This series of articles have so far been geared to advertisers and marketing people, but it occurred to me while thinking about this month’s subject, that this time I would be addressing both marketing folks as well as other music supervisors. And that makes sense, since I’ll be talking about music supervisors and brands mutually learning from one another and sharing perspectives from each respective side of advertising: the creative side and the legal/logistical side.
Creative Talk & The Music Supervisor
Any music supervisor who has worked with ad agencies or in-house marketing departments will have stories to tell about this topic: How do you translate the agency’s creative talk into music licensing language – that is, legal language? Predictably, marketing people mostly think about their vision for a spot or campaign and of course, that is their job. They are always asking: Who is their targeted demographic? What is the objective of the campaign? What will the spot(s)actually look like? What kind of videography style will be employed?What type of editing rhythm will it have, and of course, what it will sound like? Is it heavy on voice-over or is it music-driven or sound-affect driven? Obviously, the creative side has a lot to consider. The music supervisor may or may not have a hand in choosing music. These days the brand’s Creative Director usually will make the final music choice.
It is the music supervisor’s job to communicate the “creative” as well as the nuts-and-bolts details for a proposed music use tolicensors. For years, I found it challenging to be both a “team player” for the creative people, and not be the guy in the room that only tells them that they can’t dothis and they can’t do that with a licensed piece of intellectual property. Initially in the creative process, the brand speaks in very broad terms. For example, they may have a visual image they want to pursue and a recording artist in mind for a partnership, or an on-camera appearance, or maybe in-store concerts, possibly product ties-in with other brands, or social media partnerships with influencers, for example. In some cases, they may want to build an entire campaign around a particular song. At the beginning, this kind of broad thinking is exciting and inspiring and is encouraged. But at some point – and not too late in the process – it will be time to focus on each element of the campaign and define exactly how the song, image and/or artist will be used; and begin to set limits on the use of these assets. This is the time then, to start thinking like a licensor. Licensors ask very specific questions: Is there only one creative for the campaign and will there be multiple “lifts” of the spot? Or are there multiple creatives? How will a creative be defined? What is considered a “lift” and what is considered a distinctly separate “creative?”
Let’s talk about defining that term, “lift:” What is a “lift” and conversely, what is considered aseparate “creative?”Here’s how it’s defined: think of a creative as a very limited audio-visual vignette. For example, showing people dressed in winter clothes at a party in a cabin in the woods, with snow falling outside. That’s a singular creative. Another example may be showing people jet skiing in swimwear on a summer’s day on a lake. These are two distinct creatives. A single creative has one or more of these elements: 1) a single visual setting, 2) a model or set of model/actors doing one thing (like standing around a summer BBQ); 3) a visual featuring a single product; and 4) a single, seasonal graphic sale promotion. Technically a “lift” is simply an edited piece of video actually liftedfrom the main body of a stand-alone spot. A separate video in a completely new setting with new activities, new graphics, etc., is NOT a lift. A music licensor will allow multiple lifts of a spot as part of a campaign, but will quote much higher (and separately) if it becomes obvious that the brand has moved into the territory of a new creative. Sometimes this is subtle but generally it is not. Everyone can see what a brand’s intention is with each creative they produce, regardless of whether or not they’re calling it a “lift” or a distinct and discreet “creative.”
Tell Me What You Want
“Tell me what you want,” is what I ask the client at the beginning of a project. Other questions: “What will the spot look like? Do you have a storyboard or a rough video edit I can see? What will I be hearing during the spot? What will I see while I hear the music?” These may sound like very basic questions, but I know how advertising people actually get caught up in their own unique type of shop-talk and end up not really communicating the basics of a particular creative. They are quick to use abbreviations, the latest marketing catch-phrases, acronyms and initialisms, and of course, always want their spot/creative to appear new and original. If I don’t know what they are saying to me, I’ll ask a question like some of the ones above, basic with no ambiguity. I put myself in the position of their targeted audience that’s seeing their commercial for the first time. And then I put myself in the position of the music licensors so I can anticipate their questions. If I have questions, the publishers and labels will have questions.
So then, what comes after “Tell me what you want?” Following their answer, I thensay, “Ok, greatI get it, now I’ll tell you what that’s called.” Once we can agree on the definition of their creative idea and how the licensors will define them, we are on the same page and so it’s more likely that there won’t be any surprises as to what the brand can and can’t do with the licensed material.No one wants to hear about restrictions on what they can or can’t do with an asset they may have paid a lotof money for. However, everything must be made clear to the brand and marketing peopleprecisely how they are to use their song, art, literary property, or other protected material. For example, late in the process, I’ve had brands want to print their song’s lyrics and display them in their stores and on shopping bags, sometimes even use it in video graphics – something that was never discussed as a legal use of the copyright. This is an example of not understanding the limits of a rights request and the subsequent license. Using a rough cut video is the best way to communicate the creative to licensors up front. Storyboards are second best and a word description being the least effective.
Defining Terms& Focusing the “Use”
Creative people at brands have actually said these exact words to me: “We licensed the song and we have it exclusively. We thought we could do whatever we liked with it, you know, during the license term.” Many times, a client/brand will come to me with a lot of half knowledgeabout licensing copyrighted material – that is, information they got from a casual Google search. This is where it gets dangerous.It is the music supervisor’s job to educate the brand without talking down to them or becoming that person that only says, “No, you can’t do that, and you can’t do this either.” The music supervisor should be able to inform the brand of its liability and then be able to say, “Yes, you can do this but it’ll cost you more money.” That usually gets their attention. When there’s an added cost to something, the brand then must decide if the additional cost is worth it. Will they really sell more product by changing some small detail of the creative, thereby affecting the total licensing costs? I don’t ever want a brand to have to compromise its creative vision, but there are times where it becomes a point of diminishing returns.
I found that ad agencies,in an effort to anticipate their clients adding more and more elements and media buys to a campaign as it goes along;request very broadmusic rights to cover themselves. My feeling has always been the opposite: why pay for more rights than you actually need? Rather than requesting broad rights, I prefer to take the time to pin-point the rights that are needed and go from there. It definitely takes more preliminary work to focus a client’s ideas (and therefore limiting the ways music is used), but in the long run it does save them a lot of money. My clients will sometime get impatient with all the questions I throw at them. (They just want the song cleared!) This is especially the case at the start of creative talks when they haven’t even begun to think about their media buysor reach and scope of the campaign. I must wait until I have all my “use” questions answered before requesting formal quotes from licensors. I create a very comprehensive “rights template” before approaching labels, publishers, and artists. The more clearly I can define the rights needed for a campaign, the easier and faster the licensors can get their own requests to their writers and artistsout for approval. The slow initial process of focusing the rights needed with the client, and clearly defining them, pays off in the long term with faster licensor responses and lower license fees. The objective is always the same: avoid creative compromises and negotiate lower license fees. That’sthe goal in every campaign.
Michael Welsh is founder/CEO of Michael Welsh Productions, Inc. – a company specializing in music licensing and supervision for advertising only, for over 30 years. You can send your questions on related issues to info@michaelwelshprods.com. www.michaelwelshprods.com.