Revenue share

[pede4]

Hello. My game is almost done and I am going to add some music from audio portal into it, but I don't know how many % should I give to the musician. If you have such expirience of revenue sharing, please tell me what should I do. Thanks.

[Box-Killa]

How much time did the flash take, how much time did the songs take. How good is the flash and how good is the music. Also is it worth revenue sharing.

So say your flash is like the next tankmen, then maybe keep each song at around 1-5% a piece, but if the song/s are really really awesome and the user is not very renown, maybe 5-10%

But if the flash was like turd of the week, dont even worry about revenue sharing. Or are you using a song with like 1 million views and is made by paragonx9 or something, dont worry about rev share.

so in the middle, say you are expecting your flash to get like 20000 views, and the music is pretty good, well maybe 10-20% should be good.

If your flash is good, i'd keep your share at around 70-85%

[la-yinn]

For good audio, I'd say 3-5% rev per track you use.

GL with your flash. :)

[nathanallenpinard]

Please don't give revenue based on quality of the music, it's unprofessional. Give revenue on the amount, that's it.

And give revenue REGARDLESS, of whether the musician is successful or not. Beside, music on this site doesn't seem to even GIVE revenue.

[loansindi]

At 11/7/09 01:14 PM, nathanallenpinard wrote: And give revenue REGARDLESS

God yes.

Beside, music on this site doesn't seem to even GIVE revenue.

Not true! I made $0.67 in ad impressions once.

[pede4]

Thanks for answers, they really helped me.
I've got another question: what if I'll upload my flash to another site, so I'll be unable to share revenue there automatically like here, so what I'm have to do?

[Back-From-Purgatory]

At 11/7/09 04:11 PM, pede4 wrote: Thanks for answers, they really helped me.
I've got another question: what if I'll upload my flash to another site, so I'll be unable to share revenue there automatically like here, so what I'm have to do?

Then make sure you're not using music by someone who'll get pissed off finding out they aren't getting a cut.

It's ill-advised to use someones music from here then uploading it to another site to avoid giving the musician a cut. That's called theft, unless you talked to said musician and they were ok with it.

[nathanallenpinard]

It's ill-advised to use someones music from here then uploading it to another site to avoid giving the musician a cut. That's called theft, unless you talked to said musician and they were ok with it.

Even if they upload it on here half of us don't get cuts anyway.

[LJCoffee]

The only answer is:
That needs to be decided between you and the musician.

Nobody here can speak for that person, just ask the author.

[Back-From-Purgatory]

At 11/7/09 09:06 PM, nathanallenpinard wrote:

It's ill-advised to use someones music from here then uploading it to another site to avoid giving the musician a cut. That's called theft, unless you talked to said musician and they were ok with it.

Even if they upload it on here half of us don't get cuts anyway.

Just because it happens doesn't mean it's ok. Personally, if I were to find out someone was making money off one of my songs without me knowing or getting a cut, I'd be pretty pissed off, and would make sure my song was either removed or I got some of the earnings.

[nathanallenpinard]

The problem with that is NG allows it. Simply put, sponsors and revenue doesn't count as monetary gain. They can choose whatever cut % they want, without consulting you.

[joshhunsaker]

NG's license states that anything used in a commercial application (meaning "commerce" or causing money to be made) is not covered by NG license:

"You may not use this work for commercial purposes unless you make specific arrangements with the artist under another license."

Commercial is pretty cut and dried - if you are receiving revenue based on the product, that is commercial use by simple definition.

[Back-From-Purgatory]

At 11/8/09 01:56 AM, joshhunsaker wrote: NG's license states that anything used in a commercial application (meaning "commerce" or causing money to be made) is not covered by NG license:

"You may not use this work for commercial purposes unless you make specific arrangements with the artist under another license."

Commercial is pretty cut and dried - if you are receiving revenue based on the product, that is commercial use by simple definition.

Precisely, using it under the NG license is all good and dandy, but the second they make a penny off of it, it is no longer under the NG license and musicians have a right to a cut, if the flash author likes it or not, because as soon as there's money involved, it's a commercial project, and under law, using something made by someone else to make money, unless a compromise was reached, is stealing, and can land you in court.

And that was the longest run on sentence ever.

[nathanallenpinard]

Precisely, using it under the NG license is all good and dandy, but the second they make a penny off of it, it is no longer under the NG license and musicians have a right to a cut, if the flash author likes it or not, because as soon as there's money involved, it's a commercial project, and under law, using something made by someone else to make money, unless a compromise was reached, is stealing, and can land you in court.

And that was the longest run on sentence ever.

I know what you guys are saying, however there's been countless discussions about how sponsors are a way to get around that.

[pede4]

Well then, what is the price for one track, anybody knows?

[joshhunsaker]

I'd use a site like audiojungle/audiomicro/bigstocksound instead to be a little more on the safe side of things. That's just a safer plan overall really for any possibly commercial venture for music usage.

[InGenius]

It comes down to the fact that there is no moderated review system to ensure payment is being arranged for commercial use of NG's audio in Flash that is sponsored or gains ad revenue. The system for ad revenue and sponsorship dollars was not fully vetted and tested before implementation by the administration of NewGrounds and they have been playing catch-up ever since...and that's if you assume that they are even worried about this situation, which is a huge assumption since I've never seen Wade, Tom or any other admin in the BBS address this topic at any point in time. I believe they do not truly care to be honest, though I hope I'm wrong.

The only way we're going to see a change is if a big enough Artist finds their music in a flash that makes a considerable sum and chooses to get a lawyer involved. Litigation will be the only thing, I think, which will clue anyone in power to the fact that this is a problem that needs to be addressed. And I simply don't see that happening anytime soon because none of the artists who've expressed their opinions in the BBS have expressed any desire to do more than speak in topics. But since none of the admin with any power to change this answer pm's and none of the moderators they've chosen for either the BBS or audio review have any power beyond banning, this problem is going to remain unresolved. It's apathy, really, that is causing alot of the NG Audio problems.