Mcps-prs Alliance Pro Dub License.

[andyw 0]

surely dan we are not promoting the license here, we are actively discussing it which is what the forum was set up for to discus dj related subjects, there still seems more questions than answers imo but hopefully the nearer the date the clearer it will get,so far for me the jury is still out but i feel slightly better today than yesterday but time will tell.

 

 

Edited June 23, 2008 by andyw

[Danno13 0]

reat!, where can I sign up for the MCPS-PRS 'Refer a friend' scheme?

And what incentive is offered?. I can get £50 for referring a friend to HSBC, or a few £15 M&S vouchers for referring friends to various other commercial interests, even the MU used to offer £5 discounts for referrals..... snip

 

So you wouldn't tell your friends and colleagues about regulation changes that they might not know about without having an incentive? And let them run the risk of being caught out and fined? They obviously can't be very good friends!

 

 

[Spear 0]

My turn to be blonde for a moment, but as I understand it you don't need this license for your private collection of rips, so if music for both private and business use are stored on the same computer how are they gonna know which is which?

[spinner 0]

My turn to be blonde for a moment, but as I understand it you don't need this license for your private collection of rips, so if music for both private and business use are stored on the same computer how are they gonna know which is which?

 

 

It's what you have with you at a gig that might be checked. If that means the computer you mention above then that's the one that could be checked, although the most likely question will be do you have a Pro-Dub licence?

[jukeboxdj 0]

the one thing i want to know is how they are going to police it

and what would be the consequences for the fly by night so called djs without the licence and illegally downloaded tracks?

 

I feel the pricing is quite fair and like everyone else i would like a lot more information

 

 

By the way thanks Gary for the info, as i'm not a member of any association i rely on the DJU to keep me informed and up to date with all that is going on in the dj world :Thumbup:

[LEENEWSOME 0]

Well in my eyes there are still lots of points that need clarifying, the sooner they can get it done the better, its not great but it could sort the wheat from the chaff but venues are going to have to get behind it as well

[UKHero 0]

well it all seems crazy to me we are getting information from third parties and people willing to spend the time to find out the info by contacting these organsations.. Nothing from them direct at all.

 

Guys would you run your Disco business like this?

 

Bride calls you and you say I think im available I will let you know next week or here phone this guy he will know if I am or not....

 

They run there organisation in a very poor way indeed IMHO. Why should people like Gary have to do there work for them?

 

You would not sell another DJs services for them would you?

 

And as said illegal DLs will now become legal or better still here is an idea I buy a CD and 30 other DJs chip in to have a dub from it thats 29 CD sales lost.... now times this over all DJs and all albums purchased and I can now see a saving.

 

What we do guys is form CD pools the more DJs in the pool the cheaper CDs become you could have 100s of DJs dubbing of 1 now 69

 

This is the way forward guys I pay £400 for the dub licence then say 25p for each album I dub from the pool.

 

Wow Im off to set up a www.DJCDpool.co.uk all you have to do to join is prove you have a Dub licence then pay 25p for every album you DL....

 

All totaly legal cause we all have a £400 dub licence. I love loop holes.

 

Who wants to join lol

 

Nik

[Steve_Mitchell 0]

Am glad i use original cd`s, or am I going to get stiffed with a licence for them?

[Revelationroadshow 0]

Gary, firstly many thanks for bringing to all our attention what you know. I'm sure it's apreciated by many. I have been watching from a back seat for a while now, but to be honest, if what you say is correct and this licence WILL launch on 1st July, I am certainly somewhat angry and frustrated. In all honesty, how on earth can a regulatory body like the MCPS & PPL even consider launchin a widesweeping licence such as this in less than a week and do nothing at all about making those who will need to purchase one aware of the full details?

 

With all the will in the world Gary, you are not the MCPS or the PPL and although you have quite galantly stepped up to the lecturn and told us what you know and answered questions that many have, surely that's not your job? I'm wondering where the public relation teams from both these bodies are? After all, as DJ's we are simply a small part of a much larger group of people who are going to be affected by this.

 

I have a number of questions right now and if you are able to answer them Gary, then I would be very very grateful. Otherwise, when are we likely to get full details and information from the horses mouth?

 

Here goes (sorry if these have already been asked!).

 

1. Legal downloads, onto a PC hardrive, played out from the downloaded location = No need for licence?

2. Legal downloads, onto an external harddrive and played out from that harddrive = No need for licence?

3. Legal downloads, downloaded to one location and moved to another = Licence needed?

4. CD's ripped to a digital format = Licence needed?

 

With all of the above, where the licence is required to move a digital file or is used to allow a CD to be ripped to MP3, does this same licence continue to cover the created MP3 if it is moved to a new location, or onto an external hard drive. What if you rip a CD to a desktop, move it to an external hard drive and then from that external hard drive to a laptop?

