Please can someone from PG Music answer this question for me.

I am having problems releasing my original songs through LANDR when they include BIAB Realtracks.

My latest release has stalled because of this very issue and I have received the following email from them:

Hey there,
Thanks for releasing with LANDR!
Looks like you may have used samples or borrowed content in your release with UPC 628810692224.
No worries, this happens a lot. We’re here to help you avoid problems with your music after it’s released.
We just need to double-check that you have permission to use any copyrighted material.
Here’s how to get your release live as quickly as possible. Reply to this email with:
- Any beat license(s) and proof of payment
- The source of your samples (DAW, sample marketplace, etc.)
If you’re releasing a remix, reply to this email with:
1. Authorization from the original creator for use of the composition
2. Authorization from the master recording owner to reuse the audio
If you are moving previously released tracks, reply to this email with:
- The name of your former distributor
The faster you reply the quicker we’ll be able to get your release live!
Thank you for your patience,
The LANDR Team

Do I have permission, or do I need to formally request it from PG Music, or even the individual session musicians who provided the recordings ?
I cannot readily find anything in my BIAB manual regarding this subject.

Hi Andy,

You have permission. Click on the below link and it will take you to PG Music's frequently asked questions (FAQs). You can read their clearance there.

https://www.pgmusic.com/salesfaq1.htm#22

When you upload your tracks, don't reference the Realtracks as being performed by any particular artist because you have not paid anyone to actually do a recording for you. Your songs are your own work. PG Music has paid each Realtrack Artist who then signs over their work to PG Music for use with BIAB and for you to create songs with BIAB.

I've noticed over the years that some people like tagging their uploads with things like 'Drums by Craig Scott', 'Piano by Blair Masters', etc. This is not accurate because no RT artist played firsthand for these songs. The artists are actually one or two steps removed from the final product created by the songwriter. From a copyright perspective, I imagine that such information could also be counter-productive and cloud the mind of those who filter for copyright on upload sites.

In relation to using RT Artists names as having played on a song when loading a song onto a website, Peter Gannon has commented a couple of times over the years in the forums that this is not something he encourages.

Regards,
Noel

• this song was used on TV in Turkey: Dare To Dream The Impossible

There are a whole lot of independent Smooth Jazz artists releasing records that are not much more than a BIAB-made backing track with a single instrument playing the melody...

Just saying...

Thank you for confirming this, Noel.
I will quote the clearance link in my response to the LANDR support team and hopefully my release will now go ahead with monetization.

The interesting thing to me about this, and I mentioned it when you brought up this same topic a while ago, is I'm curious how LANDR is determining that not all the instruments are live.

It has to be some sort of AI program they are using, but what is it looking for to determine that?

Anyway, please update this thread once you hear back from them.

This I believe.

It takes real effort using BIAB for backing tracks for live performance to keep them from sounding like smooth jazz and/or elevator music.

I'm not criticizing either. I've heard some pretty compelling elevator music over the years. I once hear a great cover of a Bela Fleck tune in a Food Lion Grocery store. I actually stopped under the speaker and hear it out.

Anyway, its not a sound I'm after all the time. Seems like a lot of the BIAB jazz/funk/latin styles cultivate that sound. Its easy to get if you want it.
For me, I only want it a little. George Benson- yes. Wes Montgomery.... not so much.

Hi Andy. Is this song, UPC 628810692224, one of the songs you were having issues with Landr back in July? If it is, have you modified it since the July rejections or are you trying to get it accepted as it was originally recorded?

Regardless whether you've worked on this song and resubmitted it or if this is a new song. Landr is telling you the same thing now as they were back in July. Your problem is not 'permission' but rather, your songs continue to be so generic sounding they are triggering kick backs from Landr's review system.

I suggest you not quote or identify BIAB as your accompaniment band as that's not going to solve your issue long term with LandR and it also could create issues for other artists that may use BIAB on their submissions to Landr. There's no need for you to chance continuing rejections or to possibly create unnecessary issues for other artists when having permission is not the actual issue.

