Digital DJ Licence

[FDDJ 0]

I've had a look at both options for buying the Digital DJ licence (via Mastermix & DMC) and noticed that despite both acting as agents of PPL, they still don't agree on how the licence works!

 

On the DMC site it states the following:

 

"A DJ using traditional CD's, records, cassettes, DVD's, videos who does not then wish to dub his music to a hard drive or other dedicated MP3 playback device is exempt from this License. A DJ who uses legally purchased digital downloads does not need this License."

 

On the Mastermix site it says this:

 

"When you purchase a vinyl record, tape or CD you only can use that record for domestic purposes. You do not acquire any rights to copy that record or to play that record in public. So if you want to copy a sound recording on that record onto your computer, you must obtain the permission of the owner of the copyright in that sound recording.

 

The position in respect of lawful downloads is very similar, save that you are given a limited right to keep a copy of the downloaded sound recording for your domestic listening. If you want to keep that copy for other purposes, then the law requires you to obtain the permission of the copyright owner."

 

http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/533.gif

 

I can't wait to see PPL try and take someone to court, all the issues surrounding this are gonna get messy.

Edited September 13, 2005 by StevJam

[pareshj 0]

I picked a postcard flyer from the PPL stand from PLASA and it says

 

"Do you copy tracks onto your computer to play out when you're Djing?

 

You can now do this legally.

 

PPL has launched a new license enabling DJs legally to copy sound recordings onto a computer and store up to 20,000 tracks to play out in clubs, pubs and other venues.

 

To get your digital DJ license call 020 7534 1000

or visit www.ppluk.com for more information"

 

 

 

 

 

but no mention at all of MCPS license which "IS" needed to be fully 100% legal.

still confused....join the club

http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/wallbash.gif

 

 

 

 

[KrazyKaz 0]

http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/wallbash.gif

 

just when we thought it was over.

 

I'm still mega confused by the whole thing and not sure where to go from now on.

 

http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/huh.gif

[Steve_Mitchell 0]

its all a load of dangly bits.

[ian 0]

QUOTE (StevJam @ Sep 13 2005, 08:05 AM)

I've had a look at both options for buying the Digital DJ licence (via Mastermix & DMC) and noticed that despite both acting as agents of PPL, they still don't agree on how the licence works! On the DMC site is states the following: "A DJ using traditional CD's, records, cassettes, DVD's, videos who does not then wish to dub his music to a hard drive or other dedicated MP3 playback device is exempt from this License. A DJ who uses legally purchased digital downloads does not need this License." On the Mastermix site it says this: "When you purchase a vinyl record, tape or CD you only can use that record for domestic purposes. You do not acquire any rights to copy that record or to play that record in public. So if you want to copy a sound recording on that record onto your computer, you must obtain the permission of the owner of the copyright in that sound recording. The position in respect of lawful downloads is very similar, save that you are given a limited right to keep a copy of the downloaded sound recording for your domestic listening. If you want to keep that copy for other purposes, then the law requires you to obtain the permission of the copyright owner." http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/533.gif I can't wait to see PPL try and take someone to court, all the issues surrounding this are gonna get messy.

Surely the correct answer with regard to legal downloads is that "it all depends". It depends on the conditions attached to the legal download. Some downloads might be for domestic use only, but others may say that public performance is okay. When people talk about legal downloads, they usually mean stuff like downloads from iTunes or Woolworths or wherever, but there are other legal downloads such as artists placing stuff on their own website. To take an extreme example, someone could create a new piece of work, make it available for download and place it in the public domain - which I believe would make it perfectly legal to play it in public.

[jackcu 0]

My understanding is that ALL music you buy in ANY format is for domestic use only. It's just the same as buying a CD - you can play it at home but if you want to play it in public then you have to make sure you comply with the law. In this case it means that you don't need a special license to play it at a private event, but you would need a license to play it in a club where people have paid to get in.

 

My understanding is that the digital license just gives you the right to move the recording from the CD to your computer - it doesn't mean you can then play it in a club without the appropriate license.

 

Mind you, I'm so confused, I'm probably talking http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/pooh.gif

 

Cheers,

 

Jack.

