So, after some transmitter failures, computer failures and a lot of rethinking what Artisan Radio should be about, here are the plans.
As before, there will be 4 x 6 hour blocks of programming.
Artisan Radio as a broadcast venture will play all public domain material. Roaring 20's (Jazz), Tin Pan Alley (1900-1930 popular music), Historical Classical (1920s and earlier), Early Detective Book Readings, Historical Vocal (1900-1930) and another hour TBD, probably OTR.
The broadcasts will go out over-the-air via a BETS-1 certified FM transmitter (still to be purchased, although the old Decade appears to be working again, not sure if it can be trusted though), streamed and also be available via the Artisan Radio SDR Server.
Thus, no copyright issues.
There will be a parallel stream for my own listening, from my own record collection, consisting of JukeBox Hits (1950s and 1950s Billboard charting and Bubbling Under songs), Lost Jukebox (obscure 1950s and 1960s music), If It Ain't Baroque (Baroque Classical recordings), Vintage Jazz (from the 1930s through the early 1950s), Divas and Divos (the greatest voices in Opera and Classical Music), and finally, our own produced show, Teenage Dreams.
That will be transmitted using the newly acquired ProCaster. Because of copyright issues, and broadcasting issues (i.e., it's not BETS-1 certified, only RSS-210), the stream will not be readily available to anyone else, either via a stream or the SDR. Actually, it may be, but it will be password protected so that only I can listen in. I know that works with streaming, as I've experimented with IceCast, but not sure about the SDR (in which case I won't do it).
It would be nice to swap the two over-the-air transmitters, but unfortunately, Canada's rules do not allow RSS-210 transmitters to broadcast. I've listened to the ProCaster and even without the built-in audio processing, the sound quality is good enough for what I want to do and listen with. With the audio processing, I imagine it could be even better.
Sounds like a plan. But you know that whole broadcasting vs non-broadcasting clause still really perplexed me.
You know it kind of reminds me how back in the 1940s the FCC was always adamantly insisting that the college campus operations were not "radio stations" despite all the hype they were getting as being one - which of course being carrier current they really weren't, but before long the FCC began officially reserving call letters for them. But during that time period and over the next decade the FCC objective was to ultimately licence them, but eventually abandoned the whole docket because the staffs of the college stations kept changing every couple years and it was just to complicated to put together some kind of working method of doing it -- And that's when carrier-current broadcast officially became a Part 15 operation. Prior to that Part 15 was exclusively a wireless operation.
I will listen when you get the stream up and running when I am eating dinner or something and I can have you playing while I do other things. Although I like your non-broadcast venture better. But if I understand right you are doing two streams...one for the public and the other for your own use, but even though for you own use only, no music fees are required for copyrighted music? So the fees are only required if the stream is "unlocked"?
Yes. No copyright fees if you are playing music and you're the only listener. It's when others listen in that it can be deemed to be playing to the public, and requiring copyright licensing.
I'm not sure which stream I like best. Over the past few months I've really begun to appreciate the early recordings, despite their less than perfect (and that's putting it mildly) acoustics. Particularly the classical ventures; imagine attempting to crowd multiple musicians, some with large instruments, around a horn. It got much easier in the electrical era with microphones. But still, these recordings were the first attempts, and spurred interest in the classical genre for those who could not afford, or did not want, to attend concerts.
And a lot of the composers used were contemporaries of the musicians. Shostakovich, Debussy, Sibelius, Rachmaninoff, all were alive and composing at that time. Some of the 'pop' composers of the era! Imagine, classical music in the billboard charts!
@artisan-radio Yeah, it was the first time on history you could actually distribute a performance!
@mark and like Artisian said, the whole restriction is in regard to public performance, to simply broadcast on your own property is no different than you playing a copywriter cd on your home stereo, but once you "distribute" beyond personal use it becomes a public performance of copyright material - which is something you have to pay for.
Just like the ground lead debate in the U.S., I would think there's a lot of discretion with the regulatory bodies here in Canada in determining whether you're running a broadcast venture.
My opinion, and I believe it makes a lot of sense, is that it all lies with intent. If your intent is to target members of the public with your transmission, then you likely will be found to be operating a broadcasting venture, and thus have to use a BETS-1 transmitter (as opposed to an RSS-210 one).
How do you determine intent? Well, if you're competing with other, licensed radio stations, if you're doing such things as shouting out that your station exists, that would be a good indication. If you solicit advertisements or attempt to make money in any way from it, that would be another.
There's been a lot made about someone in Winnipeg being shut down running multiple AM Procaster's. I don't think that it was the multiple transmitters that was the issue; after all, you can argue that you want to maximize the distance that you can listen to your own transmitter(s). I believe it was from the fact that this guy was taking advertisements, and attempting to compete with other, local radio stations that this guy was was deemed to be running a broadcasting venture.
If you don't compete with other stations, you can't help it if others discover that you are transmitting and listen in. After all, you can't beat the laws of physics, and stop radio waves at the boundary of your home.
@artisan-radio I also believe that locating several in different locations to target the public had a lot to do with it plus he was a company. But even if he wasn't(a company), I don't think in his case it would matter.
