Thursday, August 2, 2012

Non-Exclusive Retitling: What You Might Not Know

Another insightful piece from Production Music Association board member Ron Mendelsohn that dives into the dirty details of non-exclusive retitling. For the unfamiliar, this is the practice of creating multiple titles for the same piece of music and making this music available to license through several competing distributors. It's commonly done these days, and while it may seem quite enticing on the surface there's really a lot left to be desired. Ultimately, it all comes down to how we, as an industry, value our creations.

An important read for songwriters, composers, publishers and artists. Learn more at:


  1. I think I solved the retitling problem. :-)

    One thing I recently learned about BMI and ASCAP is that titles really do not matter. Each time a song is registered, a new Work ID is formed.

    I could register the same title with me as the songwriter and a different publisher for each version. The work ID would be unique to that particular registration.

    Music libraries and publishers should use the work ID instead of the song title to add to a cue sheet. That Work ID is as unique as DNA. That alone would solve all retitle issues.


    1. Thanks for your reply. While that's certainly an interesting idea, we're not so sure it's "solved". Although each time a song is registered it gets a new Work ID, the idea of having every producer use a Work ID # instead of a song title for cue sheets is probably unrealistic, since it's not up to the publisher to submit the cue sheet. Cue sheet submission is the producer's responsibility. Not to mention, sometimes music doesn't get registered until after cue sheets are submitted. Those points aside, as Ron points out in his article, there are many other reasons why retitling is not a healthy practice.