In other words, income-producing rights are almost never transferred. This situation is in contrast to the other arts where, for instance, a person commissioning a portrait gets a painting which they own and which their heirs may sell at a later date. In legal terms, there is little or no exchange of goods or services in a typical music commission. Historically, rights evolved so that composers could benefit from the fruits of their labor and likewise so that publishers could benefit from undertaking to print and distribute the printed music. Today, however, publishers derive very little income from distribution.
Most money lies in performance rights and the other rights that the publisher negotiates.
For this reason composers have increasingly taken on the responsibility of printing and distributing their music themselves in order to control the other rights to their pieces and to retain the publishers share of the collected performance royalties. Rights have always been defined to accommodate the various media in which music may be presented, and they are relevant to the income your compositions may generate and to the conditions under which your compositions may be performed. Thanks to Richard Brooks for reviewing and amplifying the section on mechanical and grand rights. Other points of view, corrections or observations are welcome and will be printed in future volumes of the Newsletter.