 

OK, so the "what's covered bit" done...

 

next:

 

5. If the 1st July is correct, is there likely to be a period of grace and if so how long is that likely to be?

6. If I am correct and no licence is needed to use MP3's downloaded directly to an external hard drive, how will anyone be able to tell if these were downloaded there or were moved from a dektop PC?

7. What happens about all the MP3 files I currently have on my external Hard drive if I choose to not move them and leave them all on the hard drive from 1st July?

8. Will those who need a licence be given the oportunity to spread the cost over 12 months or similar?

9. If we use digital music in a format that doesn't require a licence, how will we be able to demonstrate that these music files were NOT ripped from a CD and have NOT been relocated?

 

Please don't get me wrong. I am certainly in favour of some resolution to the whole digital DJing and music issues, but I really want to make sure I know what is what. Unfortunately at this moment in time, it seems no clearer than it did months ago, yet there is an impending threat of needing something that we don't really understand.

 

I'm afraid that sounds a little like the Digital DJ licence thingumy we had a few years ago - glad I didn't buy one of those!

 

Again, apologies if all this has already been asked!

[Gary 0]

I have a number of questions right now and if you are able to answer them Gary, then I would be very very grateful. Otherwise, when are we likely to get full details and information from the horses mouth?

 

Here goes (sorry if these have already been asked!).

 

1. Legal downloads, onto a PC hardrive, played out from the downloaded location = No need for licence?

2. Legal downloads, onto an external harddrive and played out from that harddrive = No need for licence?

3. Legal downloads, downloaded to one location and moved to another = Licence needed?

4. CD's ripped to a digital format = Licence needed?

 

With all of the above, where the licence is required to move a digital file or is used to allow a CD to be ripped to MP3, does this same licence continue to cover the created MP3 if it is moved to a new location, or onto an external hard drive. What if you rip a CD to a desktop, move it to an external hard drive and then from that external hard drive to a laptop?

 

OK, so the "what's covered bit" done...

 

next:

 

5. If the 1st July is correct, is there likely to be a period of grace and if so how long is that likely to be?

6. If I am correct and no licence is needed to use MP3's downloaded directly to an external hard drive, how will anyone be able to tell if these were downloaded there or were moved from a dektop PC?

7. What happens about all the MP3 files I currently have on my external Hard drive if I choose to not move them and leave them all on the hard drive from 1st July?

8. Will those who need a licence be given the oportunity to spread the cost over 12 months or similar?

9. If we use digital music in a format that doesn't require a licence, how will we be able to demonstrate that these music files were NOT ripped from a CD and have NOT been relocated?

 

Please don't get me wrong. I am certainly in favour of some resolution to the whole digital DJing and music issues, but I really want to make sure I know what is what.

 

 

 

 

 

I'll pose these questions tomorrow later on today, when I speak with the guys at MCPS/PRS - I'll also ask about the "Do backups count toward the overall track count". I'll pose Dans/Dukesys questions about some form of corporate use - eg: What if an entertainment agency wants to send all its "DJs" out with the agencys "bog-standard" hard drive of "The publics 9999 top requests - ever!" - on this last point, I recall that the old "Digital DJ License" had some small print attached, to cover the fact that the licence holder, the dubber, and the end user must be one-and-the-same person - which stopped dead any ideas of any backroom "libraries" and user-to-user sharing of tunes or similar mis-use of the license. It's possible that the Pro dub license would have similar Ts & Cs. As I say, I'll ask.

 

 

 

I'll also check on the "Launch" quoted to me yesterday (and elsewhere) as being the 1st of July. "Launch" can mean a number of things, and can also NOT mean a number of things.

 

 

 

For example, - I doubt that if the license is made available to buy on July 1st, that anyone will be fined for not having it on July 2nd (a very critical example there, simply to get the point across). I recall that when the Digital DJ License was started, there was a very reasonable amnesty period, where even the 100% surcharge for retrospective purchasing (only buying the license AFTER you'd been cautioned etc) was waived, with only the normal license fee being sought. That may, or may not be the same with the Pro Dub license.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Dukesy 0]

So you wouldn't tell your friends and colleagues about regulation changes that they might not know about without having an incentive? And let them run the risk of being caught out and fined? They obviously can't be very good friends!

It all depends how close, and how much a friend.

