Don't steal music!

This message the production companies have been trying to hammer home for awhile now. So, given that employees and customers might get a little bored I was considering adding some music the my storefront. Well... I was just going to spend $500-1000+ (was planning to purchase in lumps of $500) and build up a big playlist that I figured would satisfy everyones ears, until I saw this:

Restaurant Owner Ordered To Pay BMI $30,450 For 'Illegally Playing' Four Unlicensed Songs

Uhh...

According to BMI, the royalty collection agency made numerous attempts to collect a yearly fee from Foster's (currently $6,060), but had no success:

Broadcast Music Incorporated sued Fosters and claimed in court documents that it called the restaurant 56 times and mailed 29 letters. BMI says Fosters ignored its requests to get a license to play music.

"We've been attempting to resolve this for two years now," said Robbin Ahrold, BMI's vice president of corporate communications and marketing. "It is our obligation when we sign an agreement with these songwriters to be diligent and do what we can do to collect their royalties."

How exactly does this work?

Which means that if you buy a CD by, say, Ryan Adams, or download one of his songs from iTunes, and play it at your family reunion, even if 500 people come, you owe nothing. But if you play it at a restaurant you own, then you must pay for the right to harness Adams’s creativity to earn money for yourself. Which leaves you with three choices: you can track down Ryan Adams, make a deal with him and pay him directly; you can pay a licensing fee to the P.R.O. that represents him — in this case, BMI; or you can ignore the issue altogether and hope not to get caught.

www.nytimes.com...

I am a little confused. I realize, the production companies look at it like "Well, so many people being entertained by our product, so the business should be paying the inflated fee. So it's fair... Okay, but as a small business owner... We can't afford the inflated prices they are asking for. I am a little confused as to how the pricing is laid out. (I'm a little tired at the moment.) But it states BMI is asking for a $6000/year license fee. For four songs?

So their thinking I guess is that they don't want some venue to be playing their music in such an entertaining way that it's drawing crowds and crowds of people. I guess?

I see why a radio station should pay the licensing fee. They are making money after all through advertising and their main draw is music. But what about a clothing store? A clothing store is really just looking for something to give them brand recognition. They might want to be "in tune" with the clientele they are aiming to bring into their stores.

What about a steel fab shop? Those guys just want something to in the background that might take the whining noise of grinders, or girders be dropped by the minute, something to take the edge of the metallic "tings" echoing through the shop.

So now, a small business, a license for 4 songs @ 6000/pop. Wow. How much are these businesses supposed to bring in in revenue, to be able to still maintain a profit margin? Unless of course they play the same 4 songs over and over again. (Suicidal employees?)

So here is my dilemma. I wanted to spend up to $1000 on a music collection, just for my business. I wanted to purchase legally, but I also wanted to play it legally.

Is it legal if I play the radio? Someone else paid the license, so it's okay then... But then we have to listen to the marketing plugs, cause those pay the licenses.

Now, here is the biggest problem in my case. I am not against marketing at all, since my life pretty much revolves around it. I am not against having to hear, see, feel ads (21st century, some ads are touchy!)

My main problem is the employees and clientele are from a certain ethnic group. And regular radio stations just don't cut it. So, as of right now I don't really have the time to check through all the legalities. I'll probably just focus on some other pressing matter for the time being.

I am just confused as to how I want to spend money, and do something legally, but so many hoops are there hanging in the distance, waiting for me to jump through them. I don't see increased revenue from the music, I just see an ambience for the clientele, and something to keep the workers happy. But instead, I'll probably just sign up to satellite radio.

Personally, I think the record company would have made more from the individual album sales than the small percentage of the radio's license which I'll be paying indirectly through my subscription.

I have been saying this for awhile now... In this day and age... In this twisted Huxley future that is unfolding in front of us... They are actually making it hard for us to give them our money.

What the...? Wasnt there already a thread about vampires?

Seem this is why I dont give a rats ass and refuse pay a single dime when I see the vampire music or movie industry involved.

Yea well... sue me.. no wait, they cant, its a cloud. Oh too bad then - good luck next time!

Find a few good musicians that sell direct via the internet. Pay them a very few bucks and print small flyers that you can place on the tables with a little bit about them and how to get their music.

You advertise for them for free and use their music for free or a small fee. You could get a name for yourself as the place to hear new music!

Tell the big boys where to go. Every one wins!

P

stuff the record labels and their extortion ... find a good local indie band and hire them to perform for your business ... would be much better use of your money and help out some musicians rather than making the extortionist record companies richer off other peoples work....

You might want to check into some of these:

Piped Music Systems

the granddaddy of all those being
Muzak

Sirius satellite radio also has a service for commercial use.

I am thinking about Spotify, not totally sure but I am having a hard time imagine that it would be illegal to play Spotify at a workplace.
And you do not have to deal with the usual s****y commercials that is always destroying ones relaxation when listening to the radio.

reply to post by LiberalSceptic


Apparently many believe that online radio websites like pandora or similar websites like Spotify would be subject, like terrestrial radio, to something called the "Homestyle" exemption. This exemption is applied to business establishments and permits a single recieving device with a specfic number of speakers depending on the square footage of the establishment. However it has not yet been tested in court.

reply to post by Josephus


Ah ok, but if just the allowed amount of speakers are used, would there be any limits of the speaker size as well?
Let´s say an iPad connected to a PA system, that would be enough to fill a fairly big place with music.

