Edited automatically registered all my tracks in their library at ASCAP. Now the question arises: Am I P.R.O. Member or is Edited P.R.O. Member with my tracks? Before there are discussions. Yes, AudioMicro is competition and bad.
This post has been edited as it is not permitted to name our competitors on the forums. Thanks, Flossie.
The company, of which you speak (AM) register tracks with the prefix “AM”. This means that the same tracks that you have placed on the AudioJungle are not formally irrelevant to those who are registered in ASCAP. Therefore, you need not worry about it. Renaming tracks for their registration in PRO is the best option for everyone in this particular case.
I do not belong to my local PRO because under its rules I could not have any songs on this library (even though the songs are not registered).
When the authors say which PRO belongs, then I recommend that you look at that PRO rules if they allow unregistered songs. I think you will find a surprise, since it is impossible for many authors follow the rules.
I have doubts with the rules of each PRO. I have had some answers, but sometimes seem contradictory. It would be very useful if Envato give us a list of the PROs that allow you to register your individual songs separately (PRS, BMI, ASCAP…?). So we can choose these PROs without break the rules.
Very good Envato! This PRO matter is very confusing but the most important right that no one should deny to a musicians should be the possibility to compose both PRO and not-PRO registered music. I belive that a company that wants to sell professional stock music wants professional musicians to work with them but professional musicians may want to compose music that may be much more complex and artistic than stock music. If I have to write a simple fine tune most of the times I may accept not to receive extra royalties, but there’s music that may need months of hard work to be finished and abilities that may need years of hard study to be learned, that’s why I won’t quit my PRO.
If envato allow us to upload our Pro tracks i think there will be mayhem ! 
i have more than 100 cinematic tracks ! 
Envato could handle this by allowing PRO tracks only for exclusive Authors.
I think envato cant handle this. Also the review time will be 3 times longer. But we will see . Maybe I’m wrong 
I think that Royalty-Free must be Royalty-Free.
Music that gets broadcasted is never royalty free. Cue sheets get filled every time. It’s just fair that the backend money finds a way to the composer. P.R.O. integration (hopefully) won’t affect non-broadcast uses of Audiojungle items.
I think that is an nonsense to sale a PRO registered tracks on Envato. This is the second thing I do not understand… And first one… I want to say about AdRev … I do not like the AdRev policy that includes all registered tracks to Youtube Audio Swap database for free usage… but “Money destroys rules” …unfortunately.
Great news.
It will make little or (most likely) no difference to most buyers of music from Audio Jungle. Other ‘Royalty Free’ libraries have allowed PRO registered music for a long time.
The problem may be educating buyers what PRO registered means.
I think the fact that the potential for royalties generally exists for broadcast use is something many people fail to realize. Both musicians and production companies can be unaware, although I actually think musicians are less aware than the music users responsible for filing cue sheets. I see evidence of that right in this thread.
Broadcast use might not always be free of performance royalties, but the potential for them is always there as long as cue sheets actually get filed. Unfortunately, there are times when they get lost in the shuffle, delayed and forgotten, or ignored by the PRO. I’ve seen reports of use at Tunesat that have never shown up on my BMI statements. Sometimes you have to track those people down and remind them to file or do it yourself on their behalf.
I agree, these things can happen all the time OvationMusic. The thing here is: Envato offers absolutely no guarantee that a Broadcaster won’t buy a standard license. I have a “Free file of the month” either downloaded for free or bought for 19$ running on TV and Radio.
Most of the other RF competitors offer PRO tracks, so the fear of “PRO will cause confusion and lead buyers to another marketplace” is groundless. Buyers, unless they shop on Audiojungle exclusively, will know PRO and will know how to handle it. And that’s - in more than 95% of the cases - nothing at all. As for “education”, a FAQ section and a newsletter would be IMO enough.
I agree however, that there will be a flood of PRO tracks coming in once the gates are open. This might be just temporarily and would just need more reviewers. If Envato plans this right, there shouldn’t be any extension of the review times. The consequences would be more rejections but also a rise in quality.
We apparently even have a grammy award winner among us selling here. And I agree on this trend: licenses for quality stuff should be as easy available for Youtubers as for Broadcasters. There’s this HUGE potential I see in Audiojungle, but there are still things that have to be changed in order to make this Marketplace fair for us. Many Authors here (including me) are selling under a pseudonym, and that’s for a reason.
Merry Christmas Everyone.
Sorry, I have to throw some monkey wrenches into the mix here. But there might be a “sort of happy ending” if @musiccreation is not a fully registered PRO member.
