[Podcast] Aggressive Ambition: Dae Bogan’s Journey to The MLC — Gig Gab 491
Dae Bogan from The MLC breaks down music royalties with Dave Hamilton on this week’s Gig Gab. From the ancient days of piano rolls to the tangled web of modern streaming, you’ll learn how mechanical royalties differ from performance rights and why most artists are leaving money on the table. The MLC—born from the Music Modernization Act of 2018—isn’t just another acronym; it’s the missing piece of the puzzle, and Dae’s been there since before the beginning, shaping the system from the inside out.
But this episode goes beyond the mechanics. Dae shares his raw, unfiltered story, from homelessness at 18 to building multiple startups and becoming a sought-after voice in music licensing. He didn’t just climb the ladder: he built it, all while staying true to his mission. You’ll hear how empathy, grit, and yes, aggressive ambition became his tools for success. Tune in, learn how not to make the mistake nearly every artist makes, and remember: Always Be Performing.
Share this:
- Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
- Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
- Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
- Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
- Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
- Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
- Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
- More
Happy New Year Songwriters! You’ve Got New Royalties
Happy New Year Songwriters & Music Publishers!
Take note of the new mechanical royalty rates that are now in effect for the use of your songs in the United States:
As of January 1, 2023, royalty rates are as follows:
• Physical / Permeant Download: 12¢ per minute or 2.31¢ per minute or fraction thereof, whichever amount is greater
• Interactive Streaming / Limited Downloads / Locker Services / Other Digital Deliveries: 15.1% of Service Revenue or Total Content Cost Prong Calculation, whichever amount is greater by offering.
As a reminder, if you own the publishing in your songs, you may be eligible to join The Mechanical Licensing Collective to get paid directly 100% of your digital audio mechanical royalties. This is a separate royalty stream, which your PRO (ASCAP / BMI / SESAC) does not collect or pay out. You earn two songwriter royalties when your songs are streamed on Spotify, Apple Music, Tidal, and other digital music services. You earn a performance royalty (ASCAP, BMI, SESAC) and a mechanical royalty (The MLC).
Learn more about The MLC at http://www.themlc.com and join for free today!
About The MLC in 60 Seconds:
Share this:
- Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
- Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
- Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
- Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
- Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
- Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
- Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
- More
Understanding the New United States’ Mechanical Royalty Rates
🚨Attention Music Creators & Indie Music Publishers🚨
Understand the New United States’ Mechanical Royalty 💸 Rates
📱Streaming: 15.1% of DSP revenue
💿Physical: 12 cents per media (e.g. CD, Vinyl)
🎧Downloads: 12 cents per download
Previously, streaming was 10.5% of DSP revenue and physical media and downloads were 9.1 cents.
Looking ahead to 2023, songwriters will see a 32%-44% increase in mechanical royalty income.
It is more important than ever before to make sure that your songs are registered at The Mechanical Licensing Collective.
Check out this explainer video that I helped to create on how song metadata influences your money:
https://youtu.be/BprSCHUAIcw
(Side Note: Before you sign a recording contract, understand how a “controlled composition clause” may reduce your income as a songwriter and how your obligation to pay collaborators the full statutory royalty rates, while you’re being paid less than the full statutory rate, will impact your overall net income as an artist.)
Share this:
- Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
- Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
- Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
- Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
- Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
- Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
- Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
- More
[Video] Symphonic Distribution x The MLC Live Q&A with Dae Bogan

Did you know that there is over 424 million in unmatched royalties that The MLC is looking to pay out? Join Randall Foster & Dae Bogan as they dive deep into the world of publishing.
Watch: https://youtu.be/EhxljeejSqI
Share this:
- Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
- Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
- Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
- Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
- Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
- Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
- Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
- More
[Video] Artist Managers Connect presents AMA About The Mechanical Licensing Collective with Dae Bogan

Is the blanket license royalty rate determined after the majors have negotiated their license with the DSPs?
Does registration with the MLC supersede registrations with HFA and MRI?
If a song was previously licensed under the voluntary license, does it now have a secondary revenue to coming from the blanket license, or do you have to choose one path over the other?
Will the MLC establish reciprocal mechanical collections with foreign mechanical CMOs such as MCPS and AMCOS?
Watch me answer these questions and many more from artist managers in my “Ask Me Anything About The Mechanical Licensing Collective”
Watch: https://youtu.be/Kz43LyYXMUI
Share this:
- Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
- Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
- Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
- Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
- Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
- Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
- Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
- More
[Video] Dae Bogan In Conversation With Damien Ritter of Music Entrepreneurship Club on BeatStars Live

