[cma-l] PPL & PRS for Music Joint Licence for Community Radio

Thu Dec 1 20:18:45 GMT 2016

Before I reply to Ian's questions, as this is my first post to this 
list, let me introduce myself...

I'm Nigel, I'm one of the Trustees of the charity Winchester Radio, 
which currently provides a hospital radio service at the Royal Hampshire 
County Hospital (I'll leave you to guess where that is situated!), and 
which was awarded a community radio licence over the summer by Ofcom to 
serve the city of Winchester. We'll be providing a service targetting 
the older generation, with the intent of encouraging "active ageing", 
healthy living, engagement and involvement in the community, etc, etc. 
We're busy planning our new larger studios and raising the money to 
build and equip them, and buy and install a transmitter, mast and 
antenna at the moment. And, as we're moving into community broadcasting, 
we thought it only right & proper that we join the CMA, so those of you 
attending the AGM on the 17th, please do come and say "hello".

And now back to the scheduled programme...

Ian, I'd refer you to the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 
(http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/contents) and in particular 
Section 90, entitled "Assignment and licences" 
(http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/section/90) and the whole 
of Chapter VII, entitled "Copyright Licensing" 
(http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/part/I/chapter/VII). 
PRSforMusic and PPL "licensing bodies" under this legislation, and the 
various licenses they offer are "licensing schemes".

I say "offer" advisedly - you are entirely within your rights not to 
take a licence from PRSforMusic and/or PPL, but then, unless you 
individually negotiated with every rights-holder (and there will be 
many) of every piece of music you played, you'd be committing the 
criminal offence of infringing copyright.

Now you can argue (and I might join you!) that this should be a civil 
matter - effectively equivalent to a breach of contract - and is not 
serious enough to be a criminal matter for which you could, in theory, 
end up in prison, but the law currently says otherwise.

Likewise, many people are surprised that, as charities, hospital radio 
stations - and I guess by extension community radio stations, many of 
which aren't charities, but are not-for-profit social enterprises - have 
to pay to play music. Personally, I have no issue with this in principle 
- donations are legally always freely given, and people can decide what 
causes they wish to support, and you wouldn't reasonably expect BT to 
provide every hospital and community radio with free telephony and 
broadband, so why should people/companies in the music industry be 
expected to provide the fruits of their labours free of charge?

I do, however, have an issue with the amount such small, local, 
not-for-profit organisations have to pay, and the lack of any 
competition to or, in the absence of that, effective market regulation 
of, these collecting societies.

There is, of course, the Copyright Tribunal, to which all such 
"licensing schemes" run by "licensing bodies" can be referred. Hospital 
radio had its own dispute with PPL a few years ago, and the Hospital 
Broadcasting Association (the equivalent of the CMA for hospital radio) 
took QC's legal advice about taking the dispute to the Copyright 
Tribunal. It was told not to waste it's money - this was so big a can of 
worms that PPL couldn't afford to lose, its pockets were much deeper 
that the HBA's, and the chances were that they'd just keep the issue 
live until such time as the HBA ran out of money. That doesn't sound 
like effective regulation to me!

All the above is, of course, my own personal views, and these do not 
necessarily reflect the corporate views of Winchester Radio  :-)

Cheers,

Nigel

-- 
Nigel Dallard
Trustee
Winchester Radio
A Charitable Incorporated Organisation registered in England and Wales, no. 1160752