But I also believe that if they listen to your transmissions and they do, and hear a jingle, an announcement that you are tuned to such and such, and programming details that can easily be taken as intending for the public to hear. The legal dictionary definition(and AI) as that's where they get it from, is any RF transmission made available for the public to receive
on a standard AM or FM radio on a commercial broadcast band where anyone can tune in is a broadcast whether anyone knows it's there or is listening. One to many as it is referred to.
One pager to another on a specific frequency for one to hear is non broadcasting.
The Canadian government says intended but just making it available and identifying yourself is a intent, along with it covering a km around you....not really for yourself to have your antique radio play what it used to. And why does RSS-210 include use in the commercial broadcast bands if you can't broadcast? That is the question.
But it's very hypocritical that with RSS-210 harmonizing with the FCC rule where a legal certified AM unlicensed transmitter can cover some large territory with no field strength limits is in a non broadcasting section of the rules as it is a broadcast as soon as you turn it on unless you are out in the country or have acres of countryside around you and few people to hear it. The RSS-210 AM should be BETS-1 and the BETS-1 with the field strength limit should be RSS-210. That would give you a range of the same as RSS-210 FM more or less and would make more sense for non broadcasting use. But if that happened the two countries wouldn't be harmonized and one certification wouldn't good for both. That would make a problem and most would not spend the money on testing and having a different item for each country like the Procaster FM. The only reason the Decade is RSS-210 as it's not needed if you have BETS was to have it certified for the USA.
I don't know. The way it sounds to me is the guy was running a business venture and it's very existence was dependant on the use of multiple transmitters, so it's highly likely his income in the venture came from advertisements that got aired over those transmitters.
All a perfectly legal, common, snd nearly century old practice using Part 15 in the US. Bummer that RSS-210 doesn't provide the same liberty in Canada.
Just like the ground lead debate in the U.S., I would think there's a lot of discretion with the regulatory bodies here in Canada in determining whether you're running a broadcast venture.....
There's been a lot made about someone in Winnipeg being shut down running multiple AM Procaster's. I don't think that it was the multiple transmitters that was the issue; after all, you can argue that you want to maximize the distance that you can listen to your own transmitter(s). I believe it was from the fact that this guy was taking advertisements, and attempting to compete with other, local radio stations that this guy was was deemed to be running a broadcasting venture.
@mark Didn't you post the citation here somewhere? I remember reading through it but forget the details. I still don't get Canadian rules, my mind is so hard wired to part 15 and it just doesn't smoothly correspond with RSS-210 and BETS, so I still haven't a grasp with the whole mess -- Though I've tried!
Oh I was going to respond to you Artisan, still am, but your post also reminded me of Mark posting the citation.. but I need to find something first and am trying to beat the edit time given...
The guy was rebroadcasting an Internet Stream which was clearly aimed at the public. And, as @richpowers pointed out, the transmitters were being operated by a company, which, presumably, required revenue (doesn't matter if it was for profit or not).
My opinion still is that if you transmit with an RSS-210 transmitter, no matter what you transmit, without making your presence known (i.e., you intend it just to yourself), and make no attempt to compete with licensed (or unlicensed) broadcasting stations (taking away revenue), you are not broadcasting.
I can cite other examples where transmitting is not considered broadcasting in the ISED/CRTC world view, and does not require a CRTC broadcast license. If you transmit within a strictly bounded area, such as a mall, and follow RSS-123 rules for field strength and content, that is not considered broadcasting (although there are plenty of the random public within that mall). No CRTC broadcast license is required (although an ISED one is).
You can run a tourism information service, and that isn't considered broadcasting. Again, no CRTC broadcast license, you need the right ISED license).
With both of the mentioned examples, power levels can be quite high (up to 1 watt for RSS-123, 100 watts for tourism, which is the reason for licensing).
So, I end up with the question of why does RSS-210 exist? Amonst other reasons, for personal use. Various FM and AM transmitters are RSS-210 certified. So they should be able to be used for personal listening. It should be noted that in the rules, there are no restrictions on content.
Artisan Radio as a radio station is definitely a broadcast venture; I stream, make an SDR available, and play over-the-air. With public domain programming, no copyright licensing fees are required. A BETS-1 certified transmitter will definitely be used.
My other venture, if you will, I haven't decided what to call it yet, is for my own personal listening, and will consist of personal programming. It may sound like a radio station, but it's not. Again, no restrictions on content. It won't be streamed to anyone else; the SDR will not be available to anyone else, and the fact that I am transmitting over-the-air with an RSS-210 transmitter (which was certified for use for that exact purpose) will only be explicitly known to myself. Even though I may listen to copyrighted material, personal use is allowed with no licensing fees (otherwise, why would you buy anything if you can't listen to it?).
It's not my fault that the radio waves put out by an RSS-210 transmitter may reach other people, who may happen to tune in. I liken this to someone overhearing a car stereo playing with the car windows wide open; others passing by may be able to hear the music, but the purpose and intent of the music playing is definitely personal.
I certainly would be willing to discuss the situation with an ISED agent if it came to that. It would be interesting to get the results of that discussion.
@artisan-radio You hope it doesn't come to that. You are on their radar then(about talking to an agent)
I just couldn't keep it explicitly to myself, and the resulting feeling I am doing something wrong. It clearly wasn't for only myself. Piece of mind now using BETS-1. The Decade does a good job of getting to my neighbourhood.