Watch the recording of the conversation.
Damien Ritter interviews Dae Bogan on The Mechanical Licensing Collective for Music Entrepreneurship Club on BeatStars Live.
Share this:
- Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
- Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
- Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
- Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
- Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
- Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
- Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
- More
[Video] Songtrust Presents ‘Let’s Talk Music Publishing: The Mechanical Licensing Collective (The MLC)’ With Dae Bogan

Watch the recording of Songtrust’s webinar.
Description: With the beginning of the new year, as the initiation of The Mechanical Licensing Collective (The MLC) begins, songwriters have a lot of questions about how this will affect them in 2021 and beyond. Join the Songtrust team, along with special guest Dae Bogan, Head of Third Party Partnerships at The MLC, to discuss everything you need to know about The MLC and their relationship to Songtrust.

Share this:
- Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
- Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
- Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
- Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
- Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
- Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
- Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
- More
I Was Interviewed By The Congressional Budget Office Regarding The Music Modernization Act, And Now I’m Even More Concerned For DIY Musicians

I just spent the last hour giving a copyright law and music publishing crash course to a Principal Analyst at the Congressional Budget Office who’s tasked with determining the economic impact of the revised Music Modernization Act (which, by the way, now includes the Musical Works Modernization Act (which is an update to the originally proposed MMA, affecting songwriters and publishers), AMP Act (affecting producers and engineers) and CLASSICS Act (affecting recording artists of Pre-1972 records)) on states, DSPs and music creators.
He emailed me yesterday and asked to speak with me about the magnitude of the unclaimed royalties market, although we ended up discussing much more than that. Apparently he had discovered a presentation that I gave at the Music Industry Research Association’s MIRA Conference last year titled “The State of Unclaimed Royalties and Music Licenses in the United States.”

