Time to rally the troops ?

[ian 0]

The thing which seems most unfair is that the people being targetted (DJs) seems very small in comparison to other sectors (for example people with iPods). Surely iPod users are doing the same thing as digital DJs and should be treated the same way?

[Gary 0]

QUOTE (ian @ Oct 24 2005, 04:11 PM)

The thing which seems most unfair is that the people being targetted (DJs) seems very small in comparison to other sectors (for example people with iPods).  Surely iPod users are doing the same thing as digital DJs and should be treated the same way?

An iPod user is having the ultimate "private" party - eg: 1 person - and besides, they're not charging themselves £ for that party either. Public Vs Private is always a difference in PPLs eyes.

 

If an Ipod user ran a disco from their iPod, through an amp and speakers, out to a waiting public - I'm sure PPL would get interested, maybe even simply build in a levy on the purchase price of the ipods and similar devices (and software). - maybe they already have. (if so, thats 3 ways that PPL are obtaining royalties).

Edited October 24, 2005 by Gary

[ian 0]

QUOTE (Gary @ Oct 24 2005, 03:16 PM)

An iPod user is having the ultimate "private" party - eg: 1 person - and besides, they're not charging themselves £ for that party either. Public Vs Private is always a difference in PPLs eyes. If an Ipod user ran a disco from their iPod, through an amp and speakers, out to a waiting public - I'm sure PPL would get interested, maybe even simply build in a levy on the purchase price of the ipods and similar devices (and software). - maybe they already have. (if so, thats 3 ways that PPL are obtaining royalties).

Okay, I'm easily confused on this. I thought the digital DJ licence was about having the right to store music on hard drives - I didn't think it actually explicitly dealt with performance?

 

I can see that the PPL would only be interested in performance, but my basic point still stands. It still looks like they (whoever they might be) are going after the soft targets - DJs who can be easily tracked down and are less likely to resist. Imagine the furore if police started doing sweeps of train carriages, arresting iPod users for illegally copying music.

[Gary 0]

QUOTE (ian @ Oct 24 2005, 04:38 PM)

I didn't think it actually explicitly dealt with performance?

It doesnt.

 

QUOTE

For the avoidance of doubt, where a copy of a Track is retained on the DJ Database pursuant to Clause 3.2(2), the Licensee is not permitted to use that copy for the purpose of publicly performing that Track (or any part of it) without obtaining a further appropriate licence.

 

 

But, if an iPod user hooked up their iPod for public performance - PPL would expect on of PPL's various other licenses to be obtained.

 

 

One difference is that we're (DJs) making money from playing tunes which we've undertaken (or might be in the future) stored on harddrives.

 

Maybe...we should all offer our DJ services FREE...instead we'll charge half our fee for setting up the gear, half our fee for taking down the gear, and as a bona fide offer of convenience, we'll make some music play while we're 'anging around inbetween. http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/huh.gif

[ian 0]

QUOTE (Gary @ Oct 24 2005, 03:47 PM)

One difference is that we're (DJs) making money from playing tunes which we've undertaken (or might be in the future) stored on harddrives.

I understand what you're saying, but I don't think it's a big difference. Essentially, the situation is the same, for example the DJ has a legal copy of a CD and sticks that on their hardrive - the citizen has a legal copy of a CD and sticks that on their iPod. In both situations the individual makes an illegal digital copy of a legally purchased CD.

 

I'm sure that people have mentioned speeding as analogies here before, so I'll set off down this dangerous track. It's like saying that cabbies should get fined for speeding because they make money from driving, but people driving private cars shouldn't get fined because they don't make money from driving. Whether or not you make money from an activity doesn't make it any less of an offence.

[Gary 0]

QUOTE (ian @ Oct 24 2005, 05:10 PM)

I'm sure that people have mentioned speeding as analogies here before, so I'll set off down this dangerous track. It's like saying that cabbies should get fined for speeding because they make money from driving, but people driving private cars shouldn't get fined because they don't make money from driving. Whether or not you make money from an activity doesn't make it any less of an offence.

That would be a misplacement of the word private. In the same Cabby Vs Car example - if both were speeding down a "private" road, neither would expect to get fined.

 

ipods have been deemed as "not illegal" in their primary intended use.