I'm not trying to sound harsh or pass judgement on your music, writing or musicianship, It's LandR that is rejecting your productions. The issue is in the studio arrangement and production of the songs. You stated back in July you are not skilled with advanced techniques of BIAB and you're not interested in learning RealBand. That's fine and it is what it is. What it is, is your lack of expertise with those techniques are what's lacking in your current song projects. Using BIAB the way you do, is not meeting the quality threshold for LandR and YouTube's agreement for monetized postings.

Being what it is, my suggestion would be that you hire a producer to help you arrange and produce your songs and also maybe contract with someone to create custom RealTracks if it's appropriate for your song. I understand you're a multi instrumentalist and I'm not sure if you play keyboards, but regardless, if you decide not to hire a producer, you should hire a skilled keyboardist to come in and program midi styles and backing tracks for your song projects. That's a very good and inexpensive way to get live and unique sounding tracks and allow you to concentrate on your strengths rather than spin your wheels trying to work around techniques that aren't working for you.


Good luck with your projects

Hi Charlie,

In answer your question, this is a new release of a song that has only just been written and recorded.

My previous songs were all released through Landr to Spotify, Apple Music, Amazon, Googleplay, Deezer, etc, and all of them ARE currently monetized.
However, in July after the songs had successfully been released, I noticed that Landr had marked some of them as not being passed for YouTube monetization.
As I explained in my July post, this was not a problem to me because, even though I have a YouTube account and do occasionally upload the odd video, I do not actually qualify for YouTube monetization. Furthermore, I'm not really interested in making money from my humble low budget videos to begin with.
What I was interested in though, was finding the precise reason for Landr's disapproval, and so I emailed them in an attempt for some clarity in the matter.
It was their answer that prompted me to post the July forum topic, as I felt that some BIAB users may be interested to know of my experience, especially if they were planning to monetize YouTube videos that include music created using BIAB Realtracks.
The outcome of the dialog that I had with Landr was rather inconclusive because they did not provide a precise reason for why the songs were regarded as 'not sufficiently distinct', and merely offered possible reasons why any release could be flagged, such as the use of samples without permission, or copyrighted material.
In conclusion, we can only speculate as to the precise reason and to the sophistication of the AI detection used by LANDR.
However (not that it makes any difference in my case), but they did inform me that they had reversed their original decision and that all of my songs were now approved for YouTube monetization on their system, although they warned that this doesn't guarantee that YouTube would also approve them for monetization if they were ever to be used in a video.

With this new release, it is a different situation because this time they have notified me in advance that they have detected samples or borrowed content, and if you read their email again you will see that all they are requesting is confirmation that I have permission to use any copyrighted material before going ahead with the release.
So as far as I am aware, I simply need to confirm that the only third party content is BIAB Realtracks and that I have full permission from PG Music to use them. Hopefully this will meet with their requirements and then my release will also be approved for distribution and YouTube monetization.

Thanks for offering your opinion and advice Charlie, but I'm perfectly happy with my music making process and the rewards that it has brought me over the last 40+ years before and after the introduction of music software. I find it convenient to use BIAB Realtracks in my recordings, but they are non-essential as I have the skills and knowhow to play many instruments myself if necessary, and to a professional standard.

I will of course update this thread when LANDR respond to my email reply.

https://andyshearer.wixsite.com/music

Thanks for replying Andy. I'm glad you're posting these updates as I agree with you that your situation could be helpful to others wanting to monetize YouTube videos using BIAB tracks. I worried my post sounds more harsh than what my intent is. My previous post intends to addressing others with similar concerns as much as your particular issue.

To clarify, I think there are two different skill sets at play with this situation getting songs cleared through Landr. Your musicianship and ability to play multiple instruments to professional levels is one skill. The other skill is Audio Production and Engineering. I see the issue with Landr to be an audio production/engineering issue and not a musicianship issue. As skilled, experienced and diverse as you are, BIAB session players and the audio tracks they record are on equal footing with you. Raw BIAB recorded audio and your recorded audio at the beginning of a mixing session are no different. What happens in the editing, processing, manipulation, duplication, balancing and rendering of those tracks is what's important to success in passing the Landr review for monetization or for any personal and commercial use of a song project.