ETA:
Ok I looked it up a bit more and seems that it would not be possible.
Seems that it would be hard to get around that agreement.

The Terms & Conditions that you agree to when registering for Spotify states that Spotify is for personal, non-commercial use.

reply to post by boncho


How about you surfing the web and download whatever free music you can find.
Allot of artist give away music on, for example Soundcloud.
But perhaps that is also only for personal use, hmm I would almost imagine so.

But all the music that one buys would be ok to play for other people.
A DJ pays for the records that he spin, and that is it, as far as I know.
There are allot of CDs and vinyls for sale on Ebay and Discogs, that you can buy and then copy to you computer and put in your playlists. For the money that you are prepared to pay, you can get a VERY big collection if you just buy it from the best place.
I would prefer to buy it in a solid format and copy it to the computer, compared to buying it in iTunes or something alike, and just own "air".

I really liked the idea that Pheonix358 had btw.

reply to post by LiberalSceptic


When you buy music in any format, you buy for personal use only. Any business use requires a further license. A DJ pays an annual license fee. Of course, how the big five steer that income stream, read massive income stream, to the musicians is an interesting tale in itself.

P

reply to post by LiberalSceptic


I just found a listing for royalty charges in Canada actually. Seems it isn't that bad. A couple hundred for the year I think. I exited out of the page so...


Perhaps I overreacted.

In the UK, if you even have a radio on at work and pay all your necessary TV licence fees etc, you still need to buy a Recorded Music licence or something like that. (I think it's a PPL).
If you're in a public space (ie not your home) and you play music in a place that people go to... you need to pay for it...

Seems weird to me. But thems the laws.

As a copyright owner who does receive royalties, I see it like this. You can play whatever you want of your own music collection in a building or space you own: no stopping you from doing that. (Flea Markets, Independent Stores etc)....whatever.
So if you are SAYING a "music collection FOR the business"...you could just as easily say "I play my favorites from my collection of tapes, CD, Mp3 files while I am at my business..
Same thing...vastly different interpretation.
1. You bring your fav collection from home
2. You use your fav collection FOR your business...and therefore...to make money.

Both vastly different. Just an interpretation.

PS We have gone after users who use our stuff in a business to make money, and not gone after those who in a business play our copyrighted material at work. See?

Originally posted by mysterioustranger
As a copyright owner who does receive royalties, I see it like this. You can play whatever you want of your own music collection in a building or space you own: no stopping you from doing that. (Flea Markets, Independent Stores etc)....whatever.
So if you are SAYING a "music collection FOR the business"...you could just as easily say "I play my favorites from my collection of tapes, CD, Mp3 files while I am at my business..
Same thing...vastly different interpretation.
1. You bring your fav collection from home
2. You use your fav collection FOR your business...and therefore...to make money.

Both vastly different. Just an interpretation.

PS We have gone after users who use our stuff in a business to make money, and not gone after those who in a business play our copyrighted material at work. See?

For example...

People using a song or an image in advertising

opposed to

Someone playing something while they work cuz they really like it

Who do you think wrote the script for this speech. The same people that want to punish you for listening to their music without "compensation".



The music, movie, and software companies have all moved to licensing, not sales. When you purchase a CD, you purchase the materials it's made of, and a license for its content. This is the future Boncho.

They don't call it dystopian for no reason.

reply to post by pheonix358


Ok thanks for info.
I actually thought that when the Dj bought the records, that was it and ok to play.

reply to post by boncho


I understand where you thoughts come from my friend.
The worst thing with this is that the artists themselves get very little of all those money.
As usual, most of it goes to the untalented people running the show.

reply to post by Lulzaroonie

Youre correct. I could sit in my business for example with a pile of CD's and sell my coffee and donuts whatever...while listening (and everyone in my place) to them over the ceiling speakers.

If you make a list of them and use it for advertising say....it can be considered that you use it to make $$$...by keeping customers happy...and buying.

reply to post by boncho
Most businesses around here just pick a radio station that plays music that is in line with what their customer base listens to and pipe it over the speaker system. As far as I know it is perfectly legal. Public broadcasts are fair game (although you are stuck with the commercials unfortunately).

If you've noticed a lot of businesses play popular music that is "covered" by another artist (usually unknown). I'm sure that is the cheaper route to go if you don't want to be at the mercy of a public broadcast.

nanu nanu

The musicians are getting on the same level as all the other amateur are on, spewing beats and sounds until someone picks it up and make it in a hit.

why shall humans always pay the same amount for an album that may not be so good as the first one before?

look, every one can put beats and sounds together and make music these days, the only difference is that the biggest cry babies out there are the ones who was really famous one time are now demanding the same attitude from the slaves/sheep who bought their albums every time it hit the stores. (not saying the music the cry babies suck, but I am saying their bitching suck they can't demand the same sale numbers every time they spew out beats and sounds xxD

peddling back on topic I guessO0'
is it the music industry who push these laws?
doesn't their artists earn enough for the industry?
so the industry makes laws to earn the little extra >?/<

sooner or later there may be only homemade music on the speakers at the restaurants XD

my two ork/cents not really..