 

For example, just because 'Ten pints Ted', the local handyman who'll turn his hand to anything, including illegally fitting gas boilers and playing DJ at the 'Grouse and Partridge' for beer money every Friday, professes to 'know' me or name drop my Roadshow in passing to give him some form of credibility, doesn't make him a friend, and neither does it mean that I want to be associated with him, or give him advance warning that his Hard Drive based player full of illegal music is about to be tumbled.

 

After all, we can't choose the people who like us can we?

 

Although many times, we may have to indulge them or tolerate them, it certainly wouldn't pass as friendship!

 

For transparency, DJ Associates have been given the following from the MCPS Business Development Director:

 

I would like to explain that members of both MCPS and PPL have rights and people who wish to make use of those rights are required to obtain a licence for any such activities and that to date there has not been a fully comprehensive licensing solution for DJ's, or others, who wish to copy the existing recording they own on to other formats for the purposes of using these other formats when they undertake their professional or semi-professional activities.

 

In seeking to develop such a solution members of my team, myself and our colleagues at PPL have invested a significant amount of time and effort in order to ensure we provide the most affordable, simple to obtain and wide ranging (in terms of the rights being granted) licence we can in these circumstances. The development process we have undertaken has involved consultation with a number of industry parties and we have been very grateful to those who have taken the time to come forward and engage with us.

 

Having undertaken this process we are confident that many people and parties in the DJ community will recognise the efforts we have made, the views we have taken on board and appreciate the benefits we have sought to include in our licence, for example:

 

· it will be a single licence covering the rights of more than 100,000 members of both MCPS and PPL

 

· we expect the entry level price for both sets of rights including VAT will now be in the region of £225 to £275, which is around the price people previously could have expected to pay for each set of rights separately excluding VAT

 

· the licence will be available via a simple web based application process

 

· it is our intention to offer introductory discounts on the standard licence prices

 

· we will be looking into additional price bandings and payment options in advance of licensees having to renew their initial licence

 

With regards to introductory discounts, the exact nature of these has not yet been decided but we are taking legal advice on these and will be applying objective criteria when setting the scope and level of such discounts.

 

The DJ Associates Intellectual Property & Media Lawyer awaits the official announcement from the MCPS and the Association will make an announcement in due course.

 

I can say that I stand by my earlier point, goodwill works both ways, especially in business and when you are actively promoting what amounts to a company, not government, telling you how to run your business, you need to be on the ball.

 

Professionally, there are some things in business negotiations which require legal proofing and as I have already stated, this subject will be looked into by an expert in their field of speciality.

[UKHero 0]

Just one other point.. If I have over the comming years brought my licences to create copies of my CD's or digital DLs when I retire can I legally sell my HD of licenced tunes as I can my legally purchased CDs? Can some one quote this for me so Gary see's it as he ignores my posts lol...

 

Nik

Edited June 24, 2008 by UKHero

[Steve_Mitchell 0]

I'll pose these questions tomorrow later on today, when I speak with the guys at MCPS/PRS -

 

Would it be a bad idea to ask these people to come onto our forum and answer the questions directly to those concerned?

[Paul Forsyth 0]

Cracking idea Steve - I'll ask them but not sure if they'll take the suggestion up.

 

Just by way of courtesy and introduction, my (real) name is Paul, I have followed this topic very closely for a number of years, I am both Vice Chairman of SEDA and their representative on the LWP.

 

If I can answer any questions I'll try, but I have no more information than has been given already.

 

Also, like Gary and others, I do not represent mcps/prs or ppl.

 

Cheers!

[KrazyKaz 0]

It would be good to have at least one of the "suits" on here answering all the questions.

[Paul Forsyth 0]

Hi again,

 

Put it to them but the guy I was speaking to was more marketing based so not the best person for the job.

 

Full details of the licence will go live on Tuesday on the MCPS site.

 

More news as it comes in.

 

Vinnie

 

PS - Hi Dan, Paul and anyone else that remembers me.

[McCardle 1]

i'd also be interested to know how this is likely to affect the hire side of things. Lots of deejays hire out equipment to the public, either as a diversity to their business or as an entirely seperate business and i do seriously believe that since neither the hire company nor the client is likely to have / need the relevant documentation nor appear on any database held by the MCPS does this mean that the client will be refused access to the venue to do their own entertainment. If this is the case, then i can see a potential for serious loss of income and hire business resulting from this, if clients are prevented from hiring. If the client should need to obtain a dubbing licence for their function, then the whole thing is going to have to be publicised on a national scale in the same way as the Inland Revenue do when tax doesn't have to be taxing.