Both skills are an art within themselves and although related, are separate from each other. There are many highly skilled musicians that know nothing of production and many highly skilled producers that can't play any musical instrument beyond a beginners level if they can play an instrument at all. The two skills correlate to each other but the individual skill sets are not dependent on each other.


My point in this post is to reassure others that have concern if their use of BIAB tracks may also face rejection for monetization, as professional quality demos or even commercial releases. They may get rejects, but they don't have to. By applying their time and resources to learning production and engineering skills, BIAB generated tracks can fill their needs. If they don't want to learn production skills, simply hire someone or corroborate with someone that has the skill set.

I couldn't agree more.
By definition, Smooth Jazz creates a relaxing mood and often tends to feature a single soloist playing over a fairly generic-sounding backing track, whether the backing track has been created using BIAB Realtracks or live session musicians.
For that reason alone, BIAB is a useful tool to many musicians.
That is the reason why I decided to use only BIAB Realtracks on this particular release, although I could just as easily have recorded the guitar, keyboard and bass guitar parts myself to achieve a similar result.

My music tends to cover several different genres and I have previously released original tracks featuring just a single live instrument (ie. solo acoustic fingerstyle guitar or piano).
What I am saying is that I would never be content with just relying on BIAB Realtracks in all of my music making, but there are occasions when I feel that it helps me to achieve the result that I'm aiming for, and it is simply more convenient and time saving.

With all these elaborate but interesting speculations about why Landr rejected a BIAB song I am surprised no one mentioned the obvious (and likely) reason for rejection.

BIAB produces identical riffs for users of the product! And these riffs alone, if detected by software, would be sufficient to get you a rejection.

The odds of your BIAB song containing a riff identical to my BIAB song are actually pretty good!

1) if we both choose a BIAB style that includes distinctive riff(s)

2) if we both use similar key and chords

3) if we both use a similar tempo

Not a lot of other factors that I am aware of. I can almost hear someone saying "yeah but odds are it won't happen" and I admit maybe it is not highly likely but it is something I worry about in my songs.

As an example let's say BIAB 2020 comes out December 1 with a cool new style that attracts a lot of attention from BIAB users. And that style includes distinctive riffs since the RealTracks do seem to be getting more complex.

A lot of songs are written in a handful of common keys. And it is also pretty common to write songs around 120 bpm.

All it takes is two BIAB users writing a song using those new distinctive riffs in a common key and bpm and Landr (or other online systems) may quite easily detect the second one as a copy!

I try and avoid using BIAB realtracks that have distinctive riffs for the very reasons you mention J*3.

That sounds as good a reason as any for LANDR to identify content as 'insufficiently distinct', but let me reiterate that they did not actually reject any of my previous eight releases. They merely marked some of them as not approved for YouTube monetization, and then they instantly reversed this decision after I requested more precise information on what constituted 'insufficiently distinct'.
Although LANDR have put my ninth and latest release on hold, their email clearly states that this is only until I provide confirmation that I have full permission to use the third party content that they have detected in my song. (ie. the BIAB Realtracks). Thay say that this is to avoid any problems AFTER it has been released.

Something else has just occurred to me which could explain how their detection system works.
I've noticed that they advertise copyright free sample packages for sale on their website. Mainly for use in house/trap/hip hop music.
It makes me wonder if their AI monitoring system is automatically programmed to allow these samples, but not other third party content, such as BIAB Realtracks ?

Of course there are alternative distribution services to LANDR that are available, but it seems likely to me that they all probably use a similar type of AI monitoring system for flagging up third party content that may require the permission of the owner.
It's all speculation I know, and anyone's guess is as good as yours, mine or Charlie's, but I'm eagerly waiting to see what they do when they receive my reply to their email.

