our members] and publishers are not being paid. NMPA is going to put an end to that".

Billboard here 

Hey Vevo - where's our royalties?

Independent US music publisher Matt Pincus has highlighted the fact that whilst online video platform Vevo (owned by Universal, Sony and the Abu Dhabi Media Group) earned $150-million dollars in revenue in 2011 and supplies roughly 40% of the content streamed on YouTube, it has not paid over a single dime to independent music publishers or their songwriter clients in the USA saying that that they “have not received any money from Vevo. Ever. That's right. Vevo: $150 Million. Independent publishers and songwriters: Zero.” In a very interesting piece in The Wrap, Pincus puts the blame very squarely at the doors of Universal and Sony saying that whilst Vevo does pay over royalties to record labels they don’t pay music publishers because “the major record companies have warranted that they have the right to license songs to Vevo on behalf of publishers, backing up that claim with an indemnity” and then rely on “controlled composition” clauses in their recording contracts with artistes to avoid paying anything to use the songs. Pincus explains it all here and it is worth a read, ending up with the opinion that “Are record companies to blame for relying on shoddy language to withhold royalties, or is it Vevo's responsibility to insure that the songwriters that helped it pull in $150 million this year share in their success? Whatever the case, this issue of fairness must be addressed.”

And more on Vevo here http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/dec2009/tc20091211_309336.htm