NationStates Jolt Archive

At work we have a radio on while we work. Recently we have received a letter saying we should be paying money to the Performing Rights Society to buy a licence to do this. To me this seems as if the performers are being paid twice - once by the radio station and once by the listener. It seems analagous to having to pay again everytime you play a cd you have already bought. What do those of you with finer legal minds than mine make of this?

They're right, you're wrong.

Welcome to wonderful world of copyrights.

When you play radio publicly it is considered somewhat similar to broadcasting music in radio, hence you're not allowed to do so without paying extra for it.

It's another one of those messed up laws. As I understand it if you play the music loud enough so people can here it you're doing unlicensed broadcasting, but if you were to hand out a radio and headphones to everyone, it's A-Okay.

What do you make of things like this, where the radio station encourages people to listen to them at work? Are you only actually authorized to do so on these specific days?

http://www.wcfx.com/workperks/workperks.html

They're right, you're wrong.

Welcome to wonderful world of copyrights.

When you play radio publicly it is considered somewhat similar to broadcasting music in radio, hence you're not allowed to do so without paying extra for it.

But it's not being played publicly, it's in a private office with a select number of people.

At work we have a radio on while we work. Recently we have received a letter saying we should be paying money to the Performing Rights Society to buy a licence to do this. To me this seems as if the performers are being paid twice - once by the radio station and once by the listener. It seems analagous to having to pay again everytime you play a cd you have already bought. What do those of you with finer legal minds than mine make of this?

And how did they know you were playing a radio at work? Or do they just send the letter routinely to lots of businesses?

It's another one of those messed up laws. As I understand it if you play the music loud enough so people can here it you're doing unlicensed broadcasting, but if you were to hand out a radio and headphones to everyone, it's A-Okay.

Unless the number of headphones was too large OR the listeners changed often (like, say, for example hair salon customers).


Gawd I hate the