I've seen these ideas discussed in other venues as well, such as the home drive-in movie scene with yard viewing of movies for friends and family. People in those forums sometimes ask about licensing or if fees should be paid to someone in Hollywood or a distributor.
Is a yard drive-in just an extension of the common movie night indoors? It happens on the same property, with maybe a few more people able to view. What if neighbors walk over uninvited to watch the show? Is it because the showing is called a "drive-in", and it's outdoors on a large screen, making it sound like a more formal business that makes people think of rights issues in the first place?
What if you had a larger estate and threw a party and a hundred people came and could see the movie indoors or outdoors, and/or what if the host charged money to get into the party, but not specifically for seeing the movie?
My situation is this: I don't write music or perform it, my station is a hobby, and needs to be run as easily and inexpensively as possible to remain a fun hobby. I see it as part of the landscape of the community, like if I put a fountain with a cupid statue on it in my yard and people could drive by and see it every day on their way to work. That's a reproduction of someone's visual art on display, right?
What if I created a nature walk in my garden and placed bought statuary along the path and asked for a donation to take a walk through, or let people go walk for free to see these works of the original artists or reproductions?
Why is it any different that my radio station is a monument to others' works which I enjoy and I seek to share that enjoyment with others? That is a big part of why I have my part 15, I simply love music and want to share my vision. It would be a sad day if I had to stop playing commercial music, because that's part of the fabric of my experience that I'm seeking to share.
Could it be that some of these burdons placed mere copies were started when people involved with music in the 19th century weren't willing to change with the times, so they decided to tax the new technology, like piano rolls, sheet music, grammophone records? As an aside, I think the idea could have been made worse by ads for records that said owning a phonograph was like having a concert master in your own parlor.
We can't just say that things have always been a certain way and so don't ask questions. It's now the 21st century, and we've been taught that a certain way of thinking about copies is the way that it is and to accept it as part of the natural order. Get outta here!
Okay here is the deal with TERRESTRIAL RADIO BROADCASTING as opposed to Internet Radio Broadcasting.
With Internet Radio, your site most likely has some abilty to log how many people have been listening and from what country, but, and I mean BUT, how the hell do you have any clue how many people are listening to your AM or FM part 15 station at any given time to fairly and legally pay for the right for them to listen to what you are broadcasting?
Why pay for 100 people if you only have 2? Why pay for 2 when you have 100?
I believe it goes the same for licensed broadcasters as well, they may be paying for 200 listeners when they only have 100, or paying for 100 when they have 200.
Maybe what has to happen is we all just hum a few notes and talk, talk, talk and the hell with the greed.
Do I think musicians should be paid for their creations? YES I DO, but there is a crooked road in this industry and I think that crooked road also screws the artists as well as the purchaser.
There has to be a better way to do this.
Bruce.
Licensing of music for broadcasting is not new.
I have a collection of 78's from the 20s through 50s, and on the early ones, it states specifically on the label 'Not For Broadcast'. The playing of the records was intended for personal use only, and separate arrangements had to be made for broadcasting.
Technology is making it easy to copy & share intellectual property, but the issues have been around a long while.
The two main licencing bodies here...Socan and Resound both told me that NO licence is needed to broadcast music on a BETS-1 station....Resound with an email from the legal dept. and Socan which bases fees on operating cost (1.9% if I remember right) but when I tried to explain BETS-1 they had no clue about this and NEVER GOT BACK TO ME! so I took this as a no licence fee needed as I'm sure if there was they would have read me the riot act.
Since I don't stream I don't have to worry about this and even if I did stream the fees for broadcasting music in total would be $150 a YEAR between the two of them.
So the money isn't an issue here, having to keep a log if they want it at anytime would be the biggest hurdle.
Don't know how different it is in the USA but here in Canada paying the fees isn't costly enough to deter anyone from hobby radio, over the air or streaming.
Mark
Glad to hear in Canada they aren't as greedy as the folks here in the USA. After all a part 15 station (Fully compliant) is a laughing joke. So why whould they even care. Now possibly someone running a 7 Watt FM Transmitter even that with its 1.9 mile coverage with the whip antenna per Youtube isn't really going to break the bank for the RIAA.
Part 15 AM most of the time has a rough time covering over a mile unless you have perfect conditions still AM has a slightly better chance of getting somewhere and still be compliant (Especially carrier current in a small town).
Tim said it the absolute best way possible.
There really is no difference between Canada & the U.S. for over-the-air broadcasting. The U.S. fees are pretty small for BMI, and you don't need anything for the others (per Tim in Bovey).
It's streaming where the issue lies. And where Canada is a bit better, as there is a blanket licensing agreement you can get if you have no revenue. If you do have revenue, then there really is little difference. I'd say, in fact, that Canada is more complicated, as the fees vary based on a number of factors, including Canadian content. The potential reporting requirements if I did decide to go after revenue is one reason that I decided to go with an all-public-domain format (vintage jazz & classical) - not so difficult in Canada, a lot more in the U.S.
US Broadcasters Pay BMI, SESAC, and ASCAP. If they stream they pay SoundExchange as well, IIRC BMI also has internet fees.