tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4513524515428334509.post2388457138796775796..comments2024-03-26T10:41:35.852+00:00Comments on The 1709 Blog: Those DMX music licences: some clarification of the issuesMarie-Andree Weisshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17125973798789498436noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4513524515428334509.post-1521446318167748442012-09-14T17:13:22.191+01:002012-09-14T17:13:22.191+01:00I have only had a short time to read this but what... I have only had a short time to read this but what I have read reaffirms my belief the US system is fraught with more questions than answers when it comes down to who owns rights and thus has the ability to license services on behalf of stakeholders. I am aware US writers relationship with their respective Performing Right Organisations (PRO) whilst exclusive are also subject to the rights of their music publishers who may in direct licensing situations be legally empowered to deal direct with Users such as DMX and as demonstrated by EMI Music Publishing the publishers are entitled to withdraw repertoire from their PRO ( in that case EMI's April catalogue for digital rights). <br /><br />However UK writers are in a different position as they generally assign all of their rights to PRS and any deal with a publisher usually acknowledges PRS's overarching rights. What this means I would argue is that the exclusive rights in UK written works belong to whichever US PRO licenses the rights in the US and that any sub publishing deal between the UK publisher and US sub publisher must be subject to those sam,e terms and conditions.<br /><br />This is comparable to the situation in relation to continental European works ( generally referred to as BIEM repertoire) where the Collection society has 'senior' rights over the repertoire and effectively own and control any licensing of such repertoire. In the UK this means publishers are generally unable to collect the norm for works from common law countries (US, UK et al) of 100% of mechanical income and are only able to collect the publishers share of such income.<br /><br />I would check this over with PRS, BASCA and the MPA but I am confident the DMX spokesman is wrong in his analysis and has failed to grasp that licensing of rights in the US is dependant on dealing with the appropriate company with sufficient rights to negotiate . I for one would doubt whether a US sub publisher of UK works has sufficient rights over the repertoire and these rights could well be trumped by say ASCAP on behalf of PRSMenace to Societieshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15017935651557080803noreply@blogger.com