Copyright

[Pinhead]

How does this work then? So performers get a fee for playing, plus they get a fee for the 'public broadcast' of their work? Or is this just referring to other PA and sound systems around the site that play artists music? If the former, then this would presumably be counting for a fair outgoing for festivals the size of Glasto... Even if the latter, how on Earth can this possibly be monitored / regulated or is it a flat fee to the PRS?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/28591693

Either way, Vince Power's troubles seem endless!

[eFestivals]

PRS charge a percentage of the ticket price to collect their fee.

There's been plenty of new festies that get caught by this, because it's not something they were aware they had to pay.

[Pinhead]

Given that the fee collected goes to the performers and they are getting a contracted fee for performing anyway, this seems a bit like having to pay them twice...?

[LondonTom]

Given that the fee collected goes to the performers and they are getting a contracted fee for performing anyway, this seems a bit like having to pay them twice...?

Just said similar in the hop farm thread. Its all very confusing tbh.

It makes sense for the recorded music on offer, just seems odd you need a PRS license to cover the live performences to.

[zero000]

Who gets the money that PRS collects is it the record companies mostly? Also if it applies to festivals does it also apply to the artists own gigs? I'm really confused

[eFestivals]

Given that the fee collected goes to the performers and they are getting a contracted fee for performing anyway, this seems a bit like having to pay them twice...?

Nope, at least for not how the law is configured. I've found the copyright laws for music to be very hard to get to grips with tho, which I had to to some extent when I was doing 'efestivals radio' (which needed me to be licenced by PRS).

I think it works like this...

PRS are granted a monopoly in law to manage, collect, and distribute fees for performances of songs.

The composition of the song is copyrighted.

Any recording of the song is copyrighted (commonly known as the 'mechanical' copyright).

These are two separate and distinct things, which can have separate 'owners'. The composer of a song is not necessarily the same entity as the performer of a song ... and just to confuse things even further, either party can sell-on these rights to another party.

A fee is payable on one or both of those copyrights for any performance of the song.

So, if a record is played on the radio (which counts as a performance), there's a fee to pay for the song's composition copyright, and a 2nd fee to pay for its mechanical copyright. The size of the fee is dependent on the number of listeners of that broadcast.

If a song is played at a festival, the band are being paid for the performance by the festival, but (in law: even if they play only their own compositions, and even if those compositions have never been published/recorded) there is still a copyright fee due to PRS for the performance of the song.

In theory, that PRS fee should (if it's their own song) make its way back to the band via the PRS, but in reality the smaller performers end up losing out.

-------

Just as an aside....

An old friend of mine set up a little record company as a hobby. I'm not sure if he made PRS aware of that record company's existance or not, but I guess he did. Anyway...

After a few months PRS cheques started arriving thru his door, bigger than the total record company turnover for the previous period (as I said, it was just a little hobby). It was clearly an error, and he was being paid royalties that were due to someone else. Skipping on to the relevant bit ...

I know that in this particular case it wouldn't have been possible for PRS to make payments to the real rights holder, and so if that money hadn't have been going to my mate, it would have 'disappearred' into an unallocated PRS pot of money (which I'm guessing eventually gets proportionally distributed across everyone they're paying out to).

[eFestivals]

PS.... just had a high profile journo picking my brains on the Vince story ... somehow I'm thinking not all of the words I used are going to make it into print.

[eFestivals]

PPS ... I'm currently not a great fan of Mr Power, who in his wisdom recently decided to drag me into a legal dispute of his, and where ownership of certain things were cited by his representative to a legally-disolved company, that sort of thing. I didn't know whether to laugh or cry, and still don't really.

[LondonTom]

Thanks for trying to explain, I think I may be even more confused than I was before

[Pinhead]

I know that in this particular case it wouldn't have been possible for PRS to make payments to the real rights holder, and so if that money hadn't have been going to my mate, it would have 'disappearred' into an unallocated PRS pot of money (which I'm guessing eventually gets proportionally distributed across everyone they're paying out to).

So essentially where PRS cannot trace copyright ownership accurately, there's the suggestion the fees go into one of their pots (accounts)... However, I thought that performers had to be registered with PRS in the first place for them to collect the fees on their behalf - you would think that this would mean that they had to submit accurate details of where the money should be going?

PPS ... I'm currently not a great fan of Mr Power, who in his wisdom recently decided to drag me into a legal dispute of his, and where ownership of certain things were cited by his representative to a legally-disolved company, that sort of thing. I didn't know whether to laugh or cry, and still don't really.

Shame really as he used to come across as an organiser that was trying to keep festivals true to their roots. People change I guess...

[eFestivals]

So essentially where PRS cannot trace copyright ownership accurately, there's the suggestion the fees go into one of their pots (accounts).

I wasn't trying to suggest that PRS keep it for themselves.

I'm pretty sure they'll have a method for disributing unallocated funds, even if it's something perhaps-charitable such as in support of grass roots music.

However, I thought that performers had to be registered with PRS in the first place for them to collect the fees on their behalf

PRS collects usage fees whatever, I believe. As I understand it, they're authorised in law to do so.

