fantastic idea trevor, but what it requires is the agreement of all record labels and artists onto the alternative which is how PPL, PRS etc has the monopoly as the companies are not going to agree to getting less by coming to us.. or you might get some but unless you have them all it wont work.<div>
<br>What we should do as a collective is make sure we are keeping the fees down (or getting them lowered) or maybe (IF we want to) asking to have full log audits and paying for what you use.. as a side note do your local artists known about PPL and PRS and are they registered to receive money?<br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Trevor Lockwood <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:lockwood@btinternet.com">lockwood@btinternet.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0"><tbody><tr><td valign="top" style="font:inherit">Gary<br><br>I agree the changes are necessary.. I remain concerned about PPL and PRS, a commercial company operating under a section of the design, trademark protection legislation, that appears to have a stranglehold on the distribution of musical content.<br>
<br>There are many stories about the heavy-handed and legalistic attitude they adopt, but the situation still remains very unclear. I'd like to see a very clear statement about what has to be paid, what happens to that money, how our local artistes can receive some of that money, and whether such a company should have that responsibility. Perhaps it could be a 'nice little earner' for OfCom?<br>
<br>To suggest that we can 'choose' which of eight stations we are most like, and then to say that these chosen stations will be monitored occasionally is not sufficient. It's clear that many stations are being
forced to pay more than they should, that local musicians gain nothing and, I understand, the CEO of this organisation is paid £600,000 a year for this 'service'. We have the technology to create a much fairer system - and maybe we make the subject of that NESTA grant that's now available?<br>
<br>Failing an adequate explanation, and given the current income they must be receiving from the community sector I can see no economic reason why we shouldn't set up a rival service.<br><br>There's a cat for you stool pigeons.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>Trevor</font></td></tr></tbody></table><br>_______________________________________________<br>
<br>
Reply - <a href="mailto:cma-l@commedia.org.uk">cma-l@commedia.org.uk</a><br>
<br>
The cma-l mailing list is a members' service provided by the Community Media Association - <a href="http://www.commedia.org.uk" target="_blank">http://www.commedia.org.uk</a><br>
Twitter: <a href="http://twitter.com/community_media" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/community_media</a><br>
<a href="http://www.facebook.com/CommunityMediaAssociation" target="_blank">http://www.facebook.com/CommunityMediaAssociation</a><br>
Canstream Internet Radio & Video: <a href="http://www.canstream.co.uk/" target="_blank">http://www.canstream.co.uk/</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
<br>
Mailing list guidelines: <a href="http://www.commedia.org.uk/about/cma-email-lists/email-list-guidelines/" target="_blank">http://www.commedia.org.uk/about/cma-email-lists/email-list-guidelines/</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
<br>
To unsubscribe or manage your CMA-L mailing list subscription please visit:<br>
<a href="http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cma-l" target="_blank">http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cma-l</a><br></blockquote></div><br></div>