In any event, I'm sure that there'll be a few sighs of relief from other BIAB users when/if LANDR accepts my confirmation that I have full permission from PG Music to use BIAB Realtracks, and they allow my latest release to go ahead.

FWIW, we have two albums released to all the major streaming platforms w/o any question ever arising. While around half of the songs feature friends playing guitar the other half features a large variety of solo RT's and all of the songs use RT/RD rhythm tracks. I have nothing in the song meta data regarding who played what.

i may be naive (ample precedent) but I don't see how a perhaps one or two bar riffs could trigger any algorithms. Given the different progressions used and the different permutations regenning yields it's all a mystery to me.

I don't use a lot chords (4-7 typically) or complex chords but I do try to have a lot of changes. To me for RT solos that gives more distinct sounds that if they don't exactly support the melody than at the least they don't distract from it. Also all of the RT solos I've used on our productions are comped up from multi regens which further reduces the likelihood of them being identical to something else.

Given that chord progressions can't be copyrighted I don't see how a non melodic riff (non melodic in that it doesn't copy a known melody) could trigger an issue or why some entity would care enough to create an algorithm to search for them.

All very strange I think.

Bud

Hi Bud,

I previously released two double compilation albums and an EP through Songcast without any questions asked, and I did use BIAB Realtracks on some of the tracks (mainly just drums though). I also used other third party content with permission from the author(s).

It's only my latest release that has stalled whilst LANDR check that I have permission to use the third-party content that they appear to have detected whilst reviewing it. The song 'You Make Me Think About Love' is an original composition, but it's the first time that I have used only BIAB Realtracks as the accompaniment to my vocal performance. I don't mention anything in the metadata regarding any other contributor than myself.
My previous eight releases contained a mixture of BIAB Realtracks and live instruments, and they were all successfully distributed to Spotify, Apple Music, Google Play, Deezer,etc with monetization for streaming and downloads.
I've even had five of these tracks aired on local and national BBC Radio here in the UK, and the BBC are known for being particularly strict and sensitive regarding the use (or misuse) of any copyrighted material in their broadcasts.

I'm confident that my release will go ahead when LANDR receive my reply to their email, but if I experience any further problems, I will simply release through an alternative distributor instead. Stay tuned for the conclusion to this mystery.

I've had several songs rejected by a library I was trying to get approved for. The rejection reason was... "sounds too midi. Record with live instruments and submit again in 6 months." Funny thing was, there was zero midi in it. And this was a number of years ago. Some of the real tracks at that time sounded kind of wonky in some places. That has fortunately, been less of an issue in the more recent versions of BB.

Quality of the real tracks and the production are a huge factor with many libraries. I know a library is different from the monetization platforms being discussed but I think the principle is the same.

And yes, I've heard several users here post music with the same exact licks in their song as is in mine. It can and does happen when the same real tracks are used in the same style.

Regarding disclosure. I know, and you know that PG grants permission for use of it's material in our original songs. So when a library asks if I have permissions as needed, I simply state that I own 100% of the song's rights. I don't recall any of them asking for signed release documents. If it's a cowrite, I add the other writer's PRO info and everything is good. All of that is usually done in their online forms or in the original agreement you sign with them that all material you will be submitting is original, and any and all clearances have been obtained, there is no intentional copyright infringement, and you control and own 100% of the song's rights for commercial use.

We were offered a contract by Crucial Music based on an all BiaB track (had to also sign a non-disclosure agreement so that about all I can say about it!). Mood Media has licensed 22 of our songs and they all include RTs including many solo RTs. There’s never been a question regarding the source of the tracks. We just state we own 100% of everything unless, as Herb mentioned, it’s a co-write.

Bud

It seems there are two different things at play here, at least from what I've been reading this morning over at CDBaby (I use CDBaby to release my music).

For the digital music places like Spotify, iTunes, etc., it seems only necessary that you have the rights to use all the tracks used to build your song, and of course we do when using realtracks.