 

I've also seen it mentioned several times, that our industry is already being undercut by the huge and ever increasing growth of companies advertising jukebox hire at prices which directly compete with us toe-to-toe for the same business and often at lower prices. If a jukebox at a private function is unlikely to ever need a dubbing licence then it just gives them more incentive and lower working overheads to be able to compete against us, in what is an already a very competitive market. Maybe the increse in working costs may actually persuade some deejays to enter the dry hire market, after all they get their evenings and weekends with their family and the working costs are cheaper for a fraction of the work.

 

I still believe that this whole licence is effectively going to cost more to police, roll out and administrate than it generates in actual additional revenue, more so as the fee appears to be a one off rather than an ongoing annual affair. There are a hell of a lot of venues in the middle of nowhere and i'm talking of 1000's of venues which are straight out of "The Shining" and occasionally not even on a Sat Nav, and with the cost of fuel rocketing, £250 doesn't buy you many tankfuls to get around these days, and one assumes that the number of spot checks will have to be substantially increased.

Edited June 24, 2008 by McCardle

[UKHero 0]

and one assumes that the number of spot checks will have to be substantially increased.

 

No dont assume this, The last farce that was a DJ licence I never ever even heard of untill I joined DJU..

 

And there was not a single venue I performed at ever asked for it much the same as PAT PIL etc...

 

There are so many problems with this licence it is ill thought out and will probably cost MCPS more money than they make....

 

They may even have a hand in further damaging the already shakey music business in this country as Digital DJs will pool Cds or just down load the tracks they need from itues etc... This is what I will be doing.

 

Nik

Edited June 24, 2008 by UKHero

[Reverandfunk 0]

I'm with Nik 100% on this. Venues arent bothered about PLI & PAT so can't see them bothering about this license

 

If Gary hadn't taken this up none of us would know anything lol

 

The fundamental problem is going to be IF you get a visit and haven't got "the license" just say they are all legal downloads with nothing ripped from CD.

 

What on earth will they do?

Go through 5000 tracks whilst you're working?

Impound your laptop?

 

 

[UKHero 0]

What on earth will they do?

Go through 5000 tracks whilst you're working?

Impound your laptop?

 

Sadly it might come to that but hey if they are all legal downloads just imagine the compensation when you sue them for loss of earnings and defamation of good character lol...

 

Gary aside I think we all know his attitude how many of you will be with cheque book in hand on the 1st of July???

 

Hey rev you wanna Join my CD pool??? lol

 

Nik

Edited June 24, 2008 by UKHero

[Dukesy 0]

Hi again,

 

Put it to them but the guy I was speaking to was more marketing based so not the best person for the job.

 

Full details of the licence will go live on Tuesday on the MCPS site.

 

More news as it comes in.

 

Vinnie

 

PS - Hi Dan, Paul and anyone else that remembers me.

Hi Paul

 

Paul (Vinnie) should be thanked for his drive and commitment in rallying members of the forum to fight against the introduction of the Digital DJ Licence when introduced back in 2005.

His passion and deeply thought-out reasons were instrumental in the establishment of DJ Associates, especially with regard to the precedent set by introducing such a licence and widely held views of the majority. He represented the Association at Bournemouth University and consulted with Professor Martin Kretschmer, Professor of Information Jurisprudence, Joint Director: Centre for Intellectual Property Policy & Management, bringing argument to LWP meetings with the PPL and with Mastermix reps at a SEDA meeting.

 

Paul's thoughts and feelings back then towards the "back door legislation" and its "frightening advance" can be read here.

[Reverandfunk 0]

Nik dunno about the pool

 

My 28 inch waist speedos are chaffing like buggery....

[Gary 0]

Paul (Vinnie) should be thanked for his drive and commitment in rallying members of the forum to fight against the introduction of the Digital DJ Licence when introduced back in 2005.

 

 

 

Totally agree - and Paul is modest with it - when I've spoken with Paul/Vinnie either by phone or at various DJ events/Trade shows etc about the "whole licence thing" and the tremendous amount of time and effort that's been put into getting a better, fairer, alternative for DJs compared to the industrys first attempt eg: The now moth-balled "Digital DJ License" - Paul has always been extremely quick to mention all the efforts of his colleagues within the License Working Party (LWP), before his own.

 

 

 

Perhaps not surprisingly, though, when I've spoken with the Pauls LWP colleagues, they too mention their colleagues efforts (including Pauls) before their own efforts too.

