Heavy Handed PRS

Subject: RE: Heavy Handed PRS
From: GUEST,Tom Bliss
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 11:17 AM

So how would you do it, Stu?

Have every single play, of every single piece of music, everywhere in the country, be logged and recorded, then calculated and paid out?

Just stop and think about it for one moment. Imagine the man hours - it couldn't possibly be done.

Remember, the licence rates are not set by PRS, but by in independent body. They are fair and tested in law.

We do have an issue about 'accidental/incidental' collection of non-member copyright material and public domain material in folk clubs and sessions, but we're working on that - and it's a tiny teeny weeny fraction of the money collected on copyright works, so I for one at least understand why it's not PRS's top priority.

The only solutions are

a) opt-outs for majority non-member/pd events like folk clubs and sessions (working on it), or

b) requiring every song and tune always to be logged and submitted (would you prefer that)? here - borrow my pen.

Most folk-style writers like me don't actually want money from sessions and clubs (certainly not free-entry ones) - but people also sing and play material by people who jolly well do - and they have the power of the law on their side.

Personally I think less than a quid per person (or a few pence if it's a big gathering) to cover the legalities while we try to come up with something better, plus many thousands paid out in recognition of the flaws in the system is anything but disingenuous.

How the money is shared out among members is purely an internal matter. PRS is owned and run by it's members, and the small players like me may get the least money, but numerically we are in a majority. Some of us bother to agitate for improvements, some don't - but the division is down to us, not the public or the government.

Subject: RE: Heavy Handed PRS
From: GUEST,Tom Bliss
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 11:22 AM

BTW: The ringtone thing is because PRS can't marry up every penny they collect to individual works (see above). The balance is divided on a pro-rate basis. So it's not someone else's money - it's ours, just from a slop pot that it's impossible to separate out.

Subject: RE: Heavy Handed PRS
From: s&r
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 11:53 AM

Tom

Giving away money that shouldn't have been charged isn't balancing books.

How would I do it?

Dunno really. Not how it's done that's for sure.

I think I'd start by ignoring places where music is not a significant part of the earning potential of the business eg Kwik Fit - no-one would have a tyre changed at KF because the mechanic had a particular radio program on.

I would cancel the ruling that forced our local festival to tell licensees that for the period of the festival the PRS licence that they pay should be voided, because we were to be charged 3% of turnover even though we used PRS licensed premises.

I'd ignore sessions where the organisers could and were willing to declare that atl least (say) 90% of tunes were PD.

I'd charge for profit making performances of course, and pay the copyright owners.

I'd look for reasonable negotiation instead of legal threats.

I don't know this but I suspect that the revenue collectors are of the same ilk as the cold calling salesmen we all love. I'd ban cold calls and send polite letters if necessary.

But it's all hypothetical isn't it?

Stu

Subject: RE: Heavy Handed PRS
From: Howard Jones
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 01:19 PM

Tom is right, it would be totally impractical to submit detailed returns for every session. Nevertheless, the current charge for a live music session for less than 100 people with not admission charge is now £8.00. PRS deducts 20% for admin costs which leaves £6.40 for distribution. Based on the sessions I attend, at least 2/3rds of the material should properly attributable to "trad". Of the remainder, about half is unattributable because of lack of information. That leaves about a quid to be randomly apportioned between PRS members, which may or may not include those whose music was actually performed.

On this basis PRS is charging roughly 8 times what they should. The people who have to pay this are not the ones promoting the music, and may see little commercial benefit. Whilst I agree that the musicians should be prepared to contribute, by the time the landlord has fallen out with the PRS the damage is done.

The fact is that PRS is getting itself a reputation for bullying behaviour and for actually damaging live music. It is hardly surprising that it meets with a hostile reception, even from those who support its objectives.

Subject: RE: Heavy Handed PRS
From: GUEST,Tom Bliss
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 02:10 PM

Howard, you should write to PRS in those terms - as I have done.