Answers/Glossary/Master use license

Glossary · Licensing

Master use license

By Boboy Watson·Last verified August 31, 2026·Also called Master license, Master use clearance, Recording license

A master use licence covers the actual recorded track — the take, the file, the master — and it is granted by whoever owns that recording. For a major-label release that is the label. For a self-released independent track it is the artist.

It exists as a separate licence because a sound recording is a separate copyright from the composition. Every use of an existing recording therefore needs two permissions. A television show placing a song needs a sync licence from the publisher and a master use licence from the label. A producer sampling four bars of a record needs composition clearance from the publisher and a master use licence from the recording owner. Getting one and not the other is the single most common way a sample clearance fails.

Fees are entirely negotiable. There is no statutory rate for master use, no compulsory licence, and no obligation on the owner to grant one at any price. A famous master can be refused outright, which is why re-recording a composition is a standard workaround — the composition can be licensed compulsorily under Section 115 for audio release, but the original recording cannot be touched without consent.

For an independent artist who owns their masters, being able to grant a master use licence directly is a commercial asset. Music supervisors prefer one-stop clearance because it removes an entire negotiation from their schedule.

The misunderstanding: believing that owning the song means you can license the recording. If a label owns the master of your own song, you can license the composition and still be unable to authorise the recording.

Two copyrights, two licences — the rule that catches almost everyone. Not legal advice.

Definitions on this site describe the United States system. I am an artist who has been through this, not a lawyer.