It seems that Youtube monetization is different however. I found the following:




I don't claim to understand legal stuff, but wouldn't the above sentence exclude realtracks because we don't have exclusive rights?

Having said that, every song I have ever released through CDBaby is also opted in for YouTube Monetization and I have never received a warning from them about it.

The article I quoted from is here: https://support.cdbaby.com/hc/en-us/arti...t-be-monetized-

Seems pretty clear. And like Herb said, I have also heard BIAB songs with identical riffs so technically RealTracks would be a problem in the case you outlined. As a practical matter it may never come up.

Some things you can do to reduce the chances of a problem...

- mix and match RealTracks on your own instead of using RealStyles

- mix in a good amount of your own playing

- mix in a good amount of MIDI parts

- use obscure keys and timings (don't use the default 120 bpm)

- edit RealTrack riffs in your DAW to make them more unique sounding

All of this represents more work but if you simply open BIAB, use default key and bpm settings, enter standard chords and choose a popular RealStyle, you are far more likely to sound like another BIAB song.

Very interesting to read what CDBaby say Dave, and it supports what LANDR told me back in July when I queried why all of my releases were monetized on Spotify, Amazon Play, Google Play, Deezer, etc, but had not been approved for YouTube/Facebook monetization.
They explained that it is because the criteria is different and more strict for YouTube and Facebook.

I did a bit of research on YouTube monetization and discovered that they changed the rules about two years ago with the aim of improving content.
To qualify for YouTube monetization, your channel must now have at least 1000 Subscribers and 4000 Watch Hour time in last 365 days. The video content must also comply with the stricter copyright ownership requirements (as you stated).
See https://youtube-creators.googleblog.com/2018/01/additional-changes-to-youtube-partner.html

As my YouTube channel falls a long way short of the required number of subscribers and watch hours, it's totally irrelevant whether the content of any of my videos complies with content requirements anyway, so you can understand why it really doesn't matter to me that my LANDR releases were not approved for YouTube monetization.
However, at the time, I was curious as to the precise reason why LANDR had not approved them, and this was the reason why I queried it with them.
Without referring directly to any of my releases, they simply answered by giving me a list of YouTube's criteria and offered the suggestion that their review system must have flagged something that didn't meet the required criteria.
To their credit, they unexpectedly said that they were happy to approve all of my releases for YouTube monetization on their system but warned me that, in the event of the material being used in a YouTube video, it would ultimately be up to YouTube themselves to decide if it fulfilled their own requirements for monetization.

As the only material I used on these releases was a combination of my own live performances and BIAB Realtracks, I would tend to agree with you that BIAB Realtracks are not exclusively licensed, therefore all that LANDR were doing when they didn't approve some of my releases for YouTube monetization, was letting me know in advance that I could run into problems if I was to use the music in a YouTube video.
Of course, it would depend on the sophistication of YouTube's detection system in identifying BIAB Realtracks within the recording, and their interpretation of what constitutes 'insufficiently distinct'.
So like you say JohnJohnJohn, a lot of BIAB songs use the same Realtracks, and every Realtrack uses the same 8 bars riffs.
Therefore it's not beyond the realms of possibility that a sophisticated AI system could identify a commonly used riff when reviewing a release, and subsequently not approve it for YouTube/Facebook monetization.

Further to my previous post, this is what LANDR referred me to in July when I queried why some of my releases were marked as ineligible for YouTube/Facebook/Instagram monetization:
https://support.landr.com/hc/en-us/articles/360005473813

I'm still waiting for them to respond to my email reply regarding my latest release: https://soundcloud.com/andyshearer-1/you-make-me-think-about-love

There is a bit more to it than that, Andy. When you opt in for youtube monetization and also deliver your music to youtube music, anyone can use your music in a youtube video.

My youtube channel is also not even close to meeting the requirements, but I know that some people have used my music in their videos that have met the requirements because I receive sync money from youtube via CDBaby.

