Royalities - and 'permission to play'

Subject: RE: Royalities - and 'permission to play'
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Feb 11 - 11:11 AM

No you are wrong.   There is a company that hires people to go to bars, funeral homes etc and they are required to pay royalities.   Have you ever wondered why the TVs have no sound on at bars....this is why.   My girl friend use to have to do this - and no they were not happy when she surprised with with a contract and request for fees.

Subject: RE: Royalities - and 'permission to play'
From: LesB
Date: 04 Jan 11 - 12:12 PM

Trouble is it also covers people listening to radio whilst at work (if the public can hear it).
Cheers
Les

Subject: RE: Royalities - and 'permission to play'
From: maple_leaf_boy
Date: 04 Jan 11 - 11:31 AM

Subject: RE: Royalities - and 'permission to play'
From: LesB - PM
Date: 04 Jan 11 - 05:30 AM

In the UK any buisness having a radio or recorded music playing where the general public can hear it, has to pay a licence fee to the PRS (Performing Rights Society)

I was in a class that talked about all of this a few years back, and
to my memory, I think it's the same in Canada and the U.S. Or at least they were trying to enforce it. Customers may be more willing to buy from a certain store because of the music being played there, therefore the artist's work being performed is contributing to the business owner's income.

And it does work, playing the right kind of music to attract paying customers.

Subject: RE: Royalities - and 'permission to play'
From: GUEST,Wesley S
Date: 04 Jan 11 - 08:43 AM

Well Little Hawk m entioned the radio case I was talking about with the Pretenders. The other situation I mentioned was a college marching band on TV playing "Rock and Roll Part 2" by Gary Glitter. I'm curious if any of these schools or sports teams are paying royalties to Glitter and know about his legal troubles.

Subject: RE: Royalities - and 'permission to play'
From: bradfordian
Date: 04 Jan 11 - 06:40 AM

Here's an article from
http://easysonglicensing.com/legal.htm

Do You Need Music Licenses?

Every day we get calls from people who want to use music legally but aren't sure what to do. Some are making CD recordings of songs that other people wrote. Others are making DVDs for their church. Some are performing copyrighted music in public.

Asking permission to use copyrighted music can be complicated because there are several ways to use music and the method for asking permission is different for each. On top of that, each musical work can have multiple owners, making it hard to locate the owner to ask permission.

A number of services exist to help with permission handling. But it's hard if you don't know which service to call for the particular permission you need. If you call the wrong one, it feels like you're getting the runaround. Commonly people ask, "Isn't there one place I can go to get all my licensing taken care of?" You have found that place. While our licensing service itself is limited to mechanical licenses, we will answer your questions and point you in the right direction whatever your needs.

Here's an explanation of where to start if you need help:

Making an audio recording?

Are you recording a composition (song) that someone else wrote? If so, for audio, you need a mechanical license. A mechanical license is permission to record a cover tune of a copyrighted song. The royalty pays the composer of the song. The best place to go for mechanical licensing is easySongLicensing.com. You get personal service, we can license any song in the USA, and we will beat competitors' fees by twenty percent.

PLUS

Are you recording a copyrighted recording, such as pre-recorded tracks? If so you need a master license. A master license is permission to reproduce a copyrighted recording. The royalty pays the artist that recorded the song. Because these licenses are custom-negotiated, you need to contact the recording artist or their record label for master licensing. If you don't know how to contact a record label, you can contact us and we will help.

Making a video recording?

Are you recording a composition (song) that someone else wrote? If so, for video, you need a synchronization license. A synchronization license is permission to record a yourself playing a copyrighted song and use it with video. The royalty pays the composer of the song. Because these licenses are custom-negotiated, you need to contact the composer or their publisher for sync licensing. If you don't know how to contact a publisher, you can contact us and we will help.

PLUS

Are you recording a copyrighted recording, such as pre-recorded tracks? If so you need a master license. A master license is permission to reproduce a copyrighted recording. The royalty pays the artist that recorded the song. Because these licenses are custom-negotiated, you need to contact the recording artist or their record label for master licensing.

Performing or broadcasting publicly?

Are you performing a copyrighted song in public or broadcasting over the radio, internet or television? If so you need a public performance rights license. A public performance rights license is permission to perform or broadcast a copyrighted song publicly. The royalty pays the composer of the song. In the USA, three agencies help composers handle these licenses. Because these licenses are custom-negotiated, you need to contact the public performance rights agency for the composer of the song you want to use. You can find them at ASCAP.com, BMI.com and SESAC.com.

In summary

If you are creating a recording of a song you did not write you WILL need EITHER a mechanical license (if you are making an AUDIO-ONLY creation), OR a synchronization license (if you are making a VIDEO creation). This license pays royalties to the composer of the song.

IN ADDITION to mechanical or synchronization licenses, if you are creating a recording (audio OR video) of someone else's recording you will need a master use license. This license pays royalties to the recording artist that recorded the song.

Remember that royalties must be paid to the composer of the song (if it is not your original), and to the artist who recorded it (if the recording is not your original).

Public performance rights are different. They are used for public performances and broadcasts.

The following are example scenarios and the licenses you will need:

1) You have made a new CD album with 5 original compositions that you wrote and 3 cover songs written by the Beatles. You play all the music with your band.

You will need mechanical licenses for the three Beatles songs to make sure that the publisher gets royalty payments out to the composers to compensate them for writing the songs. You will NOT need master use licenses because you do not need to compensate the artist for their RECORDING. You never used their actual recording, only their composition. You will NOT need synchronization licenses because synchronization licenses pay the songwriter for compositions used in video recordings. This is audio-only.

2) I have made a video for our church that has our church members singing along karaoke style to some Beatles recordings.

