A performance licence from ASCAP or BMI does not cover picture

ASCAP's own licensing page states sync rights are licensed separately by writers or publishers, not by the society.

Site publication

September 18, 2026

What happened

Placing music against picture, a film, a game trailer, an advert, needs clearance of two separate copyrights: the composition and the sound recording. As retrieved on 16 September 2026, ASCAP's own licensing page states this directly for the performing-rights side of the business: 'ASCAP does not license the right to record music on a CD, tape, or as part of an audio-visual work such as a motion picture, video or TV program. Those rights, known as mechanical and synchronization ('synch') rights, are licensed by writers or publishers.' BMI's licensing page describes its own licence in the same narrower terms, as permission to publicly perform its repertoire.

What the documents say

A performing rights organisation's licence, the one a bar, a streaming platform or a radio station holds, covers public performance of a composition. It does not cover recording that composition into a new audiovisual work, and it does not cover the recording itself at all, which belongs to whoever owns the master. ASCAP's page states plainly that writers and publishers licence synch directly; there is no blanket synch licence equivalent to the mechanical blanket licence that the MLC administers for streamed compositions. A production placing a track to picture needs a synchronisation licence from the composition's owner and a master use licence from the recording's owner, negotiated as two separate deals, neither automatic.

Why it matters for makers

The mechanism to hold onto is that 'my performance rights are covered' and 'my track is cleared for sync' are unrelated facts. A composer registered with ASCAP or BMI, or properly matched at the MLC, has solved the performance and mechanical side of their business; none of that reaches a sync request. For a generated cue specifically, the sync question sits on top of an unresolved prior question: who, if anyone, can grant a synchronisation licence for a composition a generator produced, when the platform's own terms may deny exclusivity or limit commercial use.

What to check before you use it

This is a clearance checklist, not a substitute for a lawyer reviewing a specific deal. Before a cue goes to picture, confirm who holds the synchronisation right in the composition and who holds the master use right in the recording, and get both in writing; a PRO membership card answers neither question. For a cue built from a generated element, check the generator's own terms for what commercial or broadcast rights it grants before representing to a buyer that the cue is cleared for sync at all.

• Who actually holds the synchronisation right in this composition, separate from whoever holds performance rights?
• Who holds the master use right in the specific recording being placed to picture?
• If any element was generated, does the tool's own terms permit the commercial, broadcast use this placement requires?

A PRO membership and a streaming registration are real and necessary pieces of a composer's business, but the societies' own pages are explicit that sync sits outside both. Treating a performance licence as proof of sync clearance is the single most common and most avoidable mistake this record is meant to close off.

Sources & reading trail

States ASCAP does not license mechanical or synchronization rights, which are licensed by writers or publishers directly, and defines what an ASCAP licence does cover.

Source published: Not established · Retrieved: 16 September 2026

States a BMI licence gives copyright permission to publicly perform its repertoire, describing the same performance-rights scope as ASCAP's.

Source published: Not established · Retrieved: 16 September 2026

Describes the separate blanket mechanical licence a streamed composition needs, distinct from both performance and sync rights.

Source published: Not established · Retrieved: 16 September 2026

Papers, terms and official documents establish the record; the maker reading and the checks are Signal to Song editorial analysis. This retrospective draft does not imply the site published on the event date.

Continue reading

• A blanket licence created a single place to register a song
• Epidemic Sound owns its catalogue instead of collecting royalties
• A stock-music licence excludes work you do not own
• Browse the complete the archive

Published September 18, 2026, not on the date of the event described.