How Creators Are Selling Their Background Music Licensing Rights

Lucas: Luna, I want to talk about something I've been seeing more and more — creators who are taking the background music from their TikTok videos and licensing it as a standalone product. Luna: You mean like the original beats they make or commission for their content, and then selling the rights to use that same track elsewhere? Lucas: Exactly. It's a natural extension of the 'sell your extras' trend we've been covering. But this one feels different because the asset — music — has a well-established licensing infrastructure already. It's not as ad hoc as some of the other things we've seen. Luna: Right, there are existing platforms and legal frameworks. So what's the typical deal look like? Lucas: Let me give you a specific example. I spoke with a creator — let's call her Mia — who runs a lifestyle TikTok account with about 180,000 followers. She originally made a 30-second lo-fi beat for her morning routine videos. It became kind of a signature sound for her content. A small athleisure brand reached out asking if they could use that track in their own Instagram ads. Luna: And instead of just saying yes for a flat fee, she licensed it? Lucas: Yeah. She worked out a non-exclusive license for twelve months, covering digital advertising only. She charged $2,000 upfront plus a 5% royalty on any ad spend above $50,000. Over three months, the brand spent about $260,000 on those ads, so she earned another $13,000 on top of the upfront. Total take: $15,000 from one track. Luna: That's impressive for a 30-second beat. And she kept the rights to use it herself and license it to others? Lucas: Exactly. Non-exclusive means she can sell it to multiple brands. The key is that she owned the master and the publishing outright. She registered the composition with a performing rights organization — BMI, in her case — so she could also collect performance royalties if the ad aired on TV or streaming. Luna: But a lot of creators don't own their music outright. A lot of them use royalty-free tracks from sites like Epidemic Sound or Artlist. Can they license those? Lucas: Generally no. The terms of service on those platforms typically grant you a license to use the music in your own content, but you can't sublicense it to a third party. So if you want to sell the track, you need to create original music or commission a producer who assigns you the rights. Luna: So the barrier to entry is actually creating something original. But that's not impossible — plenty of creators work with inexpensive producers on Fiverr or SoundBetter. Lucas: Right. And the economics work in your favor. A decent custom beat might cost $100 to $300 from a freelance producer. If you can license it for even $500 once, you've broken even. The upside comes from multiple licenses. Luna: How do creators protect themselves legally? Do they need a lawyer for every deal? Lucas: Not necessarily. There are template licensing agreements available from organizations like the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers — ASCAP — or even free resources like the Creative Commons wiki. But you do need to specify the scope: territory, duration, exclusivity, media type. The one thing I'd recommend is having a lawyer review your template once, then you can reuse it. Luna: So the template should cover things like: can the brand edit the track? Can they use it in TV commercials? Can they sublicense it to their own partners? Lucas: Exactly. And one more thing — termination rights. What happens if the brand stops paying royalties? You want to be able to pull the license. That's standard in most agreements. Luna: What about creators who use ai generated music? There are tools like Mubert or Boomy that let you generate original tracks. Can you license those? Lucas: It's murky. Most AI music platforms grant you a license to use the output in your own content, but the copyright status is still being litigated. The US Copyright Office has said that ai generated works aren't copyrightable without human authorship. So if you want to license the track, you'd need to have enough human creative input — like selecting, arranging, or modifying the output — to claim authorship. Right now, that's a gray area. Luna: So the safest path is still commissioning a human producer and getting a written assignment of rights. Lucas: Yeah, that's the cleanest. And you want the agreement to explicitly say 'work made for hire' if possible, which vests all rights in you from the start. Luna: Let's talk about the demand side. Why would a brand pay for a creator's background music instead of just using a stock track? Lucas: A few reasons. First, the music is already associated with a specific aesthetic or audience. Mia's lo-fi beat was tied to her morning routine content — calm, relatable, aspirational. The athleisure brand wanted to borrow that vibe for their ads. Second, stock music can feel generic. A track that's been used by hundreds of other brands doesn't create a distinct brand identity. And third, licensing from a creator can be cheaper than commissioning original music from a composer or agency. Luna: And it comes with a built-in audience. If the brand uses the same track, fans of the creator might recognize it and feel a connection. Lucas: Right. That's the 'halo effect.' The brand gets organic association with the creator's