On 01/12/2016 14:03, Ian Hickling wrote:
>
>
> That's very informative - thank you.
>
> But they've left out (or - Heaven forbid - ignored) two important 
> aspects of the responses to their Joint Consultation:
>
>
> 1 - If this is a Licence - as opposed to a Service Charge - why isn't 
> it issued by the only Licensing Authority in the system - which is 
> Ofcom? PRSfM and PPL are commercial businesses - not Licensing Authorities
>
>
> 2 - Despite many requests - there is still no categorical statement as 
> to why PRSfM and PPL are entitled in Law to claim these payments - and 
> precisely where this is written in UK Legislation.
>
>
> Sorry - I know I've asked this many times before - but it's something 
> we do need to have laid before us - and by the very people who are 
> making these far-reaching demands.
>
> My feeling is that broadcasters large and small who part with their 
> hard-earned cash before being happy with the answers are rather unwise.
>
> This isn't going to go away.
> It makes no odds to us - we don't pay these charges - it's you out 
> there, our friends and loyal Clients, that I'm concerned about.
>
>
> Ian Hickling
>
> Partner
>
> <http://www.transplanuk.com/>
>
> /Office: 016 3557 8435  (07h to 22h GTS)/
>
> /Car: 075 3098 0115 (only responds when driving)/
>
> /6 Horn Street, Compton, NEWBURY, RG20 6QS/
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk 
> <cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk> on behalf of CMA-L 
> <cma-l at commedia.org.uk>
> *Sent:* 01 December 2016 13:18
> *To:* cma-l at commedia.org.uk
> *Subject:* [cma-l] PPL & PRS for Music Joint Licence for Community Radio
> On 15 September 2016, PPL and PRS for Music began a four-week 
> consultation on the proposed introduction of a joint PPL and PRS for 
> Music Community Radio Licence for Ofcom-licensed community radio 
> stations from 1 January 2017 (the “Joint Licence”). This document 
> <http://www.ppluk.com/Global/Summary%20of%20Consultation%20Responses.pdf> 
> summarises the responses received and sets out what will happen next.
>
> This consultation was undertaken in accordance with PPL 
> <http://www.ppluk.com/About-Us/Who-We-Are/PPL-Code-of-Conduct/> and 
> PRS <http://www.prsformusic.com/codeofconduct> for Music’s separate 
> Codes of Conduct, which state that whenever new tariffs are introduced 
> or significant amendments to existing tariffs are made, a fair, 
> reasonable and proportionate approach to consultation will be undertaken.
>
> PPL and PRS for Music initially consulted with the Community Media 
> Association (“the CMA”) to seek its views on the proposed Joint 
> Licence. Following positive discussions, the CMA responded to the 
> Joint Licence proposal advising that it acknowledges the proposed 
> headline terms and welcomes the simplified approach and reduced 
> administration for the community radio sector.
>
> To complete the consultation process, PPL and PRS for Music invited 
> individual licensees to review and comment on the proposal. All on-air 
> stations holding a PPL Community Radio Licence and/or PRS for Music 
> Community Radio Licence and organisations holding an Ofcom Community 
> Radio Licence that are yet to launch on AM or FM were contacted via 
> email and provided with response forms that could be completed and 
> returned either by email or post.
>
> PPL also set up a dedicated area on its website where the relevant 
> information (including the consultation document and response form) 
> was made available to read and download along with a dedicated email 
> address allowing any comments or queries to be submitted. A summary 
> was also provided on the PRS for Music website, linking to the 
> relevant part of the PPL website. The CMA consulted independently with 
> the sector and the responses received were collated and made available 
> to PPL and PRSfM.
>
> PPL and PRS for Music have independently considered the responses 
> received and have finalised the proposed terms of the Joint Licence.
>
> The finalised headline terms of the Joint Licence will take effect 
> from 1 January 2017 and are confirmed in Section 3 (page 9) of this 
> document 
> <http://www.ppluk.com/Global/Summary%20of%20Consultation%20Responses.pdf>.
>
> A summary of the consultation responses, including details of the 
> headline terms, is now available to review online:
>
> http://www.ppluk.com/Global/Summary%20of%20Consultation%20Responses.pdf
>
> \\
>
> Community Media Association
> -- 
> http://www.commedia.org.uk/
> http://twitter.com/community_media
> https://www.facebook.com/CommunityMediaAssociation
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/pipermail/cma-l/attachments/20161201/7708be2b/attachment.html>