SLMC

the Professor · Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 2:42 am Post subject: who might come rolling in

probably wouldn't be the riaa . . . ASCAP/BMI more likely.

not much commercially recorded music gets downloaded via SL . . RIAA is most interested in pirated downloading...

the license folks are sometimes interested in very small players. . . . shoe shops, hair salons and the like... anyone playing music in a "public" place without paying the fees . . . it doesn't matter to ASCAP/BMI whether the place makes ANY money from playing the music . . . if the source (radio, cdplayer, etc) is turned toward the employees for their enjoyment while they work, it's probably ok, but if it's turned toward the public so that they hear/listen to it as they are doing their business, it's probably not ok and the rep. is probably going to ask the owner to pay the license fee. Doubly so if the place is an entertainment venue with artists doing covers and the place is making a living.

Now, as noted, since few (if any) SL venue owners make much money, it's likely that they would not pay the fees. And if ASCAP/BMI made enough noise that LL got real nervous, covers in SL might go the way of banks and gambling. I've spent the last 8 months of this year writing and working up 13 originals . . . headed for the day when I can keep playing a show without doing any covers, so I won't have to stop playing if the bad guys come on down. I need another 6 months to get enough material so I don't have to play the same show all the time (or I could switch to a 1./2 hour show - - - tee hee).

Who benefits when this happens? Virtually no one... esp,. if the result is that the joint shuts off the music instead of paying up. If they pay, one hopes that some of the $ eventually filters back to the publishing co and maybe to the artist... that's how it's supposed to work. But of course, it ain't a perfect system.

Am I taking bets on whether this will come to SL? Nope. I'm hoping they stay very uninterested in the micro-economy and that they constantly read 265 to 1 to mean that there's not much in it for them.

In the meantime, I need a chorus melody for a new song for which I have the lyrics and the verse melody . . . and another 3-6 months ...

: >

now quite reading my shit and go bump some music on the 61!
_________________
Edward Lee Lamoureux
http://slane.bradley.edu/com/faculty/lamoureux/website2/
ell@bradley.edu; AIM: dredleelam: SL:Professor Beliveau;http://www.thesixtyone.com/theprofessor/footprint/

Jojamela Soon · Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 3:04 pm Post subject:

The husband and I used to own a gym. We got the letter from BMI, pay up you're playing the radio. We turned off the radio and told people, sorry you have to bring your own music. The amount of money they wanted was ridiculous.

My venue streams licensed internet radio when no show is on. If they came in and wanted licensing money for my shows that would be it. I'd either only play musicians that did originals or shut down. I don't think there would be any independent venues left.
_________________
Just call me Jo
************
Soon's Second Life
Sailors Cove Theater

Kim Seifert · Joined: 09 Sep 2007 Posts: 198 Location: Ohio

Demure. I am not an attorney. However, I have been a paralegal for over 20 years and I checked this issue with reliable sources. First, you need to understand the relevant terms as they relate to US copyright law. They are:

1) artistic work - melody and lyrics of a song (these rights are owned by the songwriter(s) and it is what pertains to ALL SL musicians that perform covers, whether they use backing tracks or play instruments).

2) recorded works - (this is owned by the publishing company of any work - this is the actual recording of music, whether that be complete or only the instrumental backing (it is, in part, relevant to "karaoke" music).

3) derivative works - this is the result of anyone, vocalists and instrumentalists, performing a cover.

The verbage used by that site was in reference to their recorded works. According to that language, you CANNOT use their recordings for work in SL without reprisal. The music I use gives me complete rights to perform the songs anywhere I wish. I will give you that info if you like. However, that does not apply to the artistic work. That is something that all musicians that perform covers will eventually have issues with. It it not what is concerning the RIAA (they work for the publishing companies that own the recorded works).