community. Some brands even tag the creator when they use the track, which drives more visibility for both. Luna: So what's the typical price range for a non-exclusive license of a 30-second track? Lucas: It varies wildly. I've seen as low as $200 for a basic social media license from a micro-creator, up to $10,000 or more for a track from a creator with millions of followers. The factors are: the creator's reach, the track's popularity — how many views on the original video — and the scope of the license. A national TV ad campaign costs more than a one-week Instagram story. Luna: How do creators track usage? If a brand licenses a track, how do you know they're not using it beyond the agreed scope? Lucas: That's the hard part. Some creators rely on trust and periodic checks. Others use services like Audible Magic or BMAT that can detect audio fingerprints across platforms. But those can be expensive for individual creators. A simpler approach is to require the brand to submit a usage report quarterly. You can include that as a clause in the license. Luna: And if they breach, you can terminate the license and potentially sue for damages. But that's a heavy step for a small creator. Lucas: Yeah, the legal cost can outweigh the license fee. That's why many creators choose to work with a licensing aggregator — a platform that handles collection and enforcement for a cut. There are a few emerging ones focused on creator music. Luna: Do you see this becoming a significant revenue stream for creators, or is it more of a niche opportunity? Lucas: I think it's growing. As more brands look for authentic, niche audio, and as more creators produce original music for their content, the licensing market will expand. Mia made $15,000 in three months from one track. If a creator builds a library of 20 or 30 tracks, that could be a meaningful passive income stream. And because the music doesn't expire, it can generate royalties for years. Luna: There's something really compelling about that. And it's a topic we've been exploring quite a bit on the show — how creators can generate income beyond brand deals and ad revenue. If these marketing conversations have sparked something you've actually used in your own work, or if you just find value in the show staying independent and ad-free, listener support is what makes that possible. There's a link in the show notes — buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. No pressure, just if it feels right. Lucas: Yeah, it really helps keep the podcast sustainable. And speaking of sustainable income — let's talk about the long-term potential. If you create music that becomes associated with a certain genre or mood, you can license it repeatedly. Mia's track is now being used by three different brands in non-competing industries: athleisure, a wellness app, and a coffee subscription box. Luna: That's a smart approach — keeping the licenses non-exclusive and targeting different verticals. So she's essentially built a small asset that pays out regularly. Lucas: Exactly. And the best part is, the cost of creating that asset was minimal. She made the beat herself in about two hours using a digital audio workstation. Her only upfront cost was time. Luna: Are there any creators who are doing this at scale? Lucas: I've seen a few. One creator I follow — she's a musician who also makes TikTok content — has a library of about 50 original tracks she licenses through her website. She charges a flat fee of $500 for a one-year social media license, and she sells about 10 to 15 licenses per month. That's $60,000 to $90,000 a year from music licensing alone. And she still does brand deals and sells her own merch. Luna: That's a solid side business. And she's not even a huge creator — she has around 300,000 followers. Lucas: Right. The follower count matters less than the quality of the music and the niche appeal. A track that sounds great and fits a specific aesthetic will find buyers regardless of the creator's audience size. Luna: What about the discovery piece? How do brands find these tracks? Lucas: Some creators list their tracks on marketplaces like AudioJungle or Pond5. Others promote them on their own social media — a quick clip saying 'this beat is available for license.' And some build relationships with brand marketing teams directly. Once you've done one deal, word spreads. Luna: It sounds like the biggest hurdle is just getting started — creating that first original track and putting it out there. Lucas: Exactly. And that's the advice I'd give to any creator listening: if you make original music for your content, don't just leave it sitting in your video. Register it, package it, and put a license page on your website. You might be surprised who wants to pay for it. Luna: I think this is one of those opportunities that's easy to overlook because it feels like 'just background music.' But as we've seen, there's real money in it. Lucas: Yeah, and it's a good reminder that every piece of content you create has potential value beyond its primary use. The trick is recognizing which assets you can package and sell separately. Luna: And as the creator economy matures, we're going to see more of these secondary revenue streams become standard. Music licensing is just one example. Lucas: Absolutely. And we'll keep tracking the trends. That's it for today — thanks for listening, and we'll catch you next time.