[cma-l] PPL and PRSfM - Community Radio "Licences"

Fri Sep 16 14:07:56 BST 2016

>>I stand to be corrected, but I don't think any society has gone before
the tribunal on any proposal to amend or extend their scheme to cover
non-profit radio, they have just come up with fresh agreements for
community radio, offering broadly the same terms as for large scale
commercial radio.<<

They don't need to. They can charge what they like, and if the Community
Media Association doesn't agree with the prices and thinks it's worth it,
the CMA can then take them to the Copyright Tribunal if they can't reach
agreement any other way. That's how the Tribunal works, as a last resort.
You don't have to ask them for permission.

I'm not in community radio, so my two-pence-worth on this is:

1. They charge most large commercial radio groups around 12% of NBR in
total. They're charging just 4% for most community radio stations (assuming
you're earning less than 600,000 quid). If you earn nothing on commercial
revenue, you're paying 732. And there are no extra charges for the
internet, it would appear, reading the terms.

2. They require full logs for commercial radio groups, and you have to deal
with PRS and PPL separately. For community radio, from January, you don't
have any logging requirements, and you're only going to be dealing with one
company: less hassle, less paperwork.

I think, for the entire PRS/PPL repertoire, that's a bloody good deal, to
be honest.

//j

On 16 September 2016 at 12:45, Two Lochs Radio <tlr at gairloch.co.uk> wrote:

> Actually Richard, I don't think that's exactly right.
>
> The legislation certainly gives societies the right to apply to the
> Copyright Tribunal for legal recognition of a licensing scheme for a group
> of rights holders, or to vary a scheme, but it is up to the societies to
> set the scale of fees in their schemes. The Copyright Tribunal becomes
> involved in ruling on the details of fees only if specifically asked to.
>
> The Copyright Tribunal's main role is to act as an arbiter if and when
> prospective rights user finds themselves unable to agree grant of a licence
> or licence terms with a relevant collecting society. Going before the
> tribunal is an expensive and protracted process much the same as bringing
> any other civil case to court (though there is now a fast track available
> to some cases). This of course can effectively deny justice to users who do
> not have the financial and legal resources that PPL or PRS can bring to
> bear in court, and who cannot risk the potentially huge legal bills.
>
> The significance of this is that PPL and PRS could, if they were minded
> to, agree to offer different fee scales for different sectors, for example
> for not-for-profit local radio, They are not obliged to have the fees set
> by Copyright Tribunal. Indeed, I'm not aware of any tribunal ruling on the
> fees to be applied to community/non-profit radio stations, only for the BBC
> and for commercial stations (AIRC v PPL back in 1993). That settlement,
> incidentally, did not give them a right to charge a minimum fee.
>
> I stand to be corrected, but I don't think any society has gone before the
> tribunal on any proposal to amend or extend their scheme to cover
> non-profit radio, they have just come up with fresh agreements for
> community radio, offering broadly the same terms as for large scale
> commercial radio.
>
> They do of course have a duty to ensure that their fees are equitable and
> reasonable, but on the face of it it would seem perfectly fair and
> reasonable to have a lower scale of charges for radio stations whose aim is
> not to make private profit from use of the copyright material, and I don't
> believe it would be mandatory to refer such a scale of fees to the
> Copyright tribunal for approval if the licencees accepted it.
>
> Alex
>
> On 16 September 2016 at 11:21 Richard Berry <richard.berry at sunderland.ac.
> uk> wrote:
>
> The legislation sets the framework, and the Copyright Tribunal set the
> fees (See here: http://www.prsformusic.com/aboutus/faqs/prsformusicfaqs/
> pages/default.aspx#9  here: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/
> licensing-bodies-and-collective-management-organisations and here:
> https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/copyright-tribunal)
>
>
>
> The general thrust is copyright owners have the right under law to be paid
> when their work is used. When you buy a CD you are granted permission (a
> licence) to play that music in certain situations. That does not include a
> public performance, where an additional licence must be granted. PRS and
> PPL are member organisations (As is EOS in Wales) who collect royalties for
> performances by their members. This makes it easier for us and for them.
> The fees are set by the bodies and overseen by Government. Obviously, the
> members want to biggest payment possible to offset losses through piracy
> etc.  You potentially don’t have to pay THEM the fees, but you would then
> permission for each element of the copyrights for everything that you did
> play. For example, the current number one “Closer” has 7 listed writers
> with which you would need to reach agreement. You’d also need consent from
> the publishers, the record label (possibly the owner and the subsidiaries)
> as well as the artists. Plus clearances for any samples used. Whilst we’d
> all wish the fees were lower, a blanket licence is by the far the easiest
> solution. If you object, you could of course run an all speech station, one
> where artists waive their rights (Amazing Radio did this for a bit) or
> music from artists who are not members.
>
>
>
> The power is with artists (see this about the split in Wales
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-30961059) It’s a shame you missed the
> PRS/PPL session last weeken Ian, we were looking forward to your questions
>
>
>
> Best wishes
>
>
>
> Richard
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk [mailto:
> cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk] *On Behalf Of *Two Lochs Radio
> *Sent:* 16 September 2016 10:25
> *To:* office at thethread.org.uk; Ian Hickling; The Community Media
> Association Discussion List
> *Subject:* Re: [cma-l] PPL and PRSfM - Community Radio "Licences"
>
>
>
> The answer to the simple question is the same as it has been every time
> you've asked Ian. It's the: Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988
> Sections 116-123.
>
>
>
> Alex.
>
> On 16 September 2016 at 06:54 Ian Hickling <transplanfm at hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> The very basic challenge I've posed - amongst others - to PRSfM and PPL is:
>
>
>
> Show me please where in the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 - or
> any other legislation - it says that I have to pay you exclusively the fees
> you are demanding.
>
>
>
> Surely a very simple question - to which an answer is strangely not
> forthcoming?
>
>
>
> Ian Hickling
>
> Partner
>
> <http://www.transplanuk.com/>
>
> *Office: 016 3557 8435 <016%203557%208435>  (07h to 22h GTS)*
>
> *Car: 075 3098 0115 <075%203098%200115> (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 Alex Gray, Two Lochs Radio <
> tlr at gairloch.co.uk>
> *Sent:* 15 September 2016 17:28
> *To:* office at thethread.org.uk; 'The Community Media Association
> Discussion List'
> *Subject:* Re: [cma-l] FW: PPL and PRS for Music Community Radio Licences
> - Customer Consultation
>
>
>
> Dear Mr Numpty
>
>
>
> The rough answers to your questions are:
>
>
>
> 1)      Number of songs played per-hour      average
>
>
>
> The only proposed change in reporting is that there will no longer be a
> need to submit an estimate of future revenue at the start of a year, only
> the actual revenue at the end of the year.
>
>
>
> 2)      Standard budget reasonable cost payment
> bearing – in – mind that
>
>
>
> Whichever is the greater of:
>
> Minimum combined fee of £1798/year, or
>
> Combined royalties of 5% on 80% of any broadcast advertising or
> sponsorship income
>
>
>
> 3)      We are not for profit and our NET revenue is zero / zilch /
> diddly squat
>
>
>
> That status is of no interest to PPL or PRS – they levy the royalties on
> 80% of your broadcast (and/or simulcast) advertising and sponsorship
> income, regardless of whether or not it leads to profit or you spend it all
> on coffee and doughnuts for the presenters. If you have no such income,
> then you would pay only the minimum fees.
>
>
>
> 4)      No reporting, as there is nothing to report apart from song usage
>
>
>
> See 1) above
>
>
>
> Hope that fits within the attention span of a goldfish - good luck with
> the plates!
>
>
>
> Alex
>
>
>
> ----------------------------
>
>
>
> Anything outside of this, my attention span has suddenly developed into
> that of a Goldfish.
>
>
>
> I fill the form in later as I need to get back to the 50 Plates …..
> well    42 actually, as 8 have just dropped off
>
>
>
> Nick Dumpty
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> [image: Avast logo] <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Reply - cma-l at commedia.org.uk
>
> The cma-l mailing list is a members' service provided by the Community
> Media Association - http://www.commedia.org.uk
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/community_media
> http://www.facebook.com/CommunityMediaAssociation
> Canstream Internet Radio & Video: http://www.canstream.co.uk/
> _______________________________________________
>
> Mailing list guidelines: http://www.commedia.org.uk/
> about/cma-email-lists/email-list-guidelines/
> _______________________________________________
>
> To unsubscribe or manage your CMA-L mailing list subscription please visit:
> http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cma-l
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Reply - cma-l at commedia.org.uk
>
> The cma-l mailing list is a members' service provided by the Community
> Media Association - http://www.commedia.org.uk
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/community_media
> http://www.facebook.com/CommunityMediaAssociation
> Canstream Internet Radio & Video: http://www.canstream.co.uk/
> _______________________________________________
>
> Mailing list guidelines: http://www.commedia.org.uk/
> about/cma-email-lists/email-list-guidelines/
> _______________________________________________
>
> To unsubscribe or manage your CMA-L mailing list subscription please visit:
> http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cma-l
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Reply - cma-l at commedia.org.uk
>
> The cma-l mailing list is a members' service provided by the Community
> Media Association - http://www.commedia.org.uk
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/community_media
> http://www.facebook.com/CommunityMediaAssociation
> Canstream Internet Radio & Video: http://www.canstream.co.uk/
> _______________________________________________
>
> Mailing list guidelines: http://www.commedia.org.uk/
> about/cma-email-lists/email-list-guidelines/
> _______________________________________________
>
> To unsubscribe or manage your CMA-L mailing list subscription please visit:
> http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cma-l
>

-- 
https://james.cridland.net - get my weekly newsletter
https://media.info - the media information website
http://nextrad.io - the radio ideas conference

Tel: +61 447 692 743 | @jamescridland
Amazingly Brilliant Pty Ltd | ABN 30 612 913 514
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/pipermail/cma-l/attachments/20160916/18e0137b/attachment.html>