BMI and ASCAP would certainly be interested in the derivative works of all of us. In the real world, the entity that procures licenses to perform these works are the venue owners, the clubs that have live artists perform. Artists usually do NOT have to worry about the licensing. SL is a different animal though. The BMI legal department will tell you that the "medium that provides the music is responsible." Is that SL? I say it is not. The reason is because you don't have to go to SL to hear the music, but you do have to go to the URL it points to (the stream url). So in my view, the medium responsible is the owner or renter of the stream. Right now, a general license is fairly expensive but I believe the licensing companies are working toward a more affordable alternative for folks like SL musicians who do not generate as much income as a real life club that hosts live musicians. So for now, anyone that performs covers of songs protected by a licensing agency without a license to do so is in violation of copyright laws.
_________________
www.myspace.com/kimseifert
www.thesixtyone.com/Kimmee
www.kimseifert.com

Jambalaya · Joined: 25 Oct 2007 Posts: 238

You also have to consider that, along with BMI and ASCAP, there is SoundExchange to deal with. They are the organization that collects royalties from the use of sound recordings in digital transmissions on behalf of the artists & creators of the recording, i.e. where BMI/ASCAP pay the songwriters, SoundExchange pays the musicians & record companies who created the recording. They were granted royalty rights in the late 1990's, where before they did not have these rights in the U.S.

SoundExchange is what put the real hurt on webcasting, and they also made no bones about going after stations that were small & not making any money. Now, live performers wouldn't necessarily have issue here - but DJs absolutely would, and I suspect that if they (SoundExchange) decided to make an issue of it in SL then it would have repercussions that would affect live musicians too.

Venue owners that provide DJs - or even play music from their personal collection - could be required to provide a complete accounting of what played when, and how many listeners there were at any given time. That is exactly what they require from webcasters - I can tell you that we have to provide this data in detailed reports for every station we have (3 of our radio stations are simulcasting at this point).

Thankfully, our streaming providers provide us with that data, via a combination of their monitoring the streams along with us sending them real-time data of what we're playing. However, we pay additional fees for this service too, and we have to pay fees to SoundExchange according to how many ears are listening for how many hours.

It gets expensive REAL quick - if you think paying tier is bad...

vonjohin · Joined: 19 Sep 2007 Posts: 458 Location: Nashville, TN

You and Kim both nailed it.

This is why I only stream music into SL land that is from an Internet radio station, well, other than when I am playing. And also why I chose old blues as a format for my av when I signed on to do this and create a musician performer av in SL. I figured I could do mostly, if not all, public domain stuff. However, I have not been really good at researching everything from the about 100 songs on the list. I know most of it is PD, but I also know some of it is not. I wish there was a reasonable, affordable way to pay and be legit with it. I would really like to get that elephant in the room out of there before this gets ugly at some point.

Tommy CUlt · Joined: 06 Sep 2007 Posts: 156

ticious · Joined: 03 Sep 2007 Posts: 2070 Location: Chicago

I have to admit, Tommy, as a venue owner, this thought wanders through my mind from time to time. Especially since most folks seem to think that, as with a real life club (or your company and the radio), it will be the venue owner who will be held responsible. That possibility raises a really scary picture for some of us, especially since in so many cases it's the venue owner footing the bill already.

On more question I would add to your list, what about the venue that doesn't pay a fee but lets the musician put down a tip jar and encourages people to tip them? Is that venue owner likely to be held liable for copyright infringement?

Does it make any difference if the venue has never sold any product or made any money from this infringement? Might that make the argument that it's a "private party" a little easier to float?

But having everyone post opinions about what *should* happen probably isn't very useful (we all have those opinions and when/if this happens, they'll be worth the paper they're written on here and not much more). It would be good if someone with some kind of real life legal or on point music biz experience could talk to this from a more informed and experienced position.
_________________
Joy is in the ears that hear
- Saltheart Foamfollower
- The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant

Silas Scarborough · Joined: 04 Sep 2007 Posts: 1175 Location: Rhode Island

ticious · Joined: 03 Sep 2007 Posts: 2070 Location: Chicago

Norris Shepherd · Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2008 1:50 pm Post subject: Re: who might come rolling in