I like that layout.Nicholas wrote:Maybe something like this would bring the other options to the fore and help make the store FAQ discoverable.
Good response to the publisher. Let's assume their intentions were good, which is that they assumed something like a typical video game that uses MIDI tracks synchronized with game play action. Then their statement is correct because that is like a soundtrack on a motion picture which requires a synchronization license rather than a mechanical license, such as a compulsory mechanical license.Nicholas wrote:I wish I could. I would easily pay the "Apple tax" if it were allowed.jimhenry wrote:This is all a lead up to saying I think you ought to consider selling content with in-App purchases even if you have to pay Apple a 30% cut...
The day after I received my first set of licenses back from RightsFlow, I also received an email from one of the publishers of one of the songs I just licensed. It was along these lines: "Thank you for the [notice of intent] to use 'Song X' in the Synthesia program. We feel however that the interactive nature of the use keeps it from being covered by a compulsory license..."
They had assumed the "to use [...] in the Synthesia program" on their own and I promptly corrected that they were plain MIDI tracks sold on a website with no interactive features (e.g., previews) whatsoever. Still, it brought up the issue of selling the MIDI files inside the app and how it might be increasingly challenging to convince a court that including any sort of store/purchase functionality inside Synthesia wouldn't constitute an interactive use.
The subtle thing is that, for the purposes of licensing, Synthesia is a MIDI file player and it is like a record player for licensing purposes. It matters not what player your MIDI files are played on. The fact that you also provide a MIDI player is irrelevant to licenses for making recordings. When you order licenses through RightsFlow they probably are asking what your intended use is. You need to say "to make a recording of the song in the form of a MIDI file" or words to that effect. Synthesia should not be mentioned as it is not related to the licensed MIDI file any more than the iTunes program is tied to the MP3 files sold in that app. Telephone RightsFlow and ask for their suggestion of the right magic words for your intended use. Also ask for their help in correcting that language on the licenses you already have if at all possible.
Amen to "frustrating."Nicholas wrote:In terms of confidence, I am much more sure I'll be able to follow Apple's guideline (despite an external-only store) than I would be able to satisfactorily convince every copyright holder that an inside-Synthesia music store didn't constitute an interactive use of their content. Worse yet, if I were to try by putting up all sorts of notices like "This is just a MIDI file! You can use it however you like, not just with this app!" I'd inadvertently be violating another of Apple's guidelines. Namely:
I would describe MIDI files you can use with any program anywhere as a "good[...] used outside of the App".Apple wrote:11.3 Apps using IAP to purchase physical goods or goods and services used outside of the App will be rejected
That is:
To keep Apple happy an in-app purchased song can only be used inside the app.
To keep publishers happy, the same song must be completely divorced from the app (and then the type of use is still fuzzy at best).
If I was only allowed a single word to describe the situation, it would be "frustrating".
However, I think you can be a bit more aggressive here. I don't think:
To keep Apple happy an in-app purchased song can only be used inside the app.
To keep publishers happy, the same song must be completely divorced from the app.
Analogize MIDI files to MP3 files and Synthesia to an MP3 player. I can't imagine Apple has any problem with selling content in the app that can be played in the app even though it can also be played elsewhere. I think Apple wants to avoid a "QVC app" that creates a marketplace for goods. Imagine someone having an iPad app that sells iPad apps.
As for the publishers, what they are looking for is synchronization--visual action that you use to cue the music. Merely selling the content within a player for that content shouldn't be a problem except that publishers may not be used to MIDI players that play MIDI files like they are MP3 players that play MP3 files.
That is:
To keep Apple happy an in-app purchased song must be readily and significantly usable inside the app.
To keep publishers happy, the same song must not be synchronized to the visual content of the app (it is a significant difference that the visual content is synchronized to the audio content).