Email from a Principal Analyst at the Congressional Budget Office
At the top of the one hour call he began by stating that he’s had to learn copyright and music publishing in 2 days (2 days!!!). The guy who’s going to contribute to a recommendation to Congress that will impact whether or not 3 different bills will be enacted and change our copyright law has spent only 2 days learning about the complex web of regulations and customs that govern an entire industry and its millions of constituents. I guess this is how legislation is vetted; economically.
The good news is he had a lot of great questions and had did a significant amount of research prior to our call. To be fair, I meet plenty of music industry professionals who have (or at least demonstrate) less knowledge of what’s going on in the world of music rights administration and music publishing than this gentleman; and they’ve spent years in the industry! It is refreshing to know that the government does inquiry with non-lobbyist from time to time when considering the impact of proposed legislation.
At any rate, he was open to hearing my advocacy on behalf of music creators (specifically songwriters, music producers, and recording artists of Pre-1972 records) as well as my substantiated opposition to some features of the revised MMA (generally those features that would disproportionately benefit music licensees (primarily, DSPs) and major publishers while leaving DIY music creators to fend for themselves).
[This paragraph was omitted on 4/20/2018 as a result of a clarification that I received for Title 3 of the MMA]
Another issue I have is with the ownership of the unclaimed mechanical royalties fund(s). The Musical Works Modernization Act (Title 1 of the MMA) would, for the first time, codify the existence of a mechanical royalties black box in the United States. The current US Copyright Act does not give copyright owners a right to earn or collect mechanical royalties if their musical works are not registered with the US Copyright Office.
After the NOI has been filed, it is then the copyright owner’s responsibility to become aware of and locate the NOI, and then take action in order to receive mechanical royalties. The law states, “To be entitled to receive royalties under a compulsory license, the copyright owner must be identified in the registration or other public records of the Copyright Office.” (17 USC 115(c)(1))The law also makes it clear that the licensee is not required to pay mechanical royalties until after the copyright owner has been identified. “The owner is entitled to royalties for phonorecords made and distributed after being so identified…” (17 USC 115(c)(1)) What’s worse, the law does not require the licensee to pay retroactively for mechanical royalties earned before the copyright owner is identified. “…but is not entitled to recover for any phonorecords previously made and distributed.” (17 USC 115(c)(1))
However, intermediaries (e.g. Harry Fox Agency, Music Reports, Loudr) that process NOIs (Notice of Intent to Obtain a Compulsory Mechanical License) on behalf of their DSP clients do encourage their clients to set aside unattributed mechanical royalties into an escrow account (the so-called “black box”). The royalties sit there until the copyright owner raises his/her/their hand to collect the earnings or until the entity decides to disburse or absorb the uncollected funds.
Generally, this is a “good faith” policy.
Now, since the MMA will codify the black box as a matter of law, this private sector matter will become a government matter. The question, then, is will federal government or state governments have the right to maintain the unclaimed royalties black box?
Currently, unclaimed property laws enable states to receive and hold unclaimed property (such as money) when the property owner can not be reached. For example, California’s Unclaimed Property Law requires corporations, businesses, associations, financial institutions, and insurance companies (referred to as “Holders”) to annually report and deliver property to the California State Controller’s Office after there has been no activity on the account or contact with the owner for a period of time specified in the law – generally (3) three years or more. I’ve had a few refunds from services that I used and cancelled when I moved from one place to another. I did not provide the service with a forwarding address, so my refund became unclaimed property and ended up with the California State Controller. By searching the CSC’s database, I was able to find and then claim the property (pictured below).
If your property goes unclaimed too long (each state has their own statute of limitations), the state has the right to liquidate the property (e.g. sale an unclaimed vehicle) and absorb proceeds as miscellaneous revenue to the state’s budget [lawyers, correct me in the comments if I’m wrong].
Because states unintentionally (benefit of the doubt) benefits from unclaimed property, I could see states with significant music industries (e.g. California (Los Angeles), New York (Greater New York City), Tennessee (Nashville), Georgia (Atlanta)) suing the federal government or the Mechanical Licensing Collective (the entity that would be granted under the MMA to administer a new blanket licensing system along with a centralized database of musical and sound recording copyrights to match works with usage reports submitted by digital services) over the right to collect unclaimed royalties, especially if the black box is hundreds of millions of dollars (which I believe it is).
There are many other issues that I have with the MMA such as the proposed formation, structure (especially the imbalance of representation on its board where there would be 10 publishers and only 4 songwriters (why not 7/7?)), and governance of the MLC and similar unclaimed royalties issues related to the CLASSICS Act; among other issues. I’d be happy to discuss, but this post is already yuge!
In a word, I am all here for improving royalty rates, ensuring the fair treatment of music copyrights and moving towards a more equitable representation of music creators. However, the MMA is not quite there yet and passing it as-is, with all of its ambiguity, would be a shame. I don’t know if the music industry will have another shot to make this kind of update to the Copyright Act in the next 20 plus years (the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 was the last significant update).
We should probably get it right — now.
Share this:
- Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
- Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
- Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
- Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
- Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
- Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
- Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
- More
How To Apply For A Harry Fox Agency Online Account As A DIY Musician – A Step By Step Guide.