 

 

 

With news of the LWP chairman standing down (A bit like Father Christmas having the 25th to the 31st Dec off ... eg: "Presents all delivered - time for a break"), I think that ALL the members of the LWP have managed to nurture a very good final result for all of us, and my thanks go to them all.

 

 

 

In the interests of clarification, it should be noted that Pauls/Vinnies comments of 3 years ago, linked to above, relate to the first PPL License offering (The "Digital DJ License") rather than the new "Pro Dub License" which is what the LWP have been working on with "The powers that be" ever since the Digital DJ License was shelved for various content related reasons.

 

 

 

 

Edited June 24, 2008 by Gary

[Paul Forsyth 0]

Paul's thoughts and feelings back then towards the "back door legislation" and its "frightening advance" can be read here.

 

I need to go back and read this - lol.

 

Without reading it, the PPL digital DJ Licence was an ill concieved, barely researched, unbelievably restrictive piece of nonsence. One of the key arguments against it was the restriction of practice. I'm not sure that this argument stands up against the Pro Dub Licence.

 

I am now holding final judgement until I see the details of the licence.

 

Although price was / is a major consideration, the main consideration was / is the practical workability of use of the licence and to that end I believe the LWP have achieved a lot to make this work.

 

People will never be enthusiastic about paying for something they've enjoyed for free, but at 2 pence per track I find it hard to raise a financial argument against this if it means I can copy tracks legally. The legal alternative I believe is to download my back catalogue at 79 pence per track????????????????

 

Unfortunately I am in the same boat as everyone else, Tuesday 1st July I will get to see the details and make a judgement call.

 

Peace and love (lol),

 

Vinnie

 

PS - anyone that thinks this licence is bad (Pro Dub) go research the PPL Digital DJ Licence and compare the two.

Edited June 24, 2008 by Vinnie

[UKHero 0]

Vinny from a thread dated Oct 14 2005, 11:20 AM

 

This is not about cost, it's about being shafted for nothing, it's about being penalised for being honest, it's about freedom of infrmation, it's about being an unpaid informant (even the old bill pay their grasses), it's about stealth law making, it's about setting ourselves up as a cash cow to be milked by PPL.

 

So far this "license" (which really ought to be called tax)has been likened to insurance - I don't think so we know what we are buying with insurance.

 

 

We really should be looking to get England brought into line with other countries that do not penalise the DJ for using equipment and technology that is activly being pushed as the way forward.

 

How to stop "MR CROOK" from posing as a dj is not our problem!!!!

 

We need to focus on our needs and interests and not those of PPL, Equipment manufactures, promo providers those guys really can look after themselves - which is what they're doing with this license - double bubble anyone?

 

Vinnie

 

Vinny from a thread dated June 24 2008 09:22 AM

 

 

Cracking idea Steve - I'll ask them but not sure if they'll take the suggestion up.

 

Just by way of courtesy and introduction, my (real) name is Paul, I have followed this topic very closely for a number of years, I am both Vice Chairman of SEDA and their representative on the LWP.

 

If I can answer any questions I'll try, but I have no more information than has been given already.

 

Also, like Gary and others, I do not represent mcps/prs or ppl.

 

Cheers!

 

I would like to know what has changed your mind in the last 2 years 7 months 14 days 9 hours 18 minutes.

 

You seemed very much against the idea of a DJ licence as it was a device to shaft the DJ and we would not be getting anything in return... I am sure yu have put a lot of time and effort into the LWP, but what has changed. Also as DJs we are what I would call creatives and most if not all of us are not up on all the legalities of the copyright issues of the UK...

 

Yet it seems that the LWP has neglected to enlist the support of a legal representative to look out for our rights..

 

You now seem to be singing from the same hymn sheet as my good friend Gary :ads: and I just wonder why.

 

Has the LWP truly acieved what it set out to do or is it now the whipping boy of the MCPS and in some ways they are using the LWP to promote this licence on there behalf, saving them a fortune in advertising and causing wide spread scare mongering to purchase the license or else the MCPS bogie man will come get you...

 

Now Phil C has left the sinking ship that i feel is now the LWP is gary ready to jump into his position lol, might be a good move buy a Denon hd2500 and get a free 12 month dub licence sorry last bit in jest but I think some on here with open minds and open hearts will see what I mean.

 

I still think the licence should be a licence to DJ and as with many union subscriptions should be earnings related. A DJ earning from 5 nights aweek should pay more than a DJ working 1 night a month.. after all they are using the material more so it makes sence this would also help new starting DJs get a foot hold on the first rung of the ladder.

 

 

Nik

 

Nik