[ian 0]

QUOTE (jackcu @ Sep 13 2005, 11:32 AM)

My understanding is that ALL music you buy in ANY format is for domestic use only. It's just the same as buying a CD - you can play it at home but if you want to play it in public then you have to make sure you comply with the law. In this case it means that you don't need a special license to play it at a private event, but you would need a license to play it in a club where people have paid to get in. My understanding is that the digital license just gives you the right to move the recording from the CD to your computer - it doesn't mean you can then play it in a club without the appropriate license. Mind you, I'm so confused, I'm probably talking http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/pooh.gif

That's pretty much my understanding of the situation (that the digital licence allows you to transfer the format but doesn't entitle you to play it in public).

 

Where I'd disagree (and I am probably wrong) is on your statement that "ALL music you buy in ANY format is for domestic use only". I don't believe there's a blanket legal cover that all CDs (for example) are for domestic use only. I think that every CD has its own individual legalities - it's just that most of them stipulate domestic use only. But I don't see any reason why a band can't release a CD which doesn't have that stipulation on it. For example if a band write a piece of music and then make a CD of it, they own all the IPR so they can introduce any rules about it being for domestic use only or they can choose not to.

 

Like I said elsewhere (I think) this might be an extreme example, but with the Internet and digital media (video as well as audio) it is much easier for someone working alone to produce a download than a CD, so these extreme examples may well become more common.

[Dukesy 0]

The deeper issues concern me. http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/biggrin.gif

 

Let's say that a DJ who only provides discos for private functions uses his ipods and controller in the entertainment.

 

Now, according to the 'digital license', the venues are going to be instructed to keep tabs on performers who use such digital equipment in their venues.

Why?

Because the 'fear' of losing the venue PEL has been waved in the air.

 

Big Brother - eat yer heart out!

 

The client who booked the DJ in Jan 2005 for a simple Private Wedding in August 2006 at Venue's R Us may have the evening reception ruined because the venue management are going to keep an eye on the entertainers setting up the gear because they fear the 'license people' will turn up and revoke the venue license.......apparently.......or, will pass on the performing DJs details, etc.

 

It's 'driving fear' into those who want to continue providing modern entertainment and fear into the venue staff......monopoly.....monopoly.......monopoly springs to mind.

 

A DJ will not be able to argue that the function is private anymore (in the long run) because the venue staff have their own info and instructions and thus, will need to protect their interests as they see them.

 

One 'solution' for the example DJ is to acquire a Digital DJ License that allows to 'rip the original CD collections to hard disc in order to play as normal (as one would a CD) at function venues where the venue has to have the right music license (often referred to as blanket cover license) in place otherwise they would be taking a risk in allowing entertainers to perform in the first place.

 

However, there is indication that DJs may have to at some point in the near future acquire a performers license for 'stage' work.....venues are getting 'pressure' to check on the acts and are slowly getting re-educated by the same quarter who are slowly applying pressure and re-educating DJs...... http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/rolleyes.gif

 

The upshot of all this?

Does the modern DJ need to re-educate the end client about all these new 'requirements' that a modern DJ 'must have' to provide their unique professional digital service?

 

Should the DJ consider if he or she should raise their competitive Disco Fee as a consequence of all these new costly licence's because of keeping up to date with new technology (yes it is costly and needs upkeep) in order to provide a 'unique service' and remain competitive.

 

Is the DJ providing the client value for money as a consequence of increasing their fee for new technology and licence's employed?

Thoughts?

 

 

[jackcu 0]

QUOTE (ian @ Sep 13 2005, 01:52 PM)

But I don't see any reason why a band can't release a CD which doesn't have that stipulation on it. For example if a band write a piece of music and then make a CD of it, they own all the IPR so they can introduce any rules about it being for domestic use only or they can choose not to.

You are correct.

 

I have written songs that have showed up on CDs that are available for sale on the Internet. As I'm not signed to a label or publisher I can decide on what people can do with these songs. You can play them, copy them, do what you like with them (although it's nice if you pay for them :)

 

However, what I meant was music on CDs put out by labels - any I've looked at are for domestic use only. Obviously, independents can do what they like with their music.

 

Cheers,

 

Jack.

[ian 0]

QUOTE (discodirect @ Sep 13 2005, 03:08 PM)

Is the DJ providing the client value for money as a consequence of increasing their fee for new technology and licence's employed? Thoughts?

This is the big question, isn't it?

