At 03:28 PM 5/23/2001, Ian wrote:
on 5/23/01 3:18 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> and now we are being urged to pay fees to
> broadcast on the net. What is that? I can understand of you are making
money
> off of your webcast but most of us do this simply to promote quality
> underground music.
Interesting angle here. You could try to counter that fees should be waived
due to the fact that you are not billing *them* standard fees for promotion
of the recordnings.
Then again, I have no direct experience with the law in this regard.
jwz, one of the guys who wrote netscape, made a ton of money and is opening
a club. on his site for the club, he outlines the hows and whys of all the
licensing needed to legally operate an audio webcast:
http://www.dnalounge.com/backstage/webcasting.html
Interesting quote:
So, when you want to perform music, you pay all three of these
organizations. Rather than asking you which particular songs you're
playing, they just charge you a blanket rate for access to their entire
catalog; and then they make their own decision on how much of your money
to pass along to the various copyright holders. They do this
statistically, by looking at the popular music charts: rather than paying
the particular artists you've played, they just assume that almost all of
your money should go to the most popular stars.
And yes, you have to pay all three of them. Though they each represent
disjoint sets of artists, they each represent a very large number of
artists: so many that they just assume that you're playing something by
someone they represent. So if you're not paying them, then they will sue you.
-j
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