Ever since I wrote the article “How To Get A Facebook, Instagram and Oculus Direct License For DIY Musicians & Indie Publishers” for the TuneRegistry blog, musicians who own their publishing have flooded my inbox with questions regarding the Harry Fox Agency Online Account application process.
The Harry Fox Agency represents the reproduction rights in songs for thousands of publishers in the United States and issues millions of direct and complusory mechanical licenses to music users on behalf of its HFA affiliate publisher members. In addition, its Rumblefish division performs an array of licensing and administrative (e.g. royalty accounting) responsibilities for dozens of digital service providers, start-up music apps/websites, and other digital music clients. In a word, HFA issues licenses, collects royalties, and make payments to rights-holders to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars annually.
An HFA Online Account enables publishing rights-holders who are not eligible to become an HFA affiliate (e.g. DIY musicians) to still receive and enter into some direct licenses for the use of their songs in the products and services of HFA/Rumblefish clients. This includes powerhouses like Spotify, Facebook/Instagram and LyricFind, among many others. Once you’ve entered into a license, you must give HFA a list of your songs with proper metadata. You can remit your catalog of license-ready songs to HFA, and other music rights organizations and rights clearance houses, via directly from within your TuneRegistry account.
Admitingly, I did not go into much detail in the Facebook license blog in regards to how to apply for an HFA Online Account (although, I did include the HFA client services email for additional questions). Having reviewed the application form, I can see how a DIY musician could become confused. The form was designed for publishers and administrators, so a DIY musician who wears the hat as his/her own music publisher may get easily confused.
Download my free ebook, The DIY Musician’s Starter Guide To Being Your Own Label & Publisher here.
To aid in providing clarity to DIY musicians, I have written instructions for each question/field on the application form in the order as it appears. This should clarify the questions that I often receive regarding the application form.
[Note: In writing this article, I sought feedback from John Raso, VP of Client Services at Harry Fox Agency, who verified and approved my field instructions/comments and added his own notes as needed. Where applicable, I have included additional notes from John below.]
Form completion instructions for an HFA Online Account publisher application for DIY musicians who own and control their publishing and do not have a publishing deal or an applicable publishing administration deal:
1. Publisher Name: If you have a publisher or have hired a publishing administrator, stop here. Your publisher should be handling licensing with HFA. You can contact your publishing representative for clarification. If you do not have a publisher, then enter your publishing entity name as used with ASCAP, BMI, or SESAC. If you have not created a publishing company and joined ASCAP, BMI, or SESAC enter your full legal name.
2. HFA Account P#: Skip, unless you’ve received correspondence from HFA with an HFA Account P#.
3. Administrator Title: Enter “Self” if you are representing yourself. Enter the title of your representative if you’re giving them authority to oversee your HFA Online Account (e.g “Manager”, “Attorney”).
4. Administrator Name: Enter your full legal name if you are representing yourself or enter the full name of your authorized representative who will be overseeing your HFA Online Account. This is just who should be contacted aout your catalog.
5. Administrator Mailing Address: Enter the contact information of the individual identified in #4. Where should HFA mail things to?
6. Administrator Settings: This is where much of the confusion arises. Here are some scenarios:
- If you are applying as an individual self-published songwriter with no publishing entity, then select “Individual/Sole proprietor”, enter your tax ID (SSN or ITIN), and enter the name that should appear on tax documents (generally, your legal name).
- If you are applying as an individual self-published songwriter who has hired a publishing administrator, then you should not complete this application in the first place. Contact your publishing administrator.
- If you are applying as an individual self-published songwriter who has setup a business entity for the purpose of administering your own publishing with ASCAP, BMI, or SESAC and you have input this publishing entity in #1, then select the business entity structure that you have setup to form your company. For example, if your entity is a Limited Liability Company, then select “Limited Liability Company”. If it is a DBA, then select “Individual/Sole proprietor.” Enter the tax ID for the entity (this may be your personal SSN/ITIN if you are a sole proprietor or it may be your EIN if you’ve applied for one with the IRS for your LLC, Corporation, or Partnership). Enter the name on tax return that matches the entity type that you’ve selected.
- Note from John Raso, VP of Client Services at HFA: “We run the tax ID and payee name provided (“Name on Tax Return”) against the IRS database. If it doesn’t match, we cannot pay this person (or we will get fined). We hold any royalties until we get a proper name/tax ID match (we reach out several times a year to people we are holding royalties for this reason).“
For additional questions or to check on the status of an HFA application, contact clientservices@harryfox.com.
Was this article helpful? I am considering writing more like it for other music rights organizations’ application processes. Let me know in the comments.
Share this:
- Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
- Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
- Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
- Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
- Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
- Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
- Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
- More
Google To Enable DIY Musicians To Capture Their Mechanical Royalties

Today, I’m happy to say that after weeks of discussions, Google has come onboard to
Royalty Claim to make it possible for DIY music creators to get DIRECT LICENSING DEALS with Google Play Music and YouTube.Read more in Royalty Claim’s Facebook post.
Share this:
- Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
- Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
- Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
- Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
- Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
- Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
- Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
- More
Search Blog
VIEW CATEGORIES
Archives
- November 2025
- October 2025
- August 2025
- July 2025
- June 2025
- May 2025
- April 2025
- March 2025
- February 2025
- December 2024
- August 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- November 2023
- May 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- October 2022
- September 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- September 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- August 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- September 2012
- August 2012