 

With new technologies, there should either be a direct advantage to the client (e.g. an improved service) or an indirect advantage (e.g. efficiency savings leading to a reduced cost for the client).

 

With digital DJ-ing, it would seem to me that the advantage is really to the DJ rather than the client (stuff like not having to carry around so many CDs - or vinyl, not having to carry around so much equipment, faster setup time). So, in actual fact, this should lead to a reduced cost to the client rather than an increased one (since the DJ needs to be on the premises for less time), etc.

 

In many organisations, the person in charge of the accounts would expect that if you are spending additional money then this would be accompanied by an increased saving elsewhere (the "return on investment" or ROI that accountants love to talk about - or "spend to save" as politicians like to say). Which would ultimately lead to the price reduction to the client I mentioned earlier.

 

If you are going to actually increase your price (because of the digital DJ licence), then you need to be able to justify this increased price in terms of a better service. Perhaps you could say that you have more music available on the night, or that you can cue up tracks quicker so there is more time for interaction with the crowd.

 

The real pricing problem will come if there is no obvious difference in the service to the client, but digital DJs are charging more than CD/vinyl DJs (to cover their increased costs). The client will probably go for the cheaper option.

 

I guess it comes back to a pretty basic question "why do you want to go digital"? If it's really for your own benefit, then you should absorb the additional costs. If it's for the client's benefit, you should pass the costs on to the client (but also be prepared to explain why you are charging more than the CD-based DJ - in terms of the service you will be providing).

 

Personally, I'm going to keep an eye on what's happening with the whole digital DJ thing, but I'm going to be sticking with CDs for the foreseeable future.

[jackcu 0]

Good points Ian,

 

As you suggest, I'm using a laptop to save ME hassle, time, effort. Sure, I could justify some sort of cost increase if I had 10 times more songs available than someone using CDs, but I doubt that's true at the moment. However, there are plenty of Djs on this forum using CDs who are charging far more than I am - so I don't think the two things can be linked that closely. The prices we all charge are governed by lots of things, but the gear we use is probably way down the list - we use the gear we use for mostly personal reasons. The extra license is just another cost to be absorbed.

 

Cheers,

 

Jack.

[FDDJ 0]

QUOTE (ian @ Sep 14 2005, 11:36 AM)

With new technologies, there should either be a direct advantage to the client (e.g. an improved service) or an indirect advantage (e.g. efficiency savings leading to a reduced cost for the client).

I'm not sure I agree with this statement and I don't think I would stay in business for long if every time I find an efficiency that saves me money I pass that onto the client, especially considering how many DJ's find it hard to get paid a decent fee in the first place!

 

At the end of the day, 99% of clients do not base their decision on whether they feel they have received VFM by looking at a DJ's kit. They base it on the whole experience from the first day they got in touch with you, to the last song of the night.

 

The Digital DJ Licence (whether I agree with it or not) is another cost to be absorbed and if you want to actually make money out of offering a mobile DJ service this cost (just like the increase in fuel prices etc.), will have to be paid by someone, even if it only equates to a few pounds extra per gig over the course of a year.

 

Other wise you may as well DJ for free http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/533.gif

Edited September 14, 2005 by StevJam

[KrazyKaz 0]

QUOTE (StevJam @ Sep 14 2005, 12:45 PM)

Other wise you may as well DJ for free http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/533.gif

I do DJ free!!

 

It's the only way at the minute that the equipment sees daylight!!! http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/laugh.gif

[DJ Dicky 0]

Right then

 

I spent several hours at Plasa today quizzing the guys at DigitalDJ (Mastermix) and the Guys at PPL.

 

This is from the horse’s mouth.

 

To store and play mp3's on a PC / IPod / MP3 player etc you only need the PPL licence at £200 + vat

 

To rip the tracks from CD / Vinyl / Minidisk etc you do need the SG6 licence from MCPS

 

The 2 different licensing authorities cover different parts of the royalties.

 

The PPL and MCPS are not connected in any way and are not really talking to each other about this. The guy from PPL did say that he has spoken to MCPS and they are thinking about a new licence to cover ripping to MP3 but it is a long way off.

 

I raised the point about the 20,000 track limit not being high enough and currently the answer is if you have more than 20,000 tracks you would need multiple licences, 1 for each 20,000 tracks all at £200 + vat each so £400 + vat would cover 40,000 tracks.

