About Us › Forums › temp › Real world testing with the Whole House 3.0 transmitter (US) › Regard my post # 28 and Tim’s
Total posts : 45366
Regard my post # 28 and Tim’s post #32 About Licensed music.
I know this post continues to bring this thread off topic, but I just wanted to clarify post number #28 a bit. Long story short traveling DJs who take a laptop to public events have to pay for their right to use that music, because they are making a living on another person’s work. Traveling DJs do not just entertain in night clubs, they also entertain in back yard weddings and other outdoor events such as birthday parties, stag parties that are held outside of any club or bar that might have a permit to cover such entertainment. So how would that music be covered? Certainly if I have a birthday party in my back yard with a hired DJ, I’m not the one who has to get a permit or license to cover the music he or she plays, that is up to them to cover that right.
If I was a member of band who recorded music for a record label and I went to an event at a friend’s house and that friend hired a DJ with a laptop and large speakers and that DJ was hired at a cost of $500.00 for 6 hours and that DJ played a song my band released and I realized that I was not being compensated for that public exhibition of my song, I could hold that DJ in violation of copyright laws. He has no permits or license to use my music in a public exhibition.
If someone is going to get paid as a business to play my song and I get nothing in return, not even 1 cent per song, I’m not going to be happy.
I used a poor example and wording in the first place in post #26 and should have rewrote that entire post, instead, I edited it and left the entire post a mess with editing parts of it because I was being distracted with getting Zara Radio play list rebuilt and did not check back until my edit time had run out. But reading back now, I see things I thought I corrected, but didn’t.
Music licensing packages cover different things. IF you are NOT streaming the music on line to a public server where you have a potential listener audience of 100 to 1000 listeners, why would you pay a fee for that right?
A part 15 radio station can apply for fair use licensing at a very reduced cost, a part 15 station is a non profit. Although a part 15 can sell on air advertising, the likelihood of that a part 15 home brew radio station covering the same ground as a full powered commercial station is very unlikely and impossible.
Therefore, a home brew part 15 radio station can apply for a special package that costs very little and covers the fair use act.
Since I did not stream, I did not have to use stream licensing. Most of you that play with part 15 transmitters also stream your station on line. Therefore, your music licensing fees are covering your on line steam.
My first contact was with BMI and ASCAP, although I am not promoting any agency or service, I was recommended a package deal that cost me very little per month and a subscriber ONLY download site for the music I was licensed to carry under that agreement.
Most honest traveling DJs I know do have to pay for the right to use the music that they do. They download their music from subscription only websites. The dishonest ones download their music for free off of mp3 download websites, most of which eventually get shut down by the RIAA.
MP3s masquerading as ring tones, are also illegal because they contain the whole original, uncut unedited version of the song not just a promotional 10 to 20 second version of that song.
Okay now back to the topic, sorry I took this off topic.