Digital DJ license - an absolute farce! Read this!!

[Komplex]

Utter bushlit. what a scam to make some bux...

DOES THE MONEY GO TO THE ARTISTS?

[AlexG]

This is so full of grey areas. What about mix cd's, downloadable mixes etc? What about all those DJ's burning off CDR's. Will there be a 'CDJ licence' anytime soon?? I can see the benefit of such a scheme if it helps crack down on your local pub jock getting paid for Limewiring everything, but this should not apply to club jocks, who spend $$$ on promos etc, get paid (very often) naff all, have 2 kip in the car and are only trying to further the creativity of the profession, not make a fast buck. Surely an ent's licence at the venue should cover everything, whether it is a laptop, sampler, CDJ, SL1200 or a 5 piece.

[elemental]

yeah its all a bit of a joke really ... people trying to chase money basically. Fair enough if the money really goes to artists, but i dont believe it does (most of the time).

What about DJ's who play CDR's/dubplates of unreleased stuff?

I dont expect to make money off music, not until I start doing live PA's anyway, so I'm not really bothered about this.

[robin]

What about downloadable mixes etc? .

The BPI class this as piracy if you have downloadable dj mixes available on your website.

I speak from experience.

[AlexG]

This all kinda makes me wonder about bootlegs too, I'm pretty sure all those booty tracks it is possible to pick up on white have not been licenced. This is an immeasurable task, regulation of all aspects of technological music performance, be it cut ups, layering acapellas, phrase sampling, or other creative mixing techniques. Surely this new legislation is merely cracking down upon all aspects of contemporary DJ'in that are purely BENEFICIAL to the already overloaded DJ scene. It seems that the one thing that could spur another revolution in music performance (and hence more $ to PPL) is now being taxed. They should be concentrating on those who BLATANTLY flaunt copyright law in the WORST way, by stealing music, and not on those who are trying to find new and exciting ways to perform PAID FOR recordings to paying punters in paid up entertainments venues!

[robin]

This all kinda makes me wonder about bootlegs too, I'm pretty sure all those booty tracks it is possible to pick up on white have not been licenced. This is an immeasurable task, regulation of all aspects of technological music performance, be it cut ups, layering acapellas, phrase sampling, or other creative mixing techniques. Surely this new legislation is merely cracking down upon all aspects of contemporary DJ'in that are purely BENEFICIAL to the already overloaded DJ scene. It seems that the one thing that could spur another revolution in music performance (and hence more $ to PPL) is now being taxed. They should be concentrating on those who BLATANTLY flaunt copyright law in the WORST way, by stealing music, and not on those who are trying to find new and exciting ways to perform PAID FOR recordings to paying punters in paid up entertainments venues!

there are a tonne of bootlegs around all the time (cough, HTFR, cough). you're right they should persue this kind of thing first.

[computo]

actually, artists should pay DJ's, for promoting their music!

I suppose death row inmates should pay the executioner, too...

[computo]

Hmmm, tell that to beethoven and and mozart, they did great before copyright came along. it came to my attention recently, that you can not in fact copyright a recipe, that a collection of flavors is to general a concept to own, i don't see how this has prevented any number of talented chefs from making a great living.

Are you fucking retarded, or just music history deprived?

Beethoven was deaf, and Mozart died poor than a rock....

So how exactly did they do "great" from the lack of copyright?? maybe if copyrights had been around, neither of them would have been in as much pain as they were.

Foolish. Copyrights havnt prevented anything, other than the deserving artist to get paid. Read a book.

[Pandamonium]

I have owned and run a record label for several years. Here in Australia we have PPCA and APRA to collect royalties for things like DJs using other people music to make money themselves (among many other things royalties can be collected for), I can assure you the money DOES get back to the labels and artists. What is wrong with that? I would be horrified to think someone else is exploiting the music of our artists that we have spent so much money developing and releasing without us or the artists seeing anything back. It's organisations like PPCA and APRA that allow musicians to make a living from their music, and allow new music to be released. Remember, without musicians, DJS would have nothing to play . Everyyone else has to pay to use music that doesnt belong to them commercially, why shouldnt DJs?

[Komplex]

Everyyone else has to pay to use music that doesnt belong to them commercially, why shouldnt DJs?

There are two payments already, when you purchase the music and royalties when it is played (the second one is very flawed in reality)

Now what is the purpose of this "license" other than to milk some more money out of the scene and generally piss people off?

Where and how does the license fee make its way into the pocket of every single artist who writes the music that is being played? And even if a measly percentage does trickle down the slimy stream of greed, who decides where the money goes to and how much?

I call BULLSHIT. If there is a way to fight this shit, fight it hard before its too late and it becomes law or something...

[Komplex]

Everyyone else has to pay to use music that doesnt belong to them commercially, why shouldnt DJs?

That would be great, if it was done fairly... This stuff is not fair because of my above points...

[atmofunk]

how many successful electronic music producers today, or within the last 10 years can legitimately say they don't owe their success to the DJ's that played their music? There are obviously some but for the most part, without the exposure, a lot of those musicians would still be making tracks in their bedrooms

DJ's need the musicians, musicans need the DJ's.

Personally, I'd be freakin stoked if a dj bought my music and played it out. I wouldn't ask for a licence fee, I wouldn't ask for royalties - the fact that my song was bought is enough, SINCE I MAKE THIS SHIT FOR THE PURPOSE OF PEOPLE DANCING TO IT. That's the whole bloody point...

compilations, mix cd's, soundtracking (commercials) etc.. that's a diffrent story, but this is a discussion about live performance.

As far as I can tell.. these licencing organizations are trying to get in the middle and make money off both parties. There are too many grey areas to create a blanket catch-all policy and sound 100% legit from their end

[Chris J]

Hmmm, tell that to beethoven and and mozart, they did great before copyright came along. it came to my attention recently, that you can not in fact copyright a recipe, that a collection of flavors is to general a concept to own, i don't see how this has prevented any number of talented chefs from making a great living.

Are you fucking retarded, or just music history deprived?

Beethoven was deaf, and Mozart died poor than a rock....

So how exactly did they do "great" from the lack of copyright?? maybe if copyrights had been around, neither of them would have been in as much pain as they were.

Foolish. Copyrights havnt prevented anything, other than the deserving artist to get paid. Read a book.

yes and on top of that, they were totally dependant on the money given by the kings or queens. ie royalty (does the name come from that ?dunno).

[Chris J]

What about downloadable mixes etc? .

The BPI class this as piracy if you have downloadable dj mixes available on your website.

I speak from experience.

Robin, can you give us more infos on that ? What happened to you ?

[Chris J]

I have owned and run a record label for several years. Here in Australia we have PPCA and APRA to collect royalties for things like DJs using other people music to make money themselves (among many other things royalties can be collected for), I can assure you the money DOES get back to the labels and artists. What is wrong with that? I would be horrified to think someone else is exploiting the music of our artists that we have spent so much money developing and releasing without us or the artists seeing anything back. It's organisations like PPCA and APRA that allow musicians to make a living from their music, and allow new music to be released. Remember, without musicians, DJS would have nothing to play . Everyyone else has to pay to use music that doesnt belong to them commercially, why shouldnt DJs?

it's great to know that it goes to the record labels. But that's where it stops, out of experience I know that most of the time artists don't get the money when it's "little" money