Not a lot mind you, just checked this morning, a total of $6.16 as of today and it goes back to 2017. But still current, latest "sale" was May 2019 for a total of $0.00911700

Oh, that's good to know, Dave.
Every penny counts, I suppose.
I've accumulated $10.73 from Spotify monetization since July, which is barely enough to pay for a couple of beers in celebrating such a 'remarkable' achievement, but I reckon that it would have to be one heck of a video for me to earn anything from YouTube monetization.

Promise that you won't spend it all at once

I've received a response from LANDR regarding my song release. It would appear that a quite serious precedent has been created here that could potentially impact on anyone who creates music that includes BIAB Realtracks and attempts to release it through LANDR.com.

Despite PG Music confirming that I have permission to freely use BIAB in my recordings, LANDR have identified the artist who provided the recording for one of the BIAB Realtracks (ie. the sax), and are informing me that they are unable to go ahead with my release without proper authorization from the soloist Eric Marienthal, in the form of a contractual agreement:


Sep 13, 15:07 EDT
Hi there,

I'm Coleman, sorry for the delayed response!

I have a little question about your release with UPC code 628810692224.​

The soloist you have included, "Eric Marienthal" already has a relatively established online presence.
LANDR cannot release tracks without the proper authorization for this artist.

In order for us to move forward with this release, we'll need you to provide us with a contractual agreement stating the terms and conditions of the collaboration for any licensed content.


I know it seems like a lot but we just want to ensure you are protected down the line.

Let me know if you need any help with this.

Regards,
Coleman
LANDR Rescue Squad
Spread The Word:
instagram.com/landrmusic/
facebook.com/LANDRmusic
twitter.com/LANDR_music



Sep 12, 12:27 EDT
Hi again,
Further to my reply on 8th Sept, here is confirmation from PG Music that
I have permission to use Band In A Box Realtracks in my recordings. I
hope that the release can now go ahead without any further delay.

Powered by ChatBeacon.Welcome to PG Music Andy, Deryk will be right with
you. Your chat ID is SMX091219040807-127331.

Deryk 4:08:09 PM
Welcome To PG Music's Live Help. How May We Assist You Today?

Andy Shearer 4:14:32 PM
Please can you confirm that I have permission to use BIAB Realtracks in
my latest song release. I'm releasing through LANDR.com but they have
put the release on hold as they have detected possible third party
content when reviewing it and have emailed me asking for confirmation
that I have permission to use any copyrighted material. I know that I
have because I've read your FAQ (https://www.pgmusic.com/salesfaq1.htm
<https://www.pgmusic.com/salesfaq1.htm> #22), but it would be
helpful if you can also confirm this here so that I can send it to them.

Deryk 4:15:21 PM
Anything you make in the program is yours to do with as you please as
long as it doesn't infringe on the intellectual property of others or
include our demos, since the demos are copyrighted by us. Anything else
is free game.

Andy Shearer 4:17:55 PM
Thank you Deryk. I will send them a transcript of this conversation and
hopefully my release can then go ahead.

Deryk 4:18:42 PM
Ok, sounds good Andy

Andy Shearer 4:19:37 PM
Thanks again. I appreciate your help Deryk.

Deryk 4:20:05 PM
You're welcome, happy to help


I haven't a clue how they managed to identify the Realtrack soloist, but I wouldn't know how to go about contacting Eric Marienthal to seek his permission, let alone obtain a contractual agreement stating the terms and conditions of the collaboration for any licensed content.
I'm quite surprised and disappointed with this outcome, and I think that I'll just have to cancel this release altogether and maybe re-record the song without the sax solo.

This is bad news indeed. I have feared it would come down to this. I can only assume a riff in your BIAB track closely matched something already released by Eric Marienthal.

This brings up a critical question for PGM...do they even own the full rights to what the RealTrack musicians have played? Do they closely control what is played over chords or do they let the musician riff whatever they want to when recording their parts? If the latter it seems quite likely something a musician would play on a RealTrack might also appear on a piece of released music by that same musician. If that occurs who owns that riff?