 

I did suggest that they consider a licence extension for more tracks and he agreed to investigate the possibility of adding extra tracks a say 1p each above the 20,000.

 

I also raised the point of cowboy DJ’s downloading all their tracks from the internet for free and then buying a licence to make themselves ‘legal’ and the answer came back that they will be heavily policing the licence initially and making examples of people who could not show they own the original. I pointed out that this does not square with the information on their web site that states that if the original CD’s get stolen you could still legally use the MP3’s and would illegal downloaders not just claim that the CD’s have been stolen. He agreed that they had not thought that through very well.

 

The PPL and the MCPS will only be enforcing their own licence so if a PPL rep arrives at your gig and asks to see your licence he will not care if you hold a SG6 dubbing licence to legally rip from CD and visa versa.

 

To summarise:

 

If you obtain all of your music already in MP3 format (such as from a legal download site) you will only need a PPL licence.

But if you rip from CD you will also need a MCPS SG6 licence and all that goes with it such as listing the tracks you rip and informing the relevant record company.

 

There is no information of the DigitalDJ web site or the PPL web site about the SG6 licence (other than the FAQ mentioning you need one), as PPL and Mastermix know very little about the MCPS SG6 licence and its requirements.

 

In addition the PPL are planning to change the licensing so that all tracks will have to be DRM (Digital Rights Management) protected soon, although he could not say how long soon is.

This means that the only software you will be able to legally use will have to be DRM enabled ruling the old PCDJ RED and most others makes of software illegal to use unless they can add DRM support.

 

Hope this clears up some of the confusion.

 

Dicky

 

 

[Dukesy 0]

LOL!

 

Luv it!

http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/laugh.gif

 

Thanks Dicky.

QUOTE

If you obtain all of your music already in MP3 format (such as from a legal download site) you will only need a PPL licence.

Pay for a track and download...as if you purchased off the shelf, said the MCPS.

 

But hang on - if the 'PPL' want DJs to have a public performance licence for downloaded mp3s, what's stopping them insisting that a DJ has it for CDs or records at a later date?

 

I wonder, the PPL licence that is required for DJs to play their legal mp3s... is how much?

Whose buying a license? http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/biggrin.gif

Edited September 15, 2005 by discodirect

[Hugmaster 0]

Hi

 

Like I've said before, bloody rip off!

 

They've got you all ends up!

 

Thieving littel rat bags.

 

Wonder how many venues will comply? If PLI and PAT are any indication, not many, if any.

 

Darren

[brianmole 0]

http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/wacko.gif http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/533.gif

[FDDJ 0]

This is just total http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/pooh.gif

 

They do not have a clue, and the whole proposal is riddled with holes!

 

Nor can they dictate to a free market which type of software you would have to buy.

 

A solicitor would love this in court, he would have a field day!

 

 

 

 

[Gary 0]

Straight from the horses mouth...?

 

Shame theres more than one horse working at PPL... I too spoke with PPL, and Mastermix and DMC, whilst at PLASA...AND....

 

I've come up with a suggestion that (one person at) PPL has agreed to "go along with"...NO...its not a free-for-all "rip what you like licence" but its an offer of clarity.

 

I'll post that idea on a separate thread here on DJU, in the next few minutes - everyone (PPL, Mastermix and DMC) all thought it sounded like a good idea.

 

EDIT: Heres the separate thread in question.

 

I also sent a "plain-clothes" mate to talk to one of the stands selling a "DJ using some software" solution at PLASA and despite my mate giving the stand staff plenty of opportunities and practically (but deliberately avoiding saying "LICENCE?" he was never told that he needed to buy any additional items - either as a one off, or as a yearly on-going expence. This is wrong at its most basic level - this is like a car salesman not mentioning that to a nieve first-time car buyer that they need to keep buying petrol - people need to be told what they're letting themselves in for.

Edited September 15, 2005 by Gary

[Dukesy 0]

Can any of the 'new agents' provide a breakdown of the new 'license' fees and present in a pie chart?

