About 300. Seriously.
I thought for a second that I would start uploading new music. Then I read the fine print and realized its even worse than before essentially selling an all media license for $18. Tim McMorris and other big authors need to threaten removing their entire catalog or Envato will keep ripping you guys off.
That’s kind of what’s going on here friend. Can’t just pull everything at once, but surely uploads can stop. Not worth threatening anything before the official release though, I think that’s a smart move. Nothing is written in stone yet.
One other thing I would like to mention (I believe someone else posted about it as well, but feel it is important enough to bring up again and go more in depth) is that I don’t think broadcast should be a part of the first tier at all.
I love the idea of including the previous benefits as you move up the ladder of course, I just think there is too much being offered right off the bat which defeats the purpose of the other licenses.
The whole idea behind the broadcast license was to distinguish that type of use from the “regular license” use because of the value and benefit the customer receives from broadcast. The reason there has been such an uproar on the marketplaces was because buyers only needed a regular license for broadcast use.
I understand everyone is happy for the moment because they are seeing 4 licenses, but I think once everyone understands the fine print we will see the mood turn quickly.
If broadcast use with an audience size of up to 1,000,000 is added to the very first license, the other broadcast license is more of a visual pleasantry to appease authors at glance value.
It’s like authors said “We want a broadcasting license, we want fair compensation!” – and Envato said “Alright guys, here is what we’re going to do. We’re going to remove your extended license, then we’re going to add more benefits like broadcasting rights with a large audience reach to the first license, and then, we’re going to re-name it and call it a ‘Music Standard License’ instead of a ‘Regular License’. We are then going to make some other licenses that no one will really need, because most of the needs have already been granted in the first license. Sound good everyone?” What has been done, is literally the exact opposite of what has been asked for.
Our extended license income will now be removed, and as more benefits have been added to the first license, the majority of buyers will only need that new “Music Standard License”. In essence, there is actually a pretty good argument to be made that this move will cause a loss of income for authors.
I am doing my best to stay as constructive as possible, but this move seems too calculated in the buyers interest – which is why I’m being somewhat more vocal than usual.
I don’t believe I have lost perspective on how important the buyer is. I also do believe in balance and offering incentives to attract more buyers. I understand that the trade-off for us is volume. Higher volumes at lower prices. That’s the deal here and I get all of that.
I am genuinely concerned however that a destabilizing and unbalanced model is being created here. Having had more time now to look over all the details, I implore you Envato to revisit your position on allowing broadcast use within the first tier, and the pricing points on the last two tiers.
It may be argued “let see how it all goes first, and then we can tweak it”, but not creating a mess in the first place is much easier than having to clean one up. Price points can be tested and tweaked easily, and as much as I don’t like the last two price points, I think those are even secondary to allowing broadcasting in the first tier.
Please, don’t launch with broadcasting in the first tier.
It’s important to keep in mind that as a high volume, non-exclusive stock music licensing platform, AudioJungle is unlikely to have the same type of rates that bespoke music or custom licensed material may see for similar uses. This focus on value, volume, and accessibility (along with the talent and quality the authors and music of course) is a big part of what has made AudioJungle such a success, and we believe we’ll see that continue here.
Thanks for replying Eric, I value your input.
If I can be frank, a big part of what has made AudioJungle such a success has been giving customers access to an exceptionally high quality music library that is disproportionate to what it is worth. We are both saying the same thing, I just removed the eloquence from your statement.
We all signed up for that, and we get it. I understand that AudioJungle is not meant to rival a custom licensing agreement in flexibility or pricing. In my opinion however, we have now run into a situation where the boundaries of fairness are being pushed too far towards the customer’s (and yes, Envato’s) benefit.
The idea has always been that AudioJungle (Envato) and it’s content producers would grow together. We are continually raising the bar on production quality, and offering more flexibility to customers by providing additional options, cuts, or edits, etc. As the boundaries of quality are being continually pushed, music is taking longer to produce, and investments in equipment, technology and personal improvement are more expensive than ever.
It is also no secret that we now have numerous, really, numerous internationally famous brands coming to AudioJungle as their primary source for audio. My hope, and being patient in waiting, was that Envato was taking steps to rectify this. The new license types are a breath of fresh air. Unfortunately, the gains of the license types are instantaneously destroyed by the pricing structure.
The bottom line for the last long while has been that authors are being heavily and wrongfully exploited for the buyer’s benefit. I held my peace because I believed Envato was working towards a fair solution for all involved. Now that everything is out in the open, I sadly see it that author’s are being wrongfully exploited for Envato’s benefit as well. Notice I say wrongfully – we ought to be exploited to a degree, that is the whole purpose of this.
Please don’t misunderstand me – I want Envato to continuously prosper, especially financially. I want buyers to get a good deal and be happy with the products they are receiving. I also want authors to be fairly compensated for the time, effort and money they are investing; compensation that is proportionate to the ways that their work is being used.
As it stands however, for goodness sake, please review the pricing of the top two tiers! Unlimited copies or downloads, unlimited time use, broadcast audience of up to 10 million, no PRO. All for $144??? Are you serious? I am not asking for thousands of dollars here… but please, at the very least, push this up to $300 or something. The same goes for the final license. It desperately needs a revision.
People often claim that the royalty free model is destroying the entire licensing industry. The truth is, both models, traditional music licensing and royalty free licensing can co-exist. When the prices are being driven down this low for uses which certainly deserve more however, it does put the two at odds, and one does completely undermined and devalue the other.
