Sync Licensing FAQ

No. A settlement covers only the share held by the party you settle with.

A composition is usually split between several publishers, and the sound recording sits separately with the label. Settling with a publisher who controls 20 percent releases 20 percent. The remaining 80 percent stays open, the recording side stays open, and where session musicians or performers were involved, union new use payments may still be outstanding.

Before signing, confirm in writing which rights are released, which share that party actually controls, and which co-owners fall outside the agreement.

Because the fee reflects what a sync licence for that use would have cost in the market.

Pricing follows the commercial purpose of the content, the profile of the brand, the territory, the term and the platform. A post published by a commercial entity is treated as advertising and priced as advertising.

There is no established market for commercial micro-licensing at this scale. The rates that apply are advertising rates.

Duration does not drive the price. Sync licences for advertising are priced per use, not per second.

What matters is that a commercially released recording was used to promote a business. Five seconds or thirty seconds rarely changes the licence fee, and many licences carry a minimum fee regardless of length.

Not for commercial content. TikTok's general music library is not licensed for business use, and TikTok directs businesses to its Commercial Music Library instead.

The same distinction applies on Meta. The ordinary licensed music library is described as intended for personal, non-commercial use, while Sound Collection is the catalogue cleared for commercial use on Meta products.

Commerciality follows the use, not the account label. A post that promotes a brand, product or service is commercial regardless of whether it was published from a personal, creator or business account.

Our whitepaper Platform Availability ≠ Commercial Clearance sets out how to verify which applies.

Yes. Quantum in a music copyright matter is the licence fee that would have been payable had the use been cleared, and that is what we determine.

We prepare independent assessments for solicitors, brands and rights holders, covering the market-conforming licence fee for the specific use, territory, term and platform. The work includes rights ownership verification where the ownership position is unclear.

Instructions can be taken directly from counsel, with conflict checks and a fee estimate provided before work begins.

A sync licensing valuation report is an independent, court-ready document that determines the fair market value of music used without authorization. It combines artist and song analysis, territorial pricing benchmarks, and usage context to produce defensible valuation ranges for litigation, settlement negotiations, and insurance claims.

Sync license fees range from $1,500 per side for independent artists on social media to over $1,000,000 per side for major artists in global advertising campaigns. Every deal is negotiated individually — there is no standard rate card. The price depends on the artist’s profile, song performance, territory, duration, and media type. See our complete pricing guide for detailed ranges by media type.

We determine what the sync license would have cost if it had been properly obtained — the hypothetical license fee. This requires analyzing historical sync deal benchmarks, the artist’s commercial profile and streaming data, the song’s market performance, territorial pricing norms, and usage context. Our xSV™ framework translates these factors into a defensible hypothetical license fee. This fee then serves as an input for the broader damages calculation, which may include additional components determined by legal counsel.

xSV™ is Sync Valuations’ proprietary valuation methodology. It combines an Artist Sync Score (measuring commercial profile, cultural footprint, and market position) with a Song Sync Score (measuring streaming performance, chart history, and editorial features) to model what a sync license should cost for a specific combination of artist, song, territory, and media type. The framework has been accepted in courts across multiple jurisdictions.

Sync valuation reports are used by law firms representing rights holders in copyright infringement cases, music publishers and labels seeking to establish the hypothetical license value, insurance companies assessing music-related claims, and brands or agencies that need to understand fair market value for licensing negotiations. Anyone involved in a dispute over unlicensed music use benefits from an independent, evidence-based valuation.

Every sync license involves two separate rights: the master recording (the actual audio, typically controlled by the label or artist) and the publishing/composition (the underlying musical work, controlled by the publisher or songwriter). Each side negotiates and charges its own fee. Industry pricing is quoted “per side” — so a $10,000 per side fee means $20,000 total.

Standard reports are delivered within 5–10 business days. Expedited delivery is available for time-sensitive litigation. The timeline depends on the complexity of the case — a single-track, single-territory assessment is faster than a multi-track global campaign analysis.

Yes. Our valuation reports are specifically designed for litigation. They follow a structured methodology (xSV™) that has been reviewed and accepted in US federal courts, German civil proceedings (Landgericht and Oberlandesgericht), and other European jurisdictions. The reports include full methodology disclosure, data sources, and reasoning — everything required for expert testimony.

We provide valuation reports for cases in any jurisdiction worldwide. Our methodology accounts for territorial pricing differences — a sync license in the United States commands different rates than one in Germany or Brazil. We have particular expertise in US, UK, German, and Dutch legal frameworks, but the xSV™ methodology is jurisdiction-agnostic.

To begin, we need the artist and song name(s), details of the unauthorized use (where, when, how long, what media), the territory or territories involved, and any available context about the infringer’s campaign. If you have existing licensing agreements or market data, those help refine the analysis. We handle all additional research — streaming data, benchmark analysis, market comparables — from there.

Sync valuations determine the one-time fee for synchronizing music with visual media — this is a negotiated market price, not a statutory rate. Royalty calculations deal with ongoing payments based on usage (streams, broadcasts, performances). In infringement cases, the relevant question is almost always “what would the sync license have cost?” — which requires market-based valuation, not royalty arithmetic.

Yes. Our co-founders serve as expert witnesses in music copyright cases. This includes written expert reports, depositions, and courtroom testimony. We also support cases where an independent valuation report is needed but testimony is not — for example, in settlement negotiations or pre-litigation demand letters.

The enforcement gap refers to the massive volume of commercial music use on social media that occurs without proper sync licenses. Platform blanket deals (e.g., Meta’s agreements with labels) cover user-generated content — not commercial advertising. Brands running paid campaigns with copyrighted music need separate sync licenses. The total enforcement gap is estimated at $37.5 billion in unlicensed commercial use.

Report pricing depends on complexity: the number of tracks, territories, and media types involved. We provide a fixed-fee quote before starting any work — no hourly billing, no surprises. Contact us with your case details for a quote.

We are the only firm focused exclusively on sync licensing valuation. Other music experts cover broader ground (royalties, publishing, general IP). Our specialization means deeper benchmarks, a purpose-built methodology (xSV™), and a track record specifically in sync disputes — 100+ cases assessed across nine jurisdictions, for claimants and defendants alike.