Time to rally the troops ?

[transeurope 0]

I can appreciate the point Gary was trying to make, but there is one very obvious question.

 

Before the introduction of the Digital DJ Licence, what was to stop the authorities nailing pirates? Given the enormous damage it is claimed that piracy is causing music, we are surely not expected to believe that if that issue was taken seriously they would not take the additional step of merely requesting to see the originals?

 

Remember, they say ENORMOUS damage is being done to the industry!

 

Yet, we are expected to believe that while they are quite happy to inspect venues, they will not take the addditional step of requesting to see the originals for people causing ENORMOUS damage.

 

After the introduction of the Digital DJ Licence, what difference does it make to the bottom feeders that use CDR copies or iPods, or DVDs or what have you?

 

This is not a solution to the bottom feeder pirate problem. If it were it would have addressed all areas of that phenomenon.

 

It is hard to believe that this is an attempt aimed at rooting out the enormous damage caused by piracy to record labels. It is simply a revenue stream targetted at those who are trying to play ball.

[Dukesy 0]

Spot on TE!

[Andy Westcott 0]

I never have interpreted this idiotic licence as an attempt to control pirating, it is just a revenue generation angle; I for one will never accept it in any other guise.

 

Making DJs pay isn't going to cure the problem - they need to focus on old Joe in the workplace and down the pub, selling illegally copied CDs and DVDs.

[chrismk 0]

Way to go..... it will never happen, it will fall flat soonoer than one thinks in fact Im going to send a e-mail to the licensing authourities about this whole scam

[ChrisPointon 0]

Is it just me, or is everybody else getting dizzy riding on this thread which just seems to be going around and around in the same old circle http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/wacko.gif .

 

There are several points which are valid and it seems to me that the Majority, at least are singing from the same songsheet.

 

QUOTE

it will fall flat soonoer than one thinks in fact Im going to send a e-mail to the licensing authourities about this whole scam

 

But on another thread it was mentioned that sending emails to MP's was a waste of time, do you really think that the licensing Authorities will take you any more seriously?

 

I believe that it was DJ's, leaping up and down shaking their E-penis's out of the window which got this whole piece of legislation implemented in the first place or at least played a BIG part in its creation.

 

Several months ago, there were numerous threads regarding the legality of converting original Vinyl and CD to MP3. It was suggested that one representative (ideally from an association) contacted the PPL and MCPS with questions on behalf of an interested party, namely those DJ's who had a vested interest in knowing the answer. However what actually happened, was that everybody emailed the PPL en masse with their own concerns and no doubt the infux of enquiries in such a short period of time on the same subject, warranted attention of senior management, rather than the guy or gal who routinely answers the emails, which was probably where the enquiry would have ended, had there only been one email sent from one person or body representing their colleagues.

 

Moral of the story?, don't draw attention to a grey (or unaddressed) area which may otherwise give you some flexibility and leap up and down promoting its existance by shouting loudly because you may not like the result. Slow and steady wins the race.

 

I still also fail to see the connection which makes DJ's with this licence any more professional than DJ's without the licence - this sounds like Propaganda to me. DJ's who use CD's don't need this licence (Yet) so how is the industry going to make sure that CD or vinyl based DJ's are also paying taxes and have PLI & PAT? and are professional if these additional PPL checks (which some are suggesting) are not also extended to them?. By hinting that it is only DJ's who need to be checked for a digital licence who also need to be checked at the same time for other paperwork, smacks of discrimination.

 

Now i'm off to the word association thread, which is getting far more interest http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/rolleyes.gif http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/whistling.gif

[Gary 0]

I think that one big difference and perhaps why harddrive usage has been targeted (initially) is that hardrives jump the potential for piracy for DJing purposes to a whole new level- far more than any other DJ music source.

 

For example: Lets say that a friend of mine tells me that he wants some extra cash and asks to copy my music collection - copying the vinyls (in real time) would take him months, ripping the CD collection - days, duplicating a 300gb harddrive ??? happens effortlessly as he and I chat about old times over a few rounds.. http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/beer.gif ...oh nearly forgot, I'm driving.. http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/pepsi.gif .

 

ITs logical, to a certain point isnt it...PPL thinks...who needs music more than anyone else? urm DJ's? , how would they pirate a lot of it? urm? Harddrives! How can we deter a would-be pirate DJ? erm tell all the PPL registered venues to turn away DJs who have harddrives, but dont have licenses. Easy !!!

 

It is of course, point 3, where it all falls flat. At the moment, the venues dont give two stuffs about what bits of paper the DJ's got - the venues are simply happy that A) They turned up B) They dont play too loud C) They do a reasonable job and finshing on-time D) they're cheaper than that DJ with the wife, 3 kids, mortgage, no daytime job etc. http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/wallbash.gif

 

PPL state that they will revoke/cancel the venue music licence of any venue found to be using non-digitial DJ licenced DJs who use harddrives. PPL have got the rights to do this, and have done so under other licence infringements - eg: venues who have a license for background music, but found playing music as the main/featured entertainment. Typically the venue has its music license revoked for a month, and then has to re-apply for all the correct licences and is surcharged 50% on-top of the standard fee(s).