I am a little heart-broken. This has been simultaneously receiving the best and worst news at the same time.
Friends, I don’t know if I can continue to be a part of a model that demands so much of it’s authors, exploiting their work to the highest degree – TV commercials, Major Motion Pictures, Hit Television Series, Internationally famous sporting events, barring performance royalties; all while offering (keeping the above in mind) by comparison – little in return.
I have been a huge advocate of AudioJungle since the beginning. I have been so happy to be apart of this community. This however, this is wrong. I must say it openly. This time, you guys have it wrong, and it is forcing me to take a very real look at how my future plays out here.
What a wonderful announcement, really. It’s so great to see we are on the right track once again.
Unfortunately, I am left scratching my head at the price ranges and a few of the options however. The licenses are right, but the prices are dead wrong.
$144 for a broadcast license, and $306 for broadcast and film? Really? I am sorry to say we are still being sold very short here. Doing more work outside AudioJungle than inside at the moment, and understanding what companies typically pay for this type of license outside of AudioJungle, it has become down right embarrassing to see the uses of songs vs what authors are being paid for here. I am sorry, I am rarely so negative, but these prices are not fair to authors vs the type of use.
Better than before for sure, but really, $306 to use the music in a MMP? If they are going to get the music royalty free, at least make up for that in the initial cost.
I thought the point (or part of the reason) for a new license structure was to continue to meet the needs of the “little guy” while being able to fairly compensate authors for larger uses? While I’m SO happy to see these new licenses rolled out, I am at the very same time very disappointed on the price points that have been chosen
I also think that users who purchase a broadcast license should be required to enter basic info like country of use, and the name of their project.
Finally, I don’t understand why a PRO form of some sort isn’t just added with the broadcast license. Too bad really!
Thanks for the replies friends, think I will P.M one of you soon. I have to look at that widget to see if that’s possible for what I would like. Appreciate it
Yes, she is beautiful. What breed of dog is she? I’ve always loved dogs that have that wolf look.
She’s a pure-bred Siberian Husky. Though I live in Canada, we are in the far south where summers can get extremely hot. She has acclimatized very well and funnily, prefers warmer weather. If it gets too hot she will dig up the ground somewhere so she can lay in the mud to be cooler haha…. luckily for us we have a deck now and she’ll just go under there if it’s too hot.
One downfall to Huskys is the shedding (if they are going to be inside a lot like ours likes to be). They shed twice a year, and when they do, it’s out of control. You can literally pull clumps and clumps of hair out when the time comes. So for those who like spotless homes, prepare to vacuum twice a day if you want this dog
My wonderful friend Lexy – had her since she was 5 weeks old, she is now 9 years. We have had so many adventures over the years, and still have lots more to go
The only way to get a “hit” is for it to be exposed on the front page
Well, not quite the ONLY way, but it sure helps of course. In fact, my top 5 selling songs were never featured.
what i am enraged about is the fact that the things dont work the same for all. if everybody got the same amount of concern and respect from the site, it would be ok. but when you’re clearly making efforts to promote just a select few, how can i agree?
also, when having only 15 clips makes me 28 bucks in a month, and months later, when having over 70 clip i get 22 bucks in sales, you know what that tell me?
it tells me: stop working, stop trying to make better clips (or more), because the work you put in is not direct proportional with the results you will have. in other words, work or not work, upload or stop uploading, its not gonna matter too much. so i ask you, where is the incentive for me in that? why would i support aj and do my work for the better, if better is not showing?
aj should better bring some major changes and results that correspond to contributors’ work in a directly proportional manner, else they’re running an absurd business.i thought of this many a times, the only reason i see why this is like it is, is that the site is very happy just dealing with the elite sellers, and dont give a * on the rest. now sure, i cant expect them to approve that :)) its a polittically correct world
Friend, I am sorry to say you are a little out on the deep end on this one.
The bottom line is that the world isn’t “fair”. This is a business, and Envato has the right to run it the way they like. No one is forcing us to sell our music here, and perhaps you’ve forgotten that every elite author was once a brand new author that had to work to get where they are today.
Believe it or not, not every song that gets exposure sells. Equal opportunity exposure, if that were possible, would still produce buyer favorites – it’s how the world works.
So what happens next then? How about we penalize tracks that do well?! Don’t want sales to get out of control after all. It’d be a shame if those big selling items kept bringing back buyers to buy from the site (and others) over and over again. Or maybe we should pool all the sales together and divide them evenly among all authors? …hmmm I think there is a name for that.
Do you think that Coca-cola tells the supermarket where the bottles must go on their shelves? Sell your music here if you like, but understand that this is a business and they don’t have to promote you or meet your demands.
Even if they wanted to promote 5 authors for all of eternity it’s their right. It’s THEIR business and THEIR site If there was a enormously better way of doing this we would all be there right now instead of here wouldn’t we? Have you considered that a “promote everyone” strategy may actually weaken the economy of the site?
Now, I am for improvement and change just like you are. I want more licensing options. I want an improved search engine. I think it would be great for additional ways for people to be discovered. However there are so many assumptions being made. What if the new search actually makes your files harder to find because of the fierce keyword and description competition? What if buyers don’t care about the additional pages for new items or “hidden gem” items?
I’ve really said everything I’ve said to make one point actually: There is a way to go about bringing positive change to the marketplaces, and from experience I can tell you that you are going to only end up frustrating yourself with how you are approaching things.