Before pushing the panic button, I would suggest that it's likely, even probable, that LANDR overreacted and that they acted inappropriately. As someone who has dealt with copyright issues for a long time, their reasoning is quite a stretch.

And yet...they have the power to release or stop release through them, right?

Andy,

Did you include "Eric Marienthal" in the information that you originally uploaded to LANDR?

I noticed on your Soundcloud page that you had put something like 'Sax by Eric Marienthal' when I looked at a recent song of yours.

It is also possible that LANDR discovered the above Soundcloud reference. In this day and age of computers, cross-referencing around the world is a very speedy process. (Schools and universities use specially designed software to search globally so as to safe-guard against plagiarism.)

If you did include Eric's name on the original upload to LANDR, this could well be where your problem lies. (I discussed referencing Realtrack artists in general towards the end of my original post in this thread because I thought that it might cloud copyright issues if such information is included.)

Even if you later deleted any reference to "Eric Marienthal", LANDR may well be referring back to the original upload information and be taking the view that you are trying to conceal valuable copyright details.

Just a thought...

Regards,
Noel

It's less a power and more an arbitrary decision. The release from PG should have sufficed. I still lean towards the likelihood of an individual misinterpreting and misapplying the guidelines.

Hi Noel96,

I'm afraid that I did initially put a reference to Eric Marienthal on my Soundcloud, Bandcamp and Facebook pages, and then deleted it on the advice of more experienced BIAB forum users.
I realise more about the implications now and of course I regret it, but I figured that people know I can't play sax and I wanted to avoid being quizzed about who the soloist was.
I suppose that there's a possibility that they found the reference on one of my social media pages but they must have gone searching for it because I certainly didn't give them the links.
I think that it's more likely that Eric's style or phrases were detected by whatever AI system they use.
It's the first time I've used a Realtrack solo in one of my releases, but even though it consists of a series of 8 bar snippets, I suppose that there is only one Eric Marienthal, and there's quite a lot of his playing to be found on YouTube, etc.

Although Deryk said that anything we make in the program is ours to do with as we please, it seems that using Realtracks can still actually infringe on the intellectual property of the session musicians who performed them, in the eyes of LANDR at least.

Still, it's not the end of the world. I could try releasing the song through a different distributor. Some forum members
mentioned that they've successfully released lots of songs containing RealTracks, and I have too.
At least I've learned a few things from the experience and I'll be more careful next time.

Thanks everyone for your input and interest, and I hope that I haven't created a problem for anyone else through my inexperience.

It's a cracker of a sax solo though, isn't it ?

See, here's the thing. I'm assuming that the session musicians hired by PG Music are paid master scale for these recordings (staff can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on this). If that's the case, they don't have "intellectual property rights" on what they played, it's a work-for-hire.

That's why I'm pretty confident that whomever you dealt with at LANDR doesn't know what the hell he's doing/talking about.

By way of example....the classic rock song "Drift Away" was originally recorded (in Nashville btw) and session guitarist Reggie Young conceived and played the iconic guitar lick that makes up the intro to the song. That riff has been copied on dozens, maybe even hundreds, of cover versions of that song. Reggie didn't "own" that lick - if anyone had the right to pursue an infringement case, it would've been Dobie's record label, as they owned the master.

PG Music owns THESE "masters", and if they say there's no infringement and that it's fair game to use them, then it is.

I've got a confession to make and it comes with an almighty apology to anyone who has been following this thread.

I've just discovered how LANDR knew that the sax Realtrack was performed by Eric Marienthal.
When I originally posted the track on the PG Showcase forum, and on Soundcloud, Facebook and Bandcamp, I hadn't actually submitted the release to Landr.
I had it open in another tab on my PC ready to submit but I wasn't sure about naming Eric as a collaborator or not.
I had him pencilled in on the submission form but I meant to delete him after receiving advice from other Forum members who recommended that I shouldn't name him as it was not necessary, and could actually be counter-productive.

I was then interrupted by some other tasks and you guessed it, I submitted the release without first deleting Eric as a collaborator.
Hence the release being delayed and me receiving the email from LANDR.

