tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4513524515428334509.post2221351089661761716..comments2024-03-26T10:41:35.852+00:00Comments on The 1709 Blog: Is Universal Publishing’s exit from collective licensing a step backwards for music industry ‘one stop’ aspirations?Marie-Andree Weisshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17125973798789498436noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4513524515428334509.post-54065558586493922482013-02-14T15:45:26.188+00:002013-02-14T15:45:26.188+00:00One more update: BMI chief Del Bryant, has issued ...One more update: BMI chief Del Bryant, has issued a letter responding to the news Univeral had joined Sony/ATV/EMI and will licence the rights that exist in their songs directly, rather than securing those rights via deals with the country's three societies, BMI, ASCAP and SESAC and Bryant reveals that BMI has entered into an agreement with Sony/ATV/EMI to still administrate the collection and distribution of royalties from those digital platforms the major licences direct - but subject to the royalty rates agreed directly - a first for the society and whilst accepting that "recent developments may have added complexity to an already complex rights landscape" he added "we see these recent developments as a clear marketplace signal of the enhanced value music brings to the digital world and beyond. We are working diligently to make that value a reality not just for large multinational music companies, but for ALL songwriters, ALL composers and ALL music publishers".Benhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01868498334405853494noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4513524515428334509.post-40644173425532353592013-02-11T15:29:41.292+00:002013-02-11T15:29:41.292+00:00And to answer Julia: Well usually yes, if say you ...And to answer Julia: Well usually yes, if say you wanted a licence for a UK only radio or digital service then you could go to PRS for Music in the UK. In France you would go to SACEM for a French service. In the UK, PRS would licence you SACEM's member's songs, and in France SACEM would licence you PRS member's songs (etc!). Neelie Kros wants there to be (in effect) the possibility of pan-European licensing from a single collection society - and certain steps have been taken to achieve this as set out in the Blog. But now with UMG pulling away from collective licensing in the USA it's another pattern ... as I see it UMG can licence a user their catalogue - potentially globally - but ONLY their catalogue. Benhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01868498334405853494noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4513524515428334509.post-76698073345905849572013-02-11T15:20:44.201+00:002013-02-11T15:20:44.201+00:00Perhaps the third 'tension' I referred to ...Perhaps the third 'tension' I referred to needs some explanation: In 2009 TechCrunch reported that the major record labels (UMG, EMI, SonyBMG, Warners) and Merlin representing the independent labels had taken a shareholding in Spotify, and now jointly hold 18% of the company's stock, which they brought for 100,000 SEK - or $14,000. The company is now valued at anything between $1 billion and $4 billion. In addition, Sony and Universal are the major shareholders in premium music video platform Vevo along with the Abu Dhabi Media Company. But nowhere have I seen how either songwriters or recording artistes would be accounted for 'their' share of the value of these companies which must be built on the value of the record label and music publisher's catalogues - errrm - the copyrights created by those very recording artistes and songwriters.Benhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01868498334405853494noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4513524515428334509.post-47783644836306264532013-02-06T14:39:25.837+00:002013-02-06T14:39:25.837+00:00May I ask a question? I understood collection soci...May I ask a question? I understood collection societies had reciprocal deals in place so licensees only require licences from their local societies to be able to use international repertoire... but do these reciprocal agreements exclude digital rights? What about on the recording side? Interesting read.Julianoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4513524515428334509.post-15482274717057388232013-02-06T14:11:58.956+00:002013-02-06T14:11:58.956+00:00Don't forget that the writers are direct membe...Don't forget that the writers are direct members of the Performance Societies as well and are paid 50% directly. Universal are only talking about their share; they can't control the writer's share. So how does it work? The writer is paid by PRO at "PRO Rate" while Universal is paid at the "Universal Rate" which then has to credit their writer's account. It sounds like an administrative dog's breakfast with greatly increased costs that the PRO's will inevitably pass onto the writer.<br /><br />If it couldn't get any worse think about international income. The PRS would collect for say a CSI broadcast locally in the UK then pay… who at what rate? Repeat for all countries and... actually I think I'll get back to envisaging non Euclidian geometry, it's easier.<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16653338813305824956noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4513524515428334509.post-40717584990332640442013-02-06T14:05:17.514+00:002013-02-06T14:05:17.514+00:00Also, a particularly timely piece in view of the E...Also, a particularly timely piece in view of the EU's new licensing initiative "Licences for Europe"<br /><br />http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-13-97_en.htmAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4513524515428334509.post-81517640795794208052013-02-05T21:38:47.149+00:002013-02-05T21:38:47.149+00:00Collective licensing involved a lot of cross subs...Collective licensing involved a lot of cross subsidy by the 'top 100' of the collective licensing entities costs , technological change means that this cross subsidy is no longer effectively unavoidable. Hence the desperate advocacy by the collectives for mandated compulsory management status , it is the collectives who are most threatened by the sea change . john walkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09294818072841970915noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4513524515428334509.post-16236983410157359582013-02-05T19:41:47.203+00:002013-02-05T19:41:47.203+00:00This is a timely piece. The sad thing is that it w...This is a timely piece. The sad thing is that it was a timely piece a decade or two ago as well. Conventional wisdom is that "you are covered" with a blanket license from each of the three PRO's in the US (not true, but close enough to feel the blanket's warmth). Those PROs find it in their interest to make direct licensing difficult. Just like health insurance companies love for the cost of health care to be so high that you don't want to risk living without their product (even though none of them are needed for health care), the PROs have succeeded in making it too risky to do business without them (even though none of them are legally necessary to do business). But when a company the size of Universal pulls out, there it merely means 4 blankets instead of 3, unless Universal also makes it real easy to cherry pick and license one-offs. Until we facilitate the direct low-friction licensing between major service providers/retailers and the smallest self-published garage band, we will be syphoning off dollars for lawyers, negotiators, and blanket managers that could be better spent in making it ridiculously more efficient to license music. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com