Ok, I’ve read that article out of respect and can see both sides. From a creative and budgeting side on-going royalties are a pain and it never enables you to close a job. If royalties are ditched the upfront costs should be increased respectively. The ‘retirement’ argument would be moot if compensated properly as you would be able to create and contribute to your own fund as the rest of the working population do.
The argument that this kills the creative process is close to my heart. Being a designer I’m up against ‘fiver’ and such platforms that offer logos for pennies. Truth be told, the clients who choose this route don’t understand or appreciate the value I add so are best avoided. Branding is much more than a squiggle on a page, it’s a time of voice, narrative, research and positioning.
As a freelance creative with a tight client contract and fixed budget I have to work within certain constraints. One is being liable for all future costs and royalties. I’m happy to pay a higher fee for music up front and reduce other deliverables so I come in on budget but what I need is a license that protects my client and me for future costs. An open-ended project is bad for everyone and there absolutely a call for a fixed license hence my search for non-pro with audio jingle actively promote and detail for this precise reason.
You seem to be on a crusade, I understand the issue but you seem a little fixated on it. I’ve seen some none exclusive royalty free tracks have over 4000 sales. If the composer is getting $5 per use then $20,000 is decent imho, especially when that composer has stacks of tracks with similar sales.
Look bud, I’m creative and understand you plight as I get squeezed all the time. I just want a license for my project that is a one off fee.
Are you able to answer my original question with license type and number of licenses required? If not is someone else able to chip in?