[ian 0]

QUOTE (StevJam @ Sep 14 2005, 11:45 AM)

QUOTE (ian @ Sep 14 2005, 11:36 AM) With new technologies, there should either be a direct advantage to the client (e.g. an improved service) or an indirect advantage (e.g. efficiency savings leading to a reduced cost for the client). I'm not sure I agree with this statement and I don't think I would stay in business for long if every time I find an efficiency that saves me money I pass that onto the client, especially considering how many DJ's find it hard to get paid a decent fee in the first place!   At the end of the day, 99% of clients do not base their decision on whether they feel they have received VFM by looking at a DJ's kit. They base it on the whole experience from the first day they got in touch with you, to the last song of the night.   The Digital DJ Licence (whether I agree with it or not) is another cost to be absorbed and if you want to actually make money out of offering a mobile DJ service this cost (just like the increase in fuel prices etc.), will have to be paid by someone, even if it only equates to a few pounds extra per gig over the course of a year.   Other wise you may as well DJ for free http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/533.gif I don't actually disagree with you here - just that bit that you quoted from me doesn't quite say what I intended.   I think my main thrust is what you are saying - this is something which would need to be absorbed rather than passed on to the client. Like you say, the client doesn't care what equipment we're using, they just care about the end result. That was really my point - you can't say to the client "you have to pay more because I'm having to pay for a digital DJ licence" you can only say "you have to pay more because I offer a better service".   That's really what I was trying to say. The bit about passing on efficiency savings to clients is only really something to do if you are trying to reduce your prices to be more competitive in your area. For example, if you are consistently losing bookings because of your price, you need to look at how you can cut your costs and still provide basically the same service, then use those reduced costs to lower your prices and become more competitive.

[pareshj 0]

Has anyone actually signed up?. I must admit that I do look forward to it but still have many unanswered questions that would be nice for someone official to actually care about. i.e once you've signed up to the license, what will ppl want to know on an on going basis..etc

[DJ Dicky 0]

On the Wed at Plasa, Mastermix said that they had sold about 50 licenses since they launced them

 

Dicky

[Paul Forsyth 0]

I don't believe them

 

Vinnie

[Dukesy 0]

I guess that MCPS-PRS Alliance are happy receiving £10,000 to distribute the 'dues' that the customer has already paid for in the shop or on a download.

Add to that the 'dues' from the music blanket cover that venues provide for music played on premises....and it starts to gradually add up.

 

Yes, we know the law on playing CDs in public. Its the same law that applies to video recording TV shows. It's not 'officially allowed'.

But the 'Digital DJ Licence' has moved the 'goal post' slightly.

 

Imagine

What happens if it turns out that the new 'license' is against the civil liberties of the user due to a conflict in law that predates?!

Imagine the logistics! http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/laugh.gif

 

On a sideways point....sideways basic analagy

How many songs can a DJ play during a performance night in a members club? Stick with (say) 100 for now.

How many gigs can the venue have per year?

Lets say a basic 52 for now.

 

The Public Entertainment Licence

Just 12 discos per year will cost the members club (up to 100 persons capacity) £41.04 annual charge or £3.42 per event.

 

The members club license fee, as a consequence, would be (approx) £177.84 per year.

 

If we said that the DJ could play approx 100 songs per gig at the members club for 12 gigs, thats approx 1,200 songs played.

So consequently, 52 gigs in a members club would reflect approx just 5,200 songs played.

 

A sideways point

Why doesn't the PPL adopt a similar price structure to that of the new digital dj licence for venues (increased by indexation each year) charged VAT and a 50% surcharge? http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/rolleyes.gif

Thus, a venue could be charged (on this point alone) from approx £6.03 per gig or £313.56 for 52 gigs.

An annual increase of £135.72

 

The bar industry has had a big skakeup. It would explain a lot about the 'knock-on' effects to our business, no?

Would an increase such as this be accepted? No choice really!

 

Another sideways basic analagy

An installed audio jukebox (without background music facility) would have an annual charge to a members club of £175.53 (£175.53 / 365 days = 48 pence per day)

 

If a digital dj licence is going to cost around £352.50 per year, say after 1/1/06 (direct from PPL) then that approx. breaks down to £0.96 per day.

 

How many mobile DJs work 365 days per year. http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/laugh.gif

This was only a sideways basic analagy but the more I think about it, the SG6 issue should be pushed 100%.

 

3 years of the digital dj licence - £1057.50, approx?

 

I think we need a lot more info on the SG6 and long term benefits. It also needs to be easily obtainable - as easily as a digital dj licence!!!!! http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/tongue.gif

 

Edited September 22, 2005 by discodirect