If you are doing it as work for hire, why should you be asking for residuals? I can understand it if you did the work for a pittance and replaced the normal payment scheme with a percentage of sales. But if I’m that client you just lost my business, I don’t need any ten-percenters eating up my margins. I once shot for a day on a forensic video that won a multimillion-dollar jury award, but didn’t expect to get residual checks for my contribution. Just to get paid my day rate for a day’s work.
I did a deal very like the one you describe just once, early in my independent career. It went badly, because after the initial dub run we counted together, the client stopped reporting how many dubs he was making and selling, so we had no real idea of how much money he’d made without paying us our “cut”. We would have never known, but the dub house guys were friends of ours and tipped us off about the extra runs. It all ended up in small claims court, where we won a Pyhrric victory. I really don’t think you want to repeat any part of my experience.
Do you really want to get into the distribution game with this client, or do you just want to do a production job, get paid in full once, and have it be over? Do the job well, competitively and affordably, and there is no reason he won’t give you repeat business in the future. But if you make yourself look like some kind of leech or extortionist, they’ll just go elsewhere.
Rather than messing with residuals and percentages of sales, you might just want to make the contractual language very clear as to who owns what. For example, client owns finished video, BUT, you owned the licensed music or stock footage in the program, and what you need is for those rights to be respected in any future transactions the client does with that product. How you want this to go is, you make it easier and more pleasant for them to come back to you for repeat business on this work, rather than someone else, because you retain the rights on the elements within the overall production, and no other production company could legally say the same. Bringing the project back to you for updates as single jobs is way better than playing RIAA cop trying to milk one job over years of tiny residuals, I think you’ll agree. You explain to them that those rights are for a certain period of time and then the video is technically no longer legal, unles the rights to those copyrighted elements are renewed or transferred. They can wait until the rights expire and renegotiate, or you can set it all up up-front with an arrangement for permanent clearance, at a markup. It’s about the musicians and artists getting their piece, not you. But you can simplify the matter for the client, so they can just forget about the issue and use the product as they like without legal fears. That’s always a good pitch.
Anyway, that’s my personal opinion.