SESAC vs. Additional PROs: Comparison

music rights organizations
Image: USA Songwriting Competition

Choosing the right Performance Rights Organization (PRO) is crucial for all songwriters and composers who want to protect their music rights and maximize their earnings. In the world of PROs, SESAC, ASCAP, and BMI stand out as three major entities, each defined by its organizational structure, payment models, and artist representation. This post offers a comparison between these PROs, enabling creators to choose the right one for their individual needs.

Overview of Performance Rights Organizations

Performance Rights Organizations (PROs) manage the rights of songwriters, composers, and music publishers. These organizations collect royalties for their members whenever their music is played publicly, whether on radio, TV, in live venues, or through streaming services. In the United States, the main PROs include SESAC, ASCAP, and BMI, each with its own operational model.

SESAC: Structure and Artist Representation

Structure

Founded in 1930, SESAC (the Society of European Stage Authors and Composers) is a for-profit PRO. It is selective, granting membership to a limited number of songwriters and publishers. This exclusivity allows SESAC to offer more specialized services and support for its members.

Artist Representation

SESAC focuses on personalized service, providing legal assistance, marketing support, and networking opportunities. Serving a range of genres, the organization boasts that it has something for every artist or songwriter looking for tailored assistance in their career.

ASCAP: Structure and Artist Representation

Structure

ASCAP (American Society of Composers, Authors, and Publishers) is a well-known entity in the music business. Founded in 1914, ASCAP operates democratically, allowing members to vote for the board of directors and participate in decision-making. This model encourages transparency and member engagement.

Artist Representation

ASCAP offers a robust set of resources for its members, including workshops, events, and advocacy around copyright issues. The organization provides various tools to support songwriters, including educational experiences and collaboration opportunities. ASCAP represents a wide array of musical genres, with particular strength in pop, rock, and country.

BMI: Structure and Artist Representation

Structure

BMI (Broadcast Music, Inc.) is another non-profit PRO, established in 1939. Like ASCAP, BMI allows its members to be involved in the governance of the organization. BMI collects royalties for its members and has a wide range of users, including radio stations and venues that pay licensing fees to use copyrighted material.

Artist Representation

BMI offers educational programs and workshops, services that have become staples for PROs like ASCAP. The organization focuses on emerging artists and covers a wide range of musical genres, including country, hip-hop, and rock. BMI has maintained accessibility for lesser-known artists, making it an attractive option for those just starting their careers.

Payment Models

SESAC

SESAC’s payment model distinguishes it from other PROs, as it provides competitive royalties based on how often music is played. While ASCAP and BMI rely on blanket licensing, they focus more on global rebroadcast data to determine royalty distribution. SESAC, in contrast, employs advanced technology to track performances accurately, ensuring that payments reflect actual usage. SESAC members receive quarterly payments based on their performance data.

ASCAP and BMI

ASCAP and BMI continue to use a credit system for royalty distribution, which bases payments on a formula that considers the total performance royalties collected and the number of members. This means that royalties can be diluted, particularly for artists with infrequent airplay or performances. Both organizations also provide quarterly payments, though the evaluation methods can vary.

Choosing the Right PRO

When deciding between SESAC, ASCAP, and BMI, creators should consider the following factors:

  1. Membership Structure: SESAC is known for offering a more personalized experience, catering to artists based on their genre or niche. For those seeking a broader community and a more democratic approach, ASCAP or BMI may be better options.
  2. Payment Model: Evaluate how each PRO distributes royalties. SESAC’s individualized approach may yield more precise and potentially larger payments for some artists, while ASCAP and BMI may offer a simpler and fairer distribution system.
  3. Resources and Support: Consider the additional resources each PRO provides, including legal assistance, workshops, and networking opportunities. Artists should select the organization that best aligns with their career needs and goals.

Conclusion

For songwriters and composers, SESAC, ASCAP, and BMI each offer unique benefits and disadvantages in the complex landscape of performance rights organizations. Understanding the differences in their structures, payment models, and artist representation can help creators determine which PRO is best suited to their needs. Ultimately, choosing the right PRO is key to a songwriter’s success, ensuring that their rights are protected and that they receive fair compensation for their work.