 

If this licence was enforced THAT well, it would really deter the "pay-me-in-beer" guys almost instantly - not by appealing to their morals - but by meaning tha no venue would risk a months worth of earning obtained via music, and the work for non-licensed would-be DJ's would dry up - leaving less competition, more work, and more money, for legitimate DJ's.

 

This same "no licence - no work" philosophy would of course, wrok even better if all types of DJ needed it - eg: CD Jocks, vinyl Jocks, mini-disc jocks etc...but..PPL cant charge extra for such DJs playing the music from its original format.

[Andy Westcott 0]

But the 'Pay-Me_A-Beer' guys would duplicate the music anyhow, and never get caught, simply because they DJ so little, and not at the kind of venues (hotels) which would be able to check.

 

I can't see it would stop, or even deter those intent on working this way.

[ChrisPointon 0]

Interesting Article in The Stage Online yesterday http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/whistling.gif

[desperatedan 0]

Do you think it these guys they are trying to target ?!??

 

HARD DRIVE

 

Pre loaded with Music !?!! http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/whistling.gif

 

I was thinking about moving accross to digital djing but whilst this is all up in the air think I will hold fire on that one.

 

Cant understand tho why you can own a MP3 player and put music on it but you cant use it on a pc / laptop as a dj. Or even make a copy of it.

 

I must admit after some previous bad experiances of losing cd's and having a case of cd's stolen. (Whilst a residancy about 5 yrs ago now)

 

I make copy's of all my discs as I buy them to make sure I have back-up rather than having to buy them again !! ( I know I shouldnt but Im the only one who will ever use them.

 

[ChrisPointon 0]

Yes, I wonder how the Digital DJ licence is going to crack down on the Ebay auctions?

[cj_65 0]

The irony here is that a licence which is supposed to bring DJs into

'the digital age' seems to be dissuading so many of us from moving

to PC-based/HD based systems. I'm sticking to CDs until it's all

much, much clearer 8(

[Gary 0]

What really annoys me about the license is that the companies selling the software are keeping so very, very, very quiet about the requirement of the digital DJ licence. Darn sneaky and underhand. Its a bit like a garage salesman evading all the questions about fuel consumption or hidden service charges.

 

Not just on rarely changed, stagnent websites, but even on their forums the subject goes almost untouched - in some cases no mention of the PPL DDJL in months.

 

 

[Hugmaster 0]

Hi

 

Regarding the Digital DJ Software companies keeping very quiet, why wouldn't they, I'd hazard a guess that most of them are non-UK based so what hapens here means nothing to them.

 

I'm not up on the latest regulations in the US, Australia etc, but I bet DJs don't have these kind of crippling restrictions foisted upon them.

 

I still find it odd that a pub landlord of general manager of a hotel will be expected to know the difference between a DJ using a laptop with music on it, and a DJ who simply uses the laptop to store an Excel or Access database of music.

 

And will those DJs who use ripped CD's be policed and checked?

 

It's all cobblers and designed to flease the legit DJs and gives the impression of doing something about piracy, but really does stuff all to weed out the real villens.

 

I mean, it's easier to police DJs than some unknown oik selling ripped off DVDs and CDs at a car boot sale or on Ebay, much less effort involved, all they have to do is threaten the venues and they'll do all the policing for them, gits!

 

Solution! If you don't want too many questions being asked regarding your external hard drive holding 10k tracks and no licence, just carry a thumb drive or memory stick in your jacket pocket instead, and when all questions have been asked and you've satisfied the venue that your laptop is for admin purposes only, plug your drive in and keep your eyes open.

 

Just kidding!

 

Darren

[ChrisPointon 0]

QUOTE

Regarding the Digital DJ Software companies keeping very quiet, why wouldn't they, I'd hazard a guess that most of them are non-UK based so what hapens here means nothing to them.

 

Good Point. I said similar a few months ago regarding Mp3 Players and Hardware. No international software company or Electronics manufacturer are going to redesign it's products to take account of one countries change in local laws. The UK isn't a force to be reckoned with nor is it that big of a deal in the global marketplace.

 

I doubt that the rest of the world knows about the UK's digital dj licence, I know that a lot of UK DJ's still don't. Not every DJ has access to the internet or reads DJ Magazines http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/rolleyes.gif

 

 

Interesting thing I noticed in the Stage Article. Why is it that DJ's are having to bring this matter to media attention themselves?, isn't there any association out of the many which keep springing up which are going to take into account the strength of feeling of it's digital members?. Surely these should be doing the press releases?

[Gary 0]

QUOTE (Hugmaster @ Dec 1 2005, 07:04 AM)

Regarding the Digital DJ Software companies keeping very quiet, why wouldn't they, I'd hazard a guess that most of them are non-UK based so what hapens here means nothing to them.

Ignorance, or outright deceit to protect sales through verbal rose-tinted glasses is no defence for these companies. I recall that a PLASA stand flogging their software/hardware solutions sidestepped every opportunity to even mention the license when a friend of mine "mystery shopped" them about it.

 

If a company is geared up enough to advertise in the UK, they need to be geared up enough to mention, at least, a footnote to say that something like "May require 3rd party licence for public performance". With links from the software companies website to the PPL website, and the licence application form in the UK boxes.

 

Anyway...there might be some good news on the whole issue soon(ish) - but not soon enough.