You will need synchronization licenses to pay royalties to the songwriter for use of their composition in video. You will also need master use licenses to pay royalties to the recording artists (the Beatles and their studio) for rights to use their audio recording. You will NOT need mechanical licenses because mechanical licenses pay the songwriter for compositions used in audio-only recordings. This is video.

3) I have made a video for our church that has our church members singing along with our praise band as they play Beatles songs from sheet music.

You will need synchronization licenses to pay royalties to the songwriter for use of their composition in video. You will NOT need master use licenses because you are not using anybody else's recording. The recording is your own.   You will NOT need mechanical licenses because mechanical licenses pay the songwriter for compositions used in audio-only recordings. This is video.

Even if you hear the gossip...

I heard it doesn't really matter if you're only making a few copies.
I heard I don't need licensing if I'm not charging for the album.
I heard it's okay to copy for educational purposes.

Make sure to know the truth:

It is illegal to record copyrighted music for distribution without permission from the writer, arranger, or publisher of the written work, regardless of quantity, price, or method of distribution.

Subject: RE: Royalities - and 'permission to play'
From: bradfordian
Date: 04 Jan 11 - 06:17 AM

This article gives a flavour of the situation in the UK
Performing Rights in UK

bradfordian

Subject: RE: Royalities - and 'permission to play'
From: LesB
Date: 04 Jan 11 - 05:30 AM

In the UK any buisness having a radio or recorded music playing where the general public can hear it, has to pay a licence fee to the PRS (Performing Rights Society) who, in principle, distribute royalty payments to artists. There is also another licence required for the playing of recorded material from the Phonographic Reproduction Society, but I am a bit hazy about that.
The PRS are red hot on enforcing this. There was a well known case a few years ago when an inspector went into a branch of a nationwide tyre firm to get a new tyre fitted & the fitters were listening to the radio whilst working. He demanded to see their licence & they looked at him with puzzlement. The PRS then presented the tyre fitting chain with a massive bill, so they told all their branches to remove any radios from the premises.
A similar thing happened in Samual Smiths pubs when new licencing legislation came in regarding live & reconded music. They had all the entertainment systems & TVs removed from all their premises & banned all live music. Resulting in 'no instruments' signs going up at all Sam Smiths pubs at Whitby Folk Week.
That's on top of the £145 per year that we all have to fork out for just having a TV at home!
Cheers
Les

Subject: RE: Royalities - and 'permission to play'
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Jan 11 - 01:29 AM

There is no way that writers get paid every time someone plays their song in public! Not a chance. Who the hell would keep track of it all? You'd have to hire literally millions of people to monitor and report it all and then sort through all the reports, and that's just not feasible. I believe what happens is that samplings are taken on radio and other media outlets of what songs get played during various selected time slots, and from that an approximate estimated total of the number of plays of that song nationwide during say, a month, is calculated, and that determines the royalties.

Can anyone confirm if I'm correct about that?

In the case of the high school marching band, I very much doubt that anyone bothers to catalogue which songs they played last Tuesday and get royalties paid on those.

Subject: RE: Royalities - and 'permission to play'
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 04 Jan 11 - 12:43 AM

I found this on a biography site, and you've got to love it..

"Since Limbaugh's Sacramento days, his show's theme song has been an endless bass-beating loop snipped from a 1984 song by The Pretenders, "My City Was Gone." The song, though, has potent and openly liberal lyrics, written by Chrissie Hynde to protest over-development: "I went back to Ohio / but my pretty countryside / had been paved down the middle / by a government that had no pride." Limbaugh never sought permission to use the music, never paid royalties, and Hynde, living in England, heard only occasionally about her song's hijacking. She had no comment until 1997, when Limbaugh answered a reporter's question about the song by explaining that it was "icing on the cake that it was [written by] an environmentalist, animal rights wacko and was an anti-conservative song. It is anti-development, anti-capitalist, and here I am going to take a liberal song and make fun of [liberals] at the same time." Upon reading that, Hynde had her representatives contact Limbaugh and demand payment. At Hynde's request, Limbaugh's royalty checks for using her song are now made payable to People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA)."

Subject: RE: Royalities - and 'permission to play'
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 03 Jan 11 - 11:29 PM

Ruch Limbaugh used to use The Pretenders' Back to Ohio as his break music, and I know it didn't sit well with Chrissie Hind, but I believe she relented due to the royalties she received.

Subject: RE: Royalities - and 'permission to play'
From: GUEST,Wesley S
Date: 03 Jan 11 - 08:40 PM

Refresh - any answers out there?

Subject: RE: Royalities - and 'permission to play'
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Jan 11 - 10:58 AM

Both of these questions are about situations in the USA.

Subject: RE: Royalities - and 'permission to play'
From: DebC
Date: 03 Jan 11 - 10:49 AM

Hi Wesley-you might want to specify what country you are enquiring about. There are different regs for use in different countries. The US at this time does not have any provisions for performance royalties, whereas the UK and perhaps other countries do. Not sure about Canada.

Broadcast royalties are also subject to specific countries.

Debra Cowan

Subject: Royalities - and 'permission to play'
From: GUEST,Wesley S
Date: 03 Jan 11 - 10:19 AM

I have two semi-related questions:

1 - Doesn't the writer of a song get paid a royality whenever their song is performed in public? Specifically - when a collage marching band plays a rock and roll song on TV during a bowl game - won't the writer of that song end up with some small amount of money in their pocket?

2 - When a radio talk show uses a song on a regular basis to intro their show I would expect the author of the song to receive a royality. But can't the writer stop the usage of their song if they object to the content of the radio show? And if the song is still being used after a number of years can we assume that the writer of the song knows about the arrangment and approves of it's usage?