 

QUOTE

"English law, for example, does not permit recording owners to make copies for personal usage beyond certain academic/study purposes, technically rendering the act of transferring a CD - even a CD you own - to an MP3 player illegal. That doesn't render iPods illegal, incidentally, because they have substantial non-infringing uses, such as holding tracks for which the player owner holds the copyright, or for licensed copies like those downloaded from the iTunes Music Store.

 

Which again folds us back to the straightforward copyright holder bit, of "If you're the copyright holder, then you can do what you want with the track" (within reason)

 

eg: Paul Mccartney could fill an iPod with tunes which he holds the copyright to.

 

 

[ian 0]

QUOTE (Gary @ Oct 24 2005, 04:30 PM)

ipods have been deemed as "not illegal" in their primary intended use. QUOTE "English law, for example, does not permit recording owners to make copies for personal usage beyond certain academic/study purposes, technically rendering the act of transferring a CD - even a CD you own - to an MP3 player illegal. That doesn't render iPods illegal, incidentally, because they have substantial non-infringing uses, such as holding tracks for which the player owner holds the copyright, or for licensed copies like those downloaded from the iTunes Music Store.   Which again folds us back to the straightforward copyright holder bit, of "If you're the copyright holder, then you can do what you want with the track" (within reason)   eg: Paul Mccartney could fill an iPod with tunes which he holds the copyright to. That's just dodging around the point. Taking a CD and storing it on your iPod is illegal. It doesn't matter that there are legal uses for an iPod, anyone copying tracks from a CD onto an iPod is breaking the law just as much as a DJ copying a track from a CD to their hard drive. And the recording industry is going after the DJ as a soft target, rather than the far larger number of iPodders who are breaking the law.   Okay, I'm going to calm down since it doesn't actually affect me (now) because I'm an old-fashioned CD kinda guy - and think I'll stay that way for quite a while!

Edited October 24, 2005 by ian

[Paul Forsyth 0]

Hello everyone http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/042.gif

 

I would like to personally thank all that have taken the time and trouble to post on what I believe to be THE most important threat to dj's their has ever been.

 

Both SEDA and NADJ have been asked what their view is on this license, and we await their response.

 

I am not a member of NADJ but would be interested in the views of a national body.

 

I am a member of SEDA and am hoping for a statement outlining their views.

 

I am also a member of dj@ssociates a free to join dj association about to be launched to the masses by Dan, and I would like to know where dj@ssociates stand on the digital dj license - bottom line please.

 

Vinnie

 

Is this the future

 

Mr venue manager would you like all of this extra paperwork or would you like one of our lovely new intelligent jukeboxes??????????

[Dukesy 0]

Hi Vinnie

 

Firstly, Yes, it's true.....DJ @ssociates will be launching and it it TOTALLY free to join!

 

That's one plug out of the way.

 

I can not speak for the current membership of DJ @ssociates on their views but I will put it to them.

 

The Association is very young and needs a polish here and there, but like any Association the members will expect THEIR Association to represent such views!!!

 

So I have forwarded an email to the members.

 

Will reply with a collective responce as well as my own personal view.

[Dukesy 0]

I am back with some answers to your question Paul.

 

The bottom line from DJ Associates (DJ@) An overwhelming majority of the members said:

 

QUOTE

Do you think the license in its current form offers value for money? No Do you think the license needs review? Yes Would you agree to take a joint stance with the members of the DJU who have voted 95% in favour of NO to this introduction? Yes Should we lead the argument or accept association with other DJ Associations especially as DJ Associates is INDEPENDENT? Lead

Other questions in relation to this topic will be discussed when the DJ Associates Association officially launches soon.

 

In the meantime, I would like to thank all those who replied and look forward to making some important announcements here very, very soon.

 

 

 

[Paul Forsyth 0]

Thanks for coming back on this Dan. Some interesting views!

 

Looking at question 3 - would you also extend this joint stand to include other DJ associations such as NADJ, SEDA, ( Autofiltered - The association in question has requested that their name be not mentioned on this forum) and any other dj groups out there?

 

Having thought further about this whole issue and bearing in mind the rush to get this product to market - Would dj@ssociates agree that a further review of the license is required, and that postponement should be looked at. And would you encourage co-operation across all dj bodies to push for such a postponement and review?

