[cma-l] Licensing and VAT

Martin Steers martin at martinsteers.co.uk
Wed Jan 4 14:44:09 GMT 2017 

I thought this would happen.. the conversation has detracted back into the
merits and cons of PPL and PRS.

What I will say is about the "I brought it I own it, I can do what I want
with it"...

whilst I understand the logic, I think its based on the premise for which
its brought..

The example I have is movies / DVDs.

If you buy a DVD it will have a little thing on the case (if not certainly
on the recording) to say its been purchased for personal and private usage
only.. You could not buy a load of cheap £5 DVDs of Amazon and start a
rental company (why you would want to is a different issue as it doesnt
suit my example). However if you want to do a DVD rental service you have
to buy rental DVDs which when I last knew anything about it (I had a friend
who did run a DVD service years ago).. each one cost £150 - £200 each.

I think its about artists being paid in relation to the value of the work
they produce. They want to sell you a personal copy of their single for
£1.. however if you are about to start playing that to hundreds of people
then why could the not charge you more for that song.

To use my DVD rental example as above..

instead of PPL and PRS asking for a percentage (and lets face it 90% of CR
just pay the minimum.. which i AGREE should be lower, and trust me I tried
every argument as possible to get it lower) they could have an alternative
system of you having to buy "broadcast" copies of the tracks.. lets say £50
for each single or £1000 for each album of songs.. its a different game,
but I bet the numbers might all work out the same.. although I suspect
commercial radio would benefit massively and community radio would suffer.

Let me now say the following under the fact I am not a lawyer, I have never
studied the law and I am not giving you legal advice..

You have the following..

1. Pay the fees (by the way, you might be able to say you are "paying under
protest" and get away with it.. or even "signing under protest and not
accepting of these terms and conditions" on the paperwork and see what they
say)

2. Dont pay and see what happens when PPL/PRS take you to court.. at least
you could try your case in front of the judge and see what they say..

3. The sector (as the CMA cant afford to do it), clubs the 10's if not
100's of thousands of pounds for a war chest and take PPL / PRS to tribunal
/ courts against the min fees, against the moral issues etc..

Otherwise... and I mean this in the most honest, supportive and sincere
way.. lets just all move on from the debate about the rights and wrongs on
PPL and PRS.. lets use that energy in apply for grants for our community
media projects.. lets look at raising the profile of the good work of
community media and what it does.. lets try and fight the battles that
quite frankly we have a better chance of winning.. increase in community
radio fund.. etc.. all stuff thats on my agenda and as such I know is on
the agenda of the CMA.. and also rest assured.. the CMA will continue to
lobby and fight for the best terms and licenses for the sector from the
likes of PPL and PRS.. remember it was that fight that has saved all CR
stations who do or will simulcast in SSDAB around £500 per year each..

Martin

On 4 January 2017 at 13:55, Canalside's The Thread <office at thethread.org.uk>
wrote:

> I understand the legalities of it all but DISAGREE with it all with a
> vengeance !
>
> It’s nothing more than a legal money making racket concocted up back 1912
> by a few clever boffins who knew how to work a system.
>
>
>
> By rights, if I buy or purchase something, then I own it, and I can do
> what I want with it because I own it. If an ‘artist’ or whoever doesn’t
> want people to use their material then don’t put it up for use, keep it to
> yourself.
>
> Put your talent and your material in a shop and if it is good enough folk
> will buy it, if it isn’t, they won’t and that dear all is how life works.
> If ever there was a classic example of cake and eat it here it is.
>
>
>
> If I buy a Ford Car next week and decide to open up a Taxi business, Ford
> don’t charge me each time I drive it … I buy it and then I own it. If I
> earn money (as in this Taxi case .. so what ?)   do I have to report to
> Ford every year on how much I have earned so that they can charge me 3% of
> it …….
>
>
>
> What has happened is CONVENIENTLY ‘they’ as in the powers that be have
> confused Performance etc with PIRACY and by doing so they have been able to
> force through legislation. No doubt the ones who forced it through
> originally had their fingers in the Pie and were getting a nice tickle out
> of it £££ and possibly still are …………..
>
>
>
> I see it like this :-
>
>
>
> If I wish to play Elton Johns music then I go out and purchase it on
> record / cd / download / spottyface / yogurt carton and piece of string
> ………. Including all his albums and singles back in the 70’s (I started
> buying records back in 1969) plus then cd’s, I reckon Elton has had a good
> butty out of me.
>
> I happen to work in an industry where I can then showcase (for Elton) his
> work in the hope that perhaps others will purchase his talent. In
> otherwords we are all happy bunnies as it benefits us as well. Please don’t
> be distracted or foget though by the fact we have already paid for it.
>
>
>
> Elton can then pay who he wishes for helping him write a song or play
> spoons on one of his songs.
>
>
>
> If Joe Public go out and buy his material he makes money, if people don’t
> because they don’t like it then he doesn’t make money ---- a bit like us
> really. If no ones listens to us and we’re not very good, there’s no
> PRS/PPL safety net for us !        ie:- getting paid for doing nothing.
>
>
>
> If I steal Eltons talent though and don’t pay him for his record or cd
> then that is breaking the law --- it is theft.
>
>
>
> So, to conclude ……………. Buy it, do what you want with it because it becomes
> yours. If he/she doesn’t want you to buy it, don’t do it in the first place
> and don’t put it up for sale.
>
> It’s just a money making racket.
>
>
>
> To rub salt in the wounds we then have PRS/PPL coming to us    official
> Charities / Not-for-profit Organisations asking for reports and poking
> their conks into our Business. Our Business is exactly what it says on the
> can – Not-for-profit so the end result is = zero …………..also     all the
> music on our system bar a handful have been bought / purchased and I have a
> receipt for the lot going back to 1969
>
>
>
> It’s a complete joke and folk have just gone along with it. Of course it
> is a multi-million pound circus now so it will probably never be tweaked.
>
>
>
> I disagree totally with this new licence and I am unsure as to what to
> do??    The idea and concept is good (something I suggested 8 years ago and
> was told ‘’oh we can’t do that’’)             By applying for it and
> signing the form means that you are agreeing with the terms ……… we do not
> agree with the terms and therefore ‘’houston we have a
> problem’’                   this wasn’t a consultation, it was merely yet
> another lipservice exercise.
>
> I have asked them to send me the invoice for the year and who to pay it
> to, as of yet all I have received are two letters full of gobbled gook and
> the usual telling me what I already know.
>
>
>
> We refuse as a Charity / Not-for-profit Organisation to fill in report
> forms on whether a window cleaner cleans your windows for a philanthropic
> thank you … I have far more important things to do each day than work out
> mathematically the value of that.
>
>
>
>    1. It’s none of Elton Johns business           and
>    2. What don’t they understand about our Net being = zero ??
>
>
>
> I am sick of banging my head against a brick wall
>
>
>
> In a nutshell, why do you have to apply for a licence to allow you to do
> something with something that you have already paid for ???   it’s bonkers
> !     I can’t think of any other system like it …………………… can you ?    I’m
> all ears
>
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> *From:* cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk [mailto:
> cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk] *On Behalf Of *tlr at gairloch.co.uk
> *Sent:* 04 January 2017 12:22
> *To:* The Community Media Association Discussion List <
> cma-l at mailman.commedia.org.uk>
> *Subject:* Re: [cma-l] Licensing and VAT
>
>
>
> It's just two very slightly different uses of the word 'licence' Ian - not
> many words in English have only one meaning.
>
> PPL/PRS et al could call it "A document giving you permission to do
> something" but that would be a bit cumbersome, and as a shorthand the word
> 'licence' is the term generally used for the sort of contract where someone
> who has the right to restrict the use of some intellectual property or
> material grants someone else limited permission to use that material.
>
> PPL and PRS gain the right to restrict public performances by means of
> contracts with the original copyright holders (performers, composers,
> record lables etc), and they in turn issue licences to people who wish to
> make use of the copyright materials. It's the term generally used across
> the field of intellectual property - licences to produce patented goods, to
> print copies of photographs etc. Failure to have an appropriate licence of
> this type is a civil offence requiring the rights holder to take out a
> civil law suit against the alleged infringer.
>
> The other use of the word licence is the much narrower one relating to
> permission to carry on some legally restricted activity, and for which it
> is an offence not to have a licence issued by an authorised body. Such as a
> TV licence, drivers licence, lottery licence, broadcasting licence etc.
> Failure to have a required statutory licence is usually a criminal offence
> that can be dealt with by public prosecutors or fixed penalies.
>
> I'm not a lawyer, but that's my broad understanding of the situation, and
> at the end of the day it doesn;t really matter much what they call it -
> they question is whether their terms of business and charges are acceptable.
>
> Alex
>
> On 04 January 2017 at 10:04 Ian Hickling <transplanfm at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> The answer from my viewpoint Geoff is that the PRSfM and PPL payments are
> commercial service charges which is why they are subject to VAT at the
> current rate.
> The Royalties organisations are commercial businesses, they are not
> Licensing Authorities as is Ofcom.
>
> They refer to their invoice/agreement as a "Licence" whereas it fact it is
> not.
> As has been pointed out recently here and elsewhere, neither association
> has ever submitted an application to the Copyright Tribunal for a mandate
> under the Copyright Acts and is relying solely on its own assertion of its
> entitlement to collect revenue.
> You may choose to make a decision as to whether you feel  they are acting
> transparently and within the Law.
> You will probably have guessed mine.
>
>
>
> 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 Geoff Rogers <geoff at susyradio.com>
> *Sent:* 03 January 2017 23:06:54
> *To:* CMA-L
> *Subject:* [cma-l] Licensing and VAT
>
>
>
> This is a quick query prompted only by our recent invoice from PPL and PRS.
>
>
>
> The above is subject to 20% VAT but is sold to us as a a 'licence' to play
> the artistes' repertoire.
>
>
>
> However, we also pay Ofcom for a 'licence' and these are not subject to
> VAT.
>
>
>
> Can someone explain simply why VAT is payable on one form of licence and
> not the other.
>
>
>
> Happy New Year to all.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
>
> Geoff
>
>
>
> --
>
> Geoff Rogers
> Programme Director
> Susy Radio, Local Community Radio for Redhill and Reigate
> On-air across Sussex and Surrey on 103.4FM NOW
> Web: susyradio.com <http://www.susyradio.com>
>
> Susy Radio Ltd. A company registered in England and Wales.
> Registered Office: 54 Nutfield Road, Merstham, Redhill, Surrey, RH1 3EP.
> Registered Number: 06748586
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/pipermail/cma-l/attachments/20170104/408712f0/attachment.html>

More information about the cma-l mailing list