Jump to content
Light-O-Rama Forums

Music Copyright laws???


NTJP

Recommended Posts

48 minutes ago, dibblejr said:

Why would this even be in open discussion?

JR

Because even if it's a non-issue, knowing the actual facts and truth is an important concept.  

To address the "car windows down" comment, there is a difference in licensing between personal use and public performance.  That's why you don't owe a license fee for playing your CD in your car each time (technically you paid a license fee when you bought the CD), but a radio station does.    The same concept applies to TV and movies; ask a bar owner sometime about fees paid to display TV content in a bar. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • LOR Staff

    8

  • lightingnewb

    8

  • dibblejr

    7

  • jtomason

    4

Anyone who feels there is a waste of time discussing something is asked to please move to another thread.  This goes for ALL discussions, not just this one.  Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jtomason said:

Because even if it's a non-issue, knowing the actual facts and truth is an important concept.  

To address the "car windows down" comment, there is a difference in licensing between personal use and public performance.  That's why you don't owe a license fee for playing your CD in your car each time (technically you paid a license fee when you bought the CD), but a radio station does.    The same concept applies to TV and movies; ask a bar owner sometime about fees paid to display TV content in a bar. 

You ever heard those audio systems at the car shows, same concept. I was just throwing that in there my opinion is there would be some serious argument if a lawyer ever turned to the jury and asked "have you ever hosted a BBQ or Christmas party and played holiday music for your guests to hear, enjoy and dance to"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, ignorance of the law or lack of enforcement of the law doesn't make it legal :-)  But that's a whole other topic. :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, DevMike said:

Its 1978, and you are producing what will become a TV show which will become a hit and where music is essential to the plots:  "WKRP in Cincinnati".  Each song you play in that show, you negotiate a Sync license for.  Its the 1970's, a simpler time.  A time before DVD or even main stream VHS.  You are on a budget and are not thinking about future sales.  When you negotiate you SYNC licenses, nearly all of them are for use on broadcast TV ONLY, and then ONLY for a limited number of years.  A loophole in the then laws allow you to pay reduced rates because this is shot on tape, not film (tape was considered inferior and not long-lasting, unlike film)  No other medium, and hard set expiration date.  After all there is NO money in those other mediums.

The show goes into syndication and becomes a HUGE hit.  Licenses are still in place.  All is good with the world.  The licenses expire.  Everyone stops watching -- all the music is gone.

 

Yep.  Some episodes of Mystery Science Theater 3000 that were on broadcast TV are not available on VHS/DVD because they could not secure rights to the original movies for those mediums. 

Photographers too license their work based on where and how it will be used.   National ad campaign vs. local event, one-time use versus perpetual rights, all affect the price.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the point was brought up about displays being on the radar of RIAA/etc in one of the posts I hid.  The poster of that did have a good point (the message was hidden for how it was said, not what was said, so I bring that part back out into the light).

Are decorators, even ones who solicit donations for themselves, on the radar of RIAA?  Probably not.  Should you worry?  No, probably not.  Previous discussions have pretty much documented that fact.  Even I said a few days ago:

On 12/31/2016 at 5:01 PM, DevMike said:

BUT, and here is the key, the first Xmas display they wack will IMMEDIATELY get the 'War on Christmas' folks out in full force.  The ensuing bad press will paint them in such a negative light that it is better for them to just look the other way

However, that does not mean that just because they are looking the other way NOW means they will continue to look the other way in the future.

I have personally dealt with these people in a commercial setting.  These are the same people who forced us (that would be me and my previous partners NOT LOR) to hire a lawyer to prove we were 100% legal.  Sending them copies of licensing agreements, our play logs, and our proof of payments to ASCAP, BMI and SoundExchange was NOT ENOUGH.  We had (on our best months) around 1,500 listener hours per month (if you do the math, that means we averaged about two and a quarter listeners per day.  Tiny?  We were NON EXISTANT.  We ran NO ads and made NO money on the stream.

We STILL had to hire a lawyer to threaten them with a counter suit before they (begrudgingly) gave up.  That is not conjecture.  It is not hearsay.  To try to understand the RIAA and/or licensing is to try to understand string theory and not be Steven Hawking.  Here is another story (which is also fact, not conjecture):

The RIAA are the people that are supposed to be protecting artists.  An artist and composer who is/was active in Xmas displays was at an amusement park when she heard one of her compositions.  Per the law. and much RIAA foot stomping, she should be compensated for that (side bar:  I do not know if it was something that needed a sync license or not.  But even if it did not, she was the composer and should have been paid a royalty each time that song was played).  She was not.  So she goes (rightfully) to the RIAA -  After all, they are the ones that are SUPPOSED to represent her.  They did nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, dibblejr said:

You ever heard those audio systems at the car shows, same concept.

Are you a promoter of shows or a producer of expositions/etc?  Because what you are implying is that you know for 100% certain that those events are unlicensed.  Unfortunately, you would be wrong.  If the promoter of the expo didn't secure them, then the venue secured public performance rights from ASCAP/BMI/SESAC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DevMike said:

Are you a promoter of shows or a producer of expositions/etc?  Because what you are implying is that you know for 100% certain that those events are unlicensed.  Unfortunately, you would be wrong.  If the promoter of the expo didn't secure them, then the venue secured public performance rights from ASCAP/BMI/SESAC.

