The boring details that decide whether you get paid
Royalties are matched by machines comparing text and numbers. When the text does not match, the money does not fail loudly. It simply goes somewhere else, or nowhere, and nothing tells you. This section is unglamorous and it is worth more than most of the rest.
| Identifier | What it identifies | Where it comes from |
|---|---|---|
| ISRC | One specific recording | Your distributor, free. A remix or a new version needs its own |
| UPC or EAN | One release: a single, EP or album | Your distributor, free |
| ISWC | One composition, regardless of recording | Assigned by your PRO after you register the work |
| IPI or CAE | You, as a writer or publisher | Your PRO, on joining. This is the number a split sheet needs |
The mistakes that actually cost money
- Reusing an ISRC across different recordings. A radio edit, a remix and the album version are three recordings and need three codes. Reused codes merge their income and their analytics, and separating them afterwards is painful.
- Spelling your own name differently. "DJ Smith", "Dj Smith" and "DJ Smith" are three artists to a matching system. Pick one exact spelling, including capitalisation and punctuation, and use it everywhere forever.
- Writer credits that do not match the PRO registration. The name on the registration must be the legal name the PRO has for that writer, not their stage name. This is the single most common reason a correctly registered song still does not pay.
- Splits that do not total 100%. Composition and master are two separate hundreds. Each must add up on its own, and each needs to be agreed in writing before anyone has a reason to argue.
- Missing the release date on the registration. Some matching depends on it, and an absent date can leave a work unmatched indefinitely.
A split only exists if it is documented. Every undocumented one is an argument waiting for the song to be worth arguing about, and by then everybody sincerely remembers the version that favours them. It takes five minutes on the day and it is unrecoverable later if somebody stops replying.
You wrote the lyrics. A friend made the beat. A singer improvised the hook that made the song work. Who owns what?
There is no correct answer, and that is why it is worth asking. All three contributed to the composition, so all three have a reasonable claim to a writer's share, and the beat-maker may have a claim on the master as well depending on what was agreed. An even third each is defensible. So is a larger share to whoever wrote the part people actually remember. What is not defensible is deciding afterwards.
The only thing that really matters is that you agree a number while everybody still likes each other, and that somebody writes it down. Two separate percentages: one for the composition, one for the recording.
Nothing here is legal, tax or financial advice. Rates, statutory splits, platform rules and organisation fees all move, and every figure was checked in September 2026 against at least five independent sources. This is written from a United States starting point. If something is wrong, tell us on the forum and it gets fixed.