 

Thanks

 

Vinnie

 

PS - If any other group / body would like to give an answer to the above suggestion / question please do. http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/thumbup.gif

[Dukesy 0]

QUOTE

Would dj@ssociates agree that a further review of the license is required, and that postponement should be looked at. And would you encourage co-operation across all dj bodies to push for such a postponement and review?

 

Personally, I think it would give breathing space if the license could be postponed in order to drum out the problems.

I also would endorse a collective effort-front to unite on this issue alone as it would serve the interests of those concerned as well as those who feel threatened with further 'back-door' licensing.

 

I will put the question to the members and of course will provide an answer.

 

QUOTE

Looking at question 3 - would you also extend this joint stand to include other DJ associations such as NADJ, SEDA, ( Autofiltered - The association in question has requested that their name be not mentioned on this forum) and any other dj groups out there?

 

Like DJ Associates, SEDA, NADJ and ( Autofiltered - The association in question has requested that their name be not mentioned on this forum) are independent. I respect that and feel that there is room for common ground.

This issue concerns not only a minority of our industry (Digital users) but ALL DJs in the future should further licenses be introduced the same way.

 

Again, I will put it to the members to decide.

 

 

Hope this helps.

 

[John Kidd 0]

QUOTE (discodirect @ Oct 26 2005, 03:12 PM)

QUOTE Would dj@ssociates agree that a further review of the license is required, and that postponement should be looked at. And would you encourage co-operation across all dj bodies to push for such a postponement and review?   Personally, I think it would give breathing space if the license could be postponed in order to drum out the problems. I also would endorse a collective effort-front to unite on this issue alone as it would serve the interests of those concerned as well as those who feel threatened with further 'back-door' licensing. Hi All, Following a Meeting last night of Some of our Committee Members and some members, i am in a Position to Agree with this Point.   SEDA would like to see this Licence Suspended until further discussion can be had with PPL and MCPS and a reasonable effective licence could be proposed to everyone, Openly.   I feel at the monent that the current licence doesn't help anyone who wants to run a business within this industry. The Licence needs to be structured in such a way that it could allow us to do what we need to do while being legal and correct.   Fixed Goal posts, Clear Terms and Conditions, would be a start.   I would like to Welcome the DJ@ssociates into the fray and i look forward to being able to work together with you on this and probably many other issues in the Future that can help both of our memberships.

[Dukesy 0]

Like I said, DJ Associates hasn't officially launched....but on behalf of the DJ@ members ....

 

Hi 5 John.......................wassssuuuuupp!

 

OK....a small plug (again!)

 

When Dj Associates does launch, it is there not only to serve the members interests but betterment for all DJs.

You do not have to join the new 'DJ@' as it is refered to....but it is free to join.

 

It has association ethics and material to use to promote the fact that the member is part of an Association.

 

Best of all, it has a forum called DJsUnited where members can exchange experience, advice and ideas.

Further info on launch!!!!!

 

And so, it begins...... http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/smile.gif

[Dukesy 0]

Following on from the previous posts with regard to the Dj Associates members questions, I can now reveal the majority of replies:

 

QUOTE

Q) Would you support a decision to postpone the current digital dj license provided by PPL until the problems, issues and ‘flaws’ can be addressed and looked into for resolve?’ The majority replied YES Q) Other DJ associations such as NADJ, SEDA, ( Autofiltered - The association in question has requested that their name be not mentioned on this forum), along with other potential dj groups will be looking to form a potential united front to lobby / postpone the PPL digital dj license. Do you agree to DJ Associates being part of an agreed united lobby? The majority replied YES

 

One member has suggested instead of entering into a consultative process with the industry and then being asked to accept a compromise, he thought that the common platform of what is acceptable should be decided first.

 

If we agree to call for the license to be suspended, it could imply that the licence is basically OK and time is needed to "explain" it, or "slightly modify it".

 

Long term, there is no guarantee that the current format of Compact Disc Audio will be supported in retail outlets, especially as the internet and telecommunication technology is rapidly becoming the new way forward.....

One 'music company' of note are already looking far-forward potentially moving over to digital based media....

If the big manufacturing companies (as a consequence) adopt new DJ technology around the digital medium, then the license in it's current form will not serve the interests of the many.....