No to both. (I hosted and promoted a bunch of them while in the Army) and I guess we had different rules we had to follow, Certainly never had any problems at my duty stations for 25 years. No one ever asked, and I guess I nor any of my Commanders ever thought about playing music over various sound systems to allow our soldiers and family members a place to get together and have a good time would be an issue since many believe, we bought the music and we could do anything other than make a profit with it.

After reading your comment a few days ago I realized that yes, I was blind to those rules/ laws. Even at 52 its never to late to learn.

With that being said I politely left the conversation after the other comment not because I believe in censorship, lord knows I gave almost 26 years of my life to defend our Constitution but because I was simply done expressing my opinion since I had stated it a few days ago.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just as a summary to anyone reading this, please correct me if I'm wrong:

1. LOR Displays and any residential display is subject to licensing laws when an FM transmitter is involved, even if we legally own the music. (i.e an MP3 file bought off of some music service [Google Play, iTunes, Amazon Music...]

2. Once money, even donations, is a part of the picture, the display is subject to licensing laws.

3. Sync Licenses are the potentially best route for noncommercial displays... but must pay a license fee per each song(?) to any of the conglomerates that represent the artists/composers.

4. Working with indie singers/groups that write their own songs would be best, you can make much for reasonable offers (and longer-lasting ones) with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, lightingnewb said:

Just as a summary to anyone reading this, please correct me if I'm wrong:

1. LOR Displays and any residential display is subject to licensing laws when an FM transmitter is involved, even if we legally own the music. (i.e an MP3 file bought off of some music service [Google Play, iTunes, Amazon Music...]

2. Once money, even donations, is a part of the picture, the display is subject to licensing laws.

3. Sync Licenses are the potentially best route for noncommercial displays... but must pay a license fee per each song(?) to any of the conglomerates that represent the artists/composers.

4. Working with indie singers/groups that write their own songs would be best, you can make much for reasonable offers (and longer-lasting ones) with them.

1 - The FM transmitter actually has nothing to do with it.  Broadcast is used in the loosest sense as in 'you are playing it and others can hear it', regardless of medium.  

2 - Legally speaking - even if you do NOT accept donations you are still subject to licensing laws.  Those who do accept donations can expect a harder time in court, should they be targeted by the RIAA.  

3 - Sync licenses (as I read the law) would be required in ALL cases.  You are not just playing the work for the enjoyment of others, you are incorporating that work into and making it integral to another work.

4 - Working with any artist (owner of the copyright) is preferable to trying to license using the organizations.  Good luck doing that however.

More importantly:

5 - Has it happened?  Will it happen?  Do I need to worry about it?  Should any of this discourage you?

We have stories of folks who have contacted the appropriate parties and have someone on record saying that it won't be a problem.   However we also have to question if the person contacted had the legal authority to make that claim.  Remember too that if that report were challenged, even if the decorator WON, unless you were specifically named in that you are not a party to that agreement.

No one as of yet has been targeted, as far as I know.  

IMHO (and the opinion of others before me), unless you are FOR PROFIT you don't need to loose any sleep over any of this.  The RIAA has proven time and time again that they are stupid, but I don't think they would be THAT stupid as to go after an Xmas display.  Imagine the blow back once it got on national TV that the RIAA has sued someone for their Xmas display, something designed to spread joy.  

Most problems with a private display occur because a neighbor is angry.  As of right now, I know of only 2 people who have had legal issues outside of the common ones (nuisance, and code violations).  Both of them were visited by the 'Men in Black' (FCC) for having a FM transmitter that was over the legal limit.  None from the RIAA, and I doubt that even if you were reported by the Grinchy neighbor they would do anything.

---

Side bar:  "Gee Mike, why does it appear that you argue that the laws DO apply, yet think the organization tasked to monitor compliance is a bunch of jerks?"

I have a love hate relationship when it comes to the RIAA.  Yes, I firmly believe that an artist should be compensated for their work.  I rely on copyrights to ensure that I am paid for what I do.  However IMHO organizations like the RIAA are nothing but a protection racket - they force artists to be a part of their organization under the auspices of ensuring the artist gets what is due to him.  HOWEVER on the other hand, they have created some of the worst legislation on record when it comes to 'the little guy'.  They make it nearly impossible for those who want to be legal to actually BE legal.  

 

Disclaimer:  

None of this should be relied upon as legal advice.  It is option only.   Laws may have changed.  I am not a lawyer.  

LOR's official stance is that we offer no advice on how copyright laws are interpreted.  You should contact a copyright lawyer should you have any questions.  

The only music recordings LOR offers for sale are fully licensed by the artist and the composer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

I for one understand mikes stance on all this.... Many years ago in a rock band in Alberta Canada in a tiny hick town doing a back 3 filler, the band i was doing sound for, got hit by some bottom feeding jerk that screamed SOCAN.  All said and done, cost the band some 24000 bucks for back fines and all to be legit for the next 3 years after that. It was long ago and far far away. But the awful taste it left in my mouth is still there today....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/4/2017 at 10:41 AM, dibblejr said:

We are all doomed.

We would all be in violation for nothing more than playing our car stereo with our windows down. How about on the lake with the wake towers with 10,000 watts of music being broadcast to the guy/ gal holding on for dear life on the tether. A simple BBQ at the park, Christmas party at work and the list could go on and on.

Unless you are profiting from it I do not think any of us small residential users have to worry. Does ABC and the rest of the networks pay a royalty while they share the videos of the Christmas Light contests?

That's IMHO.

JR

 

It is also about intent.  Did you roll down your windows so everyone else could hear?

Operating a FM transmitter at 93.1 shows intent (as if the deer repellent sign, did not :P)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...