Adding a prefix or suffix to a song doesn’t change the song’s actual title. It’s still there plain as day. Re-titling in that manner is only meant to tell a PRO which publisher should be credited with performance royalties when there are multiple publishers with non-exclusive agreements on the same song. Even if the publisher tells the user to use the suffix or prefix, that doesn’t mean they will. Once such a cue sheet then gets filed with the composer name and without the prefix or suffix on the title, the song will be registered with the exact title here at AJ. At that point, performance royalties will be possible from AJ issued licenses with that title if the composer is a fully registered PRO member. If there is no publisher on the song, the composer will be credited with his share and collect the publishing share under the excess writer clearance. In this specific case, the songs here at AJ appear to have the exact same titles at AM, only without the additions. That means what I mentioned above would be very possible if @musiccreation was a PRO member.
In fact, even changing the name entirely from what might be registered with a PRO doesn’t work since any time a cue sheet gets filed with most (perhaps all) PROs, the song gets registered via the cue sheet. That being the case, broadcast licenses issued by AJ will result in the music being PRO registered as long as a cue sheet gets filed, and, performance royalties should result if the composer is a PRO member. The PRO can find the composer name in their records and choose to decide if it’s the same person who is credited on the cue sheet, and cue sheet filers can look up membership by name from the PRO websites even if the song has not yet been registered. If they have the composer’s IPI number, then there’s no guessing. However, as far as I know, no actual royalty payments can be paid directly by a broadcaster or allotted from the royalty pool of blanket fees paid by all broadcasters with blankets if the composer is not a PRO member and there is no PRO registered publisher.
That’s the “happy ending” for @musiccreation if he’s not a fully registered PRO member since AJ is not a PRO registered music publisher. His name might be associated with songs that actually are in the ASCAP catalog (regardless of what you call them), but they don’t have any details to pay him if he’s not a fully registered member. Even if the songs get registered on cue sheets without the prefixes and suffixes from AM and are exactly the titles here at AJ, there’s no entity to collect the royalties and therefore, no payment is generated or requested and AJ’s claim of no performance royalties would indeed be valid. The only way the PRF (performance royalty free) business model works without being a joke is when no songs and no composers are PRO registered. In my opinion, the PRF business model is bad for the music industry, but music libraries that do not allow composers to be PRO registered do exist. The second that AJ decided to allow composers to be PRO registered, their claim to PRF went out the window. They might as well allow the songs to be registered. Now of course, some production companies will not file cue sheets when told the license is PRF, but many will file them anyway because there is likely to be other music in the production that is registered and they are supposed to file all cues.
NOTE: This is only a “happy ending” in terms of his music technically not violating AJ policy. To me, it’s not actually “happy” (or should I say, “inspiring”) because it also means that if he’s not a PRO member, he won’t get paid from any cue sheets that resulted in performance royalties based on licenses from other sources. No money = 
guys sorry for that question but i have problem with english… so i cant understand many thinck… useing googletranslate too but its not working well… 100% so can someone say shortly… what i geting if i will use P.R.O user or no p.r.o user… i accepted no p.r.o user becouse i dont understand so pls say anyone what its mean … short… sorry for my bad english again ))
You did fine @DG_PunK . The Envato question is only a survey now. There is no impact to any of us from answering the question. Envato is just getting a count of PRO and nonPRO members in AudioJungle at this time.
While I am happy to see at least a step in the right direction, I don’t understand why including anything speculative is bad, it’s just more information you will be gathering regarding the situation. I think you guys are intelligent enough to handle what the results would be. By excluding a “I plan on joining” and lets say “I don’t plan on joining” you lose out on some possible information in this “information” gathering process. Anyways, just my thoughts. I hope this leads to you guys allowing PRO registered tracks. Thanks for listening to us!
I am doing something that is maybe bad in the eyes of AJ, but I have no choice based on their model. I am including all of my BMI information to buyers on sites where they do allow PRO registered tracks. Please note, I am NOT registering the tracks, but I am including my IPI information. If a track ends up on television and I get a CUE sheet, I will be removing it from Audio Jungle. This is the only way I can protect my assets and provide for my family based on Audio Jungle’s current model. Exactly OvationMusic, by allowing PRO registered Authors, they basically contradicted themselves by not allowing PRO registered tracks. While I am somewhat optimistic about what their current new settings will lead to (the “survey”, if you will), I am not going to get my hopes up.
Wondering if Envato has any updates on the Performance Rights Oraganization / P.R.O. issue?