Call it old age, stupidity or whatever you like, but I'm afraid that this is all my fault and I'm the victim of my own making.
So I've now sent a grovelling apology to LANDR advising them that I had named Eric as a collaborator in error. I've now deleted the original release request and re-submitted it without any mention of Eric Marienthal, and I'm keeping my fingers and toes crossed that the release will now pass their review.

Once again, I apologise unreservedly and I will update this thread just as soon as LANDR either release my song, or ban me forever for being a complete tool !

Hi Andy,

There's nothing wrong with making mistakes. It happens to all of us.

I imagine that this thread will prove very valuable for many users in the future because of the detailed discussion it contains. From that perspective, I have no doubt that you will be applauded and not criticised.

I'm glad you got to the bottom of it all! By solving this problem, you (and all of us, too) now know how to avoid similar problems in the future.

All the best,
Noel

• my latest re-mix using multiband compression : Just A Little After Midnight

Good news. Today I've received email confirmation that my release has been delivered to the stores:


Sep 16, 09:20 EDT
Hey there,

I've gone ahead and delivered your release to the stores!

Each store has its own processing time, but generally your release will be live on Google Play, Deezer and Tidal within 1-3 days.

Apple and Spotify take a little longer--it normally takes around 5 business days for your release to be live on there.
The smaller stores may take a little more time too, so please be patient.

If you have set a target release date, your track will go live in all stores on at that time.

Hope this helps!

All the best,
Coleman
LANDR Rescue Squad

Congratulations, Andy! That's a great outcome. Thanks for completing the story. It's good to know that, at the end of the day, you had a happy ending.

I hope the big bucks roll in

Noel

Good outcome. Again, thanks for posting all of the details, and especially how this was resolved. This can certainly be useful for others in the future.

Good news indeed, thanks for the update!

Hi Noel. I would have sworn that I read years ago that Mr. Gannon encouraged the crediting of the RT artists. I haven't done a search though. I'm getting ready to release a project done primarily with RT's and now I'm questioning what approach I should take.

Thanks.

Hi Paul,

In a post he made a long time ago, to the best of my recollection -- and I'm paraphrasing what he said because I cannot remember the words -- Peter said that the artists have not specifically played on any of the songs BIAB creates. While the artist did play for PG Music, what songs are created with BIAB are snippets of the artist's playing that are joined together to create an adhesive sound. In other words, the artist did not sit down with a user's song and put his own interpretation on that song at the request of the user.

How I interpreted this is that it's probably being a little unkind to the original BIAB artist to say that they played on a particular song because they were never professionally engaged to play on that song. The end result with BIAB is a compilation from multiple sources.

Just a thought... if you want to include the names, why not say something like...

• The instrumentals for this song were created by PG Music's Band In A Box using audio material from Paul Franklin (Pedal Steel), Neil Swanson (Acoustic Bass), Natalie Haas (Cello).

... an ackowledgement like the above simply states the truth and is accurate.

All the best with your release!

Regards,
Noel

P.S. Why not email sales@pgmusic.com and ask? My recollection may be wrong. Alternatively, PG Music might have a different view these days. You could also include the URL of this thread in the email. (My recollection is from a number of years ago.)

• re-modelled and re-mixed: A Road With New Horizons

One of the very first things I did when I bought BIAB was to directly ask PGM this very question and I was told, "We actually request that you do not credit any RealTracks or MIDI Soloist artists in order to maintain the artist's creative integrity."!

I Searched and found the post I referred to above. Here is the relevant information,

Q. Am I allowed to credit the artists who played the RealTracks on my CD if I want to?

A (from PGM). We actually request that you do not credit any RealTracks or MIDI Soloist artists in order to maintain the artist's creative integrity.


And here is the original post,

https://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=179419


This is a resolved issue from at least 7 years ago!

Good find, JJJ.

That certainly helps clarify the company's preferences.

Thanks guys!

Good news. Gotta be careful and double and triple check before you click send.

Lesson learned...carry on.