Performers might have to be registered in order to have PRS pay money back to them. Not being lucky enough to be in that position I've no idea.

- you would think that this would mean that they had to submit accurate details of where the money should be going?

Bigger broadcasters have a man whose job it is to compile a list of what's played which is then submitted to PRS.

For 'efestivals radio' as a small broadcaster, I had to submit nothing at all that detailed what was played (I did have to submit some numbers around number of tracks and listeners per track). So these couldn't be accurately allocated.

But even for the 'accurate' methiod it goes wrong. Was the song played freom the artist's original album release, or from a singles compilation released by a different record co? Etc, etc.

I think I once might have been told that there's PRS bods writiong down the tracks at the bigger festivals, too. Will they get all the track names right? Probably not.

The PRS system is far from perfect for doing what it's meant to, but it's all there is, and I suspect that for the mainstream and even the bigger minor player it works well enough.

Shame really as he used to come across as an organiser that was trying to keep festivals true to their roots. People change I guess...

Did he?

I think we must have different sources.

Edited August 1, 2014 by eFestivals

[LondonTom]

Did he?

I think we must have different sources.

Likely Marketing BS, but that was what Hop Farm was meant to be wasn't it? No VIP areas (though it did have a VIP area )...all in it together sort of thing No coporate branding etc.

[Spindles]

I thought PRS only hounded barber shops with the radio on and such....

[eFestivals]

Thanks for trying to explain, I think I may be even more confused than I was before

I understand your pain, it took me a while to start to understand even the basics.

In general, if you think the whole idea of copyright as it exists today is a good thing (I don't), and from what i know, I'd say that PRS have probably got things set-up just about right - so that it remains as a system that actually works(ish) no matter which angle you come at it from.

For example...

With efests radio, because of the small number of listeners (typically less than 10) it would have been complete overkill for it to have to comply with with the sorts of high reporting standards that the likes of the BBC have to do, or to pay the high fees they'll be paying.

I had what was something like a 'small radio licence' which covered everything*, which cost something like £500pa (I forget the exact details). It was just about affordable I felt, which meant that I then engaged with the PRS system. If I'd had to pay more I would have either operated without a licence or not done it at all.

(* including PPL, tho there may have been separate paperwork &/or payments. I forget. And it all confused the hell out of me.)

[Ruwise]

This is even more confusing than I thought I knew about royalties and mechanical royalties as I have a friend whose husband was in a fairly big band and even though he didn't write the songs he gets mechanical royalties but I suppose how they calculate these things is far more complex than you think. It amazes me how they can ever truly calculate it accurately and how they even attempted to before computerisation in beyond me.

[Pinhead]

Its a bit frilly around the edges isn't it this copyright. Always has been though I reckon (remembers the 'home taping kills music' campaign in the '80's whilst manufacturers were happily legally pumping out twin-deck tape players (largely intended for this purpose).

In the future when everything is streamed and rendered un-copyable, the systems may just start to become fairer and more accountable....

[eFestivals]

I don't guarantee I've got everything there exactly right - i only know it thru the ways I've encountered it - but it's certainly a complex system, which for the most-part seems to work OK (I know there's a fairly sizable number of grumblers).

Years ago a guy who worked for me was dead keen to do new things, and did a fantastic audio interview with a band (I forget who, but they were barely registering at the time), and mixed the interview with some snippets of their newly-released single. The band said it was fine for efests to use their track like that. It made me decide that audio interviews were worth pursuing.

So I contacted the PRS to check what was what, and they said it needed licencing from the rights holder. That wasn't the band, because they'd sold their rights on (quite common, it gives cash immediately to struggling bands) ... and he wanted about £400 for the use of the music.

So that was the end of that, cos there's no way I'd ever earn anything like that back from it.

[Guest]

Given that the fee collected goes to the performers and they are getting a contracted fee for performing anyway, this seems a bit like having to pay them twice...?

PRS is for the writers of the songs. Bands getting paid to play might be playing other artists songs.

[stuartbert two hats]

Vince Power is a fucking cool name though. Far cooler than John Power, for some reason I can't put my finger on.

When I'm in my 50s I might start DJing local pubs with the stage name Vince Power

[Pinhead]

Beware the copyright mind....

[Yoghurt on a Stick]

Yeah, your best probably changing it to Vince Powder - just to be on the safe side.

[atomised]

This copyright business does seem a complete and utter minefield

[ancient_one]

I thought PRS only hounded barber shops with the radio on and such....

Indeed they do. I have a home-based business, and have lost count of the letters from PRS reminding me I need a licence to play music. It's all a bit of a grey area - I think if I have the kitchen radio on while I have my breakfast, that's OK. If I move through to my office and can still hear the kitchen radio, it might be OK if it is just me in the room. But if someone else comes in to the room, I might need to start paying for it.

[atomised]

That's a clear contender for most ridiculous thing I've heard today. Sounds so over the top

[Blisterpack]

Vince Power is a fucking cool name though. Far cooler than John Power, for some reason I can't put my finger on. Tranmere Rovers have a player called Max Power. He is shite, unfortunately.

Edited August 5, 2014 by Blisterpack