 

I totally agree with Eskies comments in another thread that the whole thing is a farce from the beginning, and I feel very passionate about the whole subject, however, not wishing to let passion cloud my personal judgement...the topic is extremely difficult to ignore...

Therefore, I have sought legal advice on behalf of the DjsUnited forum and DJ Associates Association.

I expect feedback within the next 7-10 days and hope to provide some clarification of the alternatives available.

 

Chris has kindly posted a DJ Associates (rotating) banner at the bottom of the forum for those that wish to sign up for free membership to the 'DJ@' association.

 

Essentially, member benefits will be announced in full soon:

DJ Associates is a non-profit making independent association for Mobile DJ entertainers who agree to the Association ethic guidelines promoting standard, service, practice, presentation, appearance and business professionalism.

 

The aims of the Association are to encourage members to promote local client awareness and to improve the public perception of DJing.

The Association 'image' logo and banners on members websites and literature will help towards promoting the members own reputation and standard as well as acting as a reference aid.

 

DJs who are fortunate to be based near an existing regional Association may wish to sign-up for membership with them.

 

I am sure DJ Associates along with SEDA and NADJ are happy to advise those who wish to set up and promote their own organisation body / regional association or DJ Pool. The bottom line is that although we are all here to help, the only difference with the DJ Associates Association is that it is Free to join, whereas the others are subscription based for the regional meetings / membership benefits that they offer their members, etc.

 

Although the 'DJ@' is not officially launched, it is expected that when the time comes for a united stand, ALL TYPES OF DJ will need representation as the future of DJing is in the essential stage of a radical shake-up....just as the media has reported about the shake-up to the bars, restaurant and club venues in the entertainment and leisure scene.....even that is still on going and going to get worse!

 

This is not scare mongering. As Vinnie put it, it's about standing up for what is right and a time to rally the troops because peoples livelihoods are indeed going to be affected once this 'license' passes January 1st/2nd 2006.

This is not an argument about the price of the license. Its a lot to do with common sense and long term planning for Disc Jockeys who depend on an income from entertainment.

 

It has been suggested that when other countries look towards the UK in leading ideas such as the digital DJ license or revolutionary technology.....expect noises of bleating and 'fluffy followings' around the global community, of course, long term!

 

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

 

http://www.djassociates.org/anims/dja-banner1.gif

[brianmole 0]

http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/thumbup.gif Nice work chaps.

[chrismk 0]

QUOTE (discodirect @ Oct 28 2005, 08:07 AM)

It has been suggested that when other countries look towards the UK in leading ideas such as the digital DJ license or revolutionary technology.....expect noises of bleating and 'fluffy followings' around the global community, of course, long term!

Is that right, Im afrai we live in the 21st centuary, the British effect (or should I say empire) on the world is long gone mate, I've lived abroad and believe me when I say people there couldnt give a *hoot* what happens here, this is here now, not over the world each country has its own way, like why did it take the UK so long to become up to date with the Interenet compared to other countries, I was on the internet when windows 95 was released, where was the internet as we know in the UK, nowhere...fact

Another good example is broad band, we are so far behind the USA, France, Spain, Germany and a good few other countries in this field, while we are saying wow, we have 2mb connection the other countries are already doing it at 10mb, go figure, other countries arnt interested in what happens here, why should they

[Eskie 0]

There's a lot of truth in Chris' post above. I can remember in 95/96 when I was DJ'ing in Indonesia which is viewed as a third world country. I was player/manager for the British football team there which played in the ex-pat league. We had around 25 players in the squad and only one guy DIDN'T have email! cos I used to just send all the details of upcoming games to all the team by email. I came back to the UK in 98 and was roped into running a team here; not one of the guys in the squad here had email http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/wacko.gif

This is just one example that we are as not as technologically advanced in this country as some people seem to believe.

[transeurope 0]

Hmm. It is true that Britain as a country in the round is less influential than it once was, but it is still the world's fourth largest economy. That is pretty significant.

 

Britain is part of the G7, that means that it is part of the a group of the worlds' 7 largest economies. It is one of the largest members of the European Union, which is the world's largest trading block. Within the EU it is 1/3 of "The EU 3". Those are the EU states that are considered globally integrated (not merely integrated with other European countries). The other two, by the way are Germany and France.

