BS: Found on U.K folk newsgroup.

Subject: RE: BS: Found on U.K folk newsgroup.
From: GUEST,Sooz(at work)
Date: 14 Feb 03 - 08:17 AM

Festival Organisers now get a whole wad of forms from PRS and have to record details of every piece of music which is performed. They then do the sums and bill us accordingly. Hopefully this means that the songwriters will start to see more cheques landing on the doormat. The forms for our small festival took me several hours to complete - I hate to think how long they take the organisers of large festivals.

Subject: RE: BS: Found on U.K folk newsgroup.
From: Dave Bryant
Date: 13 Feb 03 - 09:59 AM

I seem to remember that when the ESDSS looked into the way that PRS returns were calculated they found that only the two largest venue classes were taken into account. The returns from the smaller venues were all binned - which effectively ruled out any income for folk performers. The returns from these smaller venues were merely apportioned in line with the large venues. This would mean that you could put a return in for a Harvey Andrews number, but the money would go to Paul McCartney etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Found on U.K folk newsgroup.
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Feb 03 - 05:08 AM

I don't know about the economics of running a pub in England, but it seems to me that the fee is approximately 9 pounds per performance. If the acts are attracting any sort of support, shouldn't this fit into the margins somewhere?

Mind you, I still have an objection to the PRS setup, in that when they're deciding to pay out the money as royalties, I bet they don't include this pub in their survey and give something to the people playing their own material there.

Subject: RE: BS: Found on U.K folk newsgroup.
From: Steve Parkes
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 08:06 AM

There was another thread on this subject a while ago, but I can't find it (the search engine seems to be on the blink again). Harvey Andrews pointed out that he gets royalties from other people's recordings of his songs, but rarely sees anything from the PRS: the big boys get it nearly all. It's certainly unfair to take money from us performers but not to give it to the people whose songs we sing.

Steve

Subject: RE: BS: Found on U.K folk newsgroup.
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 07:28 AM

And let's not forget that if the PRS found it enforceable, a licence is required for any premises playing copyright music where customers can hear it. This includes the radio playing in your local hairdressers!

Nigel

Subject: RE: BS: Found on U.K folk newsgroup.
From: alanabit
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 07:23 AM

I posted on another thread some time ago that one of the factors which has caused live gigs to close down in Germany is the GEMA charges. (These are a bit like the PRS licences in the UK). Many pubs simply can't afford to pay. I shamefacedly admit to having claimed money from the GEMA for live gigs myself. I won't do it any more. We musicians are not entirley blameless and the greed of some of us has contributed to the organised slaughter of live music.

Subject: RE: BS: Found on U.K folk newsgroup.
From: Nemesis
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 04:09 PM

This fits in with the sort of conspiracy theory I've heard that (okay .. it's a conspiracy theory!! Bear with me :) ..

.. that the PRS is lobbying hard to get the License Bill through .. so, that it can clean up all these "unlicensed" venues where their artists' work is being performed without a PRS tariff being charged..

Subject: RE: BS: Found on U.K folk newsgroup.
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 12:58 PM

1. Ban all covers. Play original or trad only. No PRS. Simple. Beware of copyright arrangements of trad material. Duration of copyright life + 70.
2. Make application to Copyright Tribunal to set a fee (procedure in Copyright Act).
3. PRS not a public agency.
4. No automatic right to face accusers. How would you like to complain about the Yakuza running a noisy pub and have your identity leaked?
5. If you're in Nottingham and this pub shuts, go to Bar 7 on Canning Circus - they have live music upstairs (and not commercial crap) too, and till late

Subject: RE: BS: Found on U.K folk newsgroup.
From: mack/misophist
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 12:14 PM

If PRS is a public agency, surely they're required to open their books for inspection. And don't English legal procedures still give one the right to face one's accusers?

Subject: BS: Found on U.K folk newsgroup.
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 09:15 AM

The recent story from Mr Gall, of a pub's PEL charges increasing 500% in
one-fell-swoop - came on the same day as I received a block e-mail from a
well established live music pub venue, The Running Horse in Nottingham.

This week, the Running Horse received a telephone call from The PRS
(Performing Rights Society), announcing that the pub's annual PRS charges
are to rise from £1670.40 to £3298.00 (+ VAT.). No arguments. The reason
being given is that - having been recently reassessed - this venue promotes
and encourages musicians to play - who also write their own original
material as well as playing covers.

As a result, the pub - which struggles to keep going and to keep audiences
coming on narrow margins - may have to close. It's not a folk venue, but a
blues venue presenting electric and acoustic blues from the UK and the USA
(relevant here nevertheless) with tickets from around the 2 quid up to 10
quid (for something special) mark.

If it closes down, there'll be some 360 less live performances, with 360
less opportunities for live acts - many of them local musicians - who'll
earn nothing further from this venue, nor have a place to play. Doubly sad
when in the past year under its new management, it has managed to
re-establish itself with live music after years of being run-down.

Forgetting that the pub also provides an outlet for bands to sell their CD's
to a specialist audience, where will such closures of live venues like this
leave the artistes and bands (or the workers from the PRS) and anyone else
connected with the music biz - when there is no-one and no-where left to
play live?

How does the PRS justify these hiked and hyped charges. How does the PRS
actually distribute the money it collects? No-one seems to know... What
makes me think that the very artistes that the RH presents, will be the last
bods to receive any of the monies collected? Over the years, I've heard
nothing good said by anyone about this organisation.

Isn't it about time that the Michael Jacksons, Paul McCartneys, Elton Johns
Eminems and the many other up and coming billionaires quit being so damned
greedy and put something back into music?

Isn't it also about time we collectively stopped pandering to them and
refused to go on paying the glamour queens who can afford to squander their
'hard earned' millions on mindless trivialities.

Then ...in the same week, the very same venue also had notice from the
Council which put their PEL in question. This was regarding an 'anonymous
complaint' from an alleged neighbour, regarding noise levels. As a result
their late music license has been withdrawn to appease Council officials.

The venue which has had very good relations with all its neighbours
especially over the last year or so, has gone to great lengths to educate
and control patrons and performers to noise levels inside and outside.
Surprised, it has since done further research with all its adjoining
neighbours - all of whom were surprised and also of whom none have
apparently made any such noise complaint.

I wonder how long it will be before the The Running Horse and other venues
like it, are forced to drop live music altogether in favour of perhaps big
screen football, or kareoke and pool tables. So much easier to make money
too.

Who on earth would ever want to run a live music venue in this climate of
attack and of being milked dry? Who said live music was slowly dying? It's
increasingly looking - for one reason or another - that way.

Greed and stupidity!

CR