 

Those are all economic power points.

 

In music, Britain is home to EMI, this is one of the "Big Four" globally significant record labels. To be honest, EMI is a bit messed up at the moment, but its ability to survive at all is based on the fact that it floats on a very rich domestic music industry.

 

In club DJing the UK is a significant force. UK mobile DJs are recognised worldwide as being very knowledgeable about commercial music. You will frequently see the UK charts lead other countries. What was #1 in the UK in January goes to #1 elsewhere in February.

 

It is true that Britain is bad at "the technology thing". The Digital Music Disaster is a good example of this. However this is an opportunity to show the world that it is merely the power elites of the UK are clueless about technology, not the ordinary Joe.

 

Let's not forget that Britain was a powerful force in dissipating home computing in the 80s with the Sinclair machine. As a country it is not technologically illiterate, but perhaps technologically poorly led.

 

Finally, don't get too carried away either with the technological feats of some of our friends in developing countries.

 

There is many a developing country with a Gucci shop, while many EU member states do not have one. You can find the Gucci shop, just beyond the slum, the poorhouse and the orphans begging for money...next to where the rich people live.

 

States have to be looked at in the round.

[Dukesy 0]

Update...from the DJ@ website

 

 

Mastermix - PPL Licence Campaign Update

 

DJ@ssociates is actively campaigning on behalf of it's members to:

 

(i) Establish that the law is enforceable

(ii) Establish that the law is fair

(iii) Establish that the law covers all eventualities

(iv) Establish which type of DJ requires the licence - if at all.

 

So far DJ@ has contacted several MP's and high profile DJ's and Music Labels to gauge their stance on the matter, it is also seeking advice from a Law firm which specialises in the music industry.

 

We believe that DJ@ is the only association looking beyond the hype and propaganda with which this licence has been press released, and looking at the long term implications to it's members, and any fall out on our industry.

 

As you are aware, not all legislation is imposed for the good of it's members, most is the result of somebody justifying their position within the cogs of a larger industry. We strongly believe in it's present form that the licence is unclear. We also believe that it puts the UK based DJ on an unfair footing compared to the industry regulations in European countries.

 

If you would like to be represented on this matter with a common goal then please sign up to DJ@ssociates - it's FREE.

[chrismk 0]

QUOTE (discodirect @ Nov 3 2005, 03:57 PM)

DJ@ssociates is actively campaigning on behalf of it's members to: (i) Establish that the law is enforceable (ii) Establish that the law is fair (iii) Establish that the law covers all eventualities (iv) Establish which type of DJ requires the licence - if at all.

Its for this very fact I cannot sign up or agree to what will try and regulate me in the end, its unclear and its undefined, I highly doubt you'll get much of a response from MP's or the big boy DJ's, the paper trail alone would cost a fortune to get this in.

 

How much do you think this will all cost to investigate, then once its all in for someone to come along and find a loophole bypassing the whole process, and there are always loopholes....

[Dukesy 0]

Regulation is killing off this county - period, whereas in the EU countries, there is de-regulation.

 

What feedback and results have been achieved with the Association will be announced in time.

For the record, not one member of the Association has been asked to contribute any funds whatsoever.

 

[Gary 0]

Given the number of Slap-flop DJs who will spring up just for the christmas, nye and wedding profits, then "retire" for the other 8 months of the year, using a hardrive of tunes that they copied off a real DJ for beer money, or bought off ebay, I would welcome this license with open arms if:

 

1) it was being rigorously enforced by venues - eg: no DDJ license! no entry!

2) it was run by the mcps - after all ripping is changing the mechanical/physical stortage medium of the tune, and thats what mcps specialize in, rather than dabbling in.

3) restrictions such as roadie usage at same gig, and the playing of background music from the licensed laptop was covered, rather than forbidden by the license, as it is currently.

 

maybe I should have started that list off with "Dear Santa..."

 

How many of you would rather pay your PPL DDJ license fee amounts next year into a fund at a "musically aware" legal firm.

 

Is there a case for the monopolies commission to get involved?...unlikely I think.

 

Should we be aiming more at getting mcps to drop the "write to record companies" part of their SG6 license and include harddrive as a destination storage medium.

[chrismk 0]

QUOTE (discodirect @ Nov 12 2005, 11:10 PM)

Regulation is killing off this county - period, whereas in the EU countries, there is de-regulation.

This alone creates a positive trading atmosphere, I wonder why they are doing it in the 1st place.

The same could be said as Gary has mentioned that "Over Xmas" the Slappy DJ comes out his den, is it also not true like I do who does not talk about my bussiness online in any form by giving names, venue, cost or elsewise that over Xmas thats indeed curiousity is out just to hear whos having a good time, after all Xmas is the time of celebration and fun, a DJ license is a farce, tons of venues will not even be bothered from what I have encountered, on many gigs I have done I dont even bother asking them if they want to see the PLI or Pat certificates cos they arnt interested, when I asked why, their replay is simply I can see that your equipment is top condtion and our own insurance covers all incidences if anything was to happen.

What I can see and feel is there is a select few who now want dominating control over a already hard to set up and go industry, if life is that tough go into something along with the DJing/media bussiness to make more money like I do, and I dont need a licese to trade on the internet, there's already one loophole I can think of..

[Dukesy 0]

QUOTE (Gary @ Nov 13 2005, 10:58 AM)

Given the number of Slap-flop DJs who will spring up just for the christmas, nye and wedding profits, then "retire" for the other 8 months of the year, using a hardrive of tunes that they copied off a real DJ for beer money, or bought off ebay, I would welcome this license with open arms if: 1) it was being rigorously enforced by venues - eg: no DDJ license! no entry! 2) it was run by the mcps - after all ripping is changing the mechanical/physical stortage medium of the tune, and thats what mcps specialize in, rather than dabbling in. 3) restrictions such as roadie usage at same gig, and the playing of background music from the licensed laptop was covered, rather than forbidden by the license, as it is currently. maybe I should have started that list off with "Dear Santa..." How many of you would rather pay your PPL DDJ license fee amounts next year into a fund at a "musically aware" legal firm. Is there a case for the monopolies commission to get involved?...unlikely I think. Should we be aiming more at getting mcps to drop the "write to record companies" part of their SG6 license and include harddrive as a destination storage medium.

The problem as I see it Gary is that the points you hi-lighted would probably be very, very nice........but wouldn't serve all DJs.

 

I don't see why DJs who don't use laptops or dedicated hard drive systems should be penalised because of point 1 above.

 

This is not a 'one stop shop' introduced license.

 

It has been introduced to tap an area of revenue not accessed before, to shut up the DJs who kept on badgering and nit-picking with the endless phone call enquiries of "can I do this.....can I do this......can I do this.....can I do this....." and to serve the long term plans of third party companies who have jumped onboard to have a slice of the cake, to help wave the big stick to the confused and ignorant as well as bolster niche sales because their existing products are swirling around the pan.

 

Vinnie doesn't use a laptop device but could see the far reaching implications that can and will erode the users rights if this license in it's present form is allowed to be rubber stamped as ideal and serving a purpose.

 

If more thought had gone into this license........it covered a greater aspect of the digital user...I'm sure more would embrace the idea and welcome any future license plans which undoubtedly WILL be considered.

 

Remember the Quiz license? That disappeared. Why? Nobody bought it.

Unlike the 'quiz' license, the DDJL has a joker card - venues.

 

I'm not saying that every licensed venue in the land is going to be bothered by the introduction of the DDJL.....but they will stand still and listen if told to do so if their license is affected.

 

Make a few examples and word spreads.

 

More paperwork, more red-tape, more crap to deal with....... but if the pressure is applied in the right place, how could a venue ignore something that could affect their license?

Who is more important? The DJ or the takings?

How many venues will defend us???

The Musicians Union have said the PPL are busy with other matters and will not be hounding DJs.........but agreed that the venues could and can do the 'dirty work'.

 

I agree that MCPS are probably better suited to developing a license but the process needs to be far much easier to implement and administrate.

The idea behind the SG6 is very good and probably wouldn't require an annual fee for the privilege of using converted media.

 

But until MCPS rock the boat and introduce a far better license that serves all DJs.....those DJs who want to duck and dive can, those that want to buy it will, those who are bothered can voice their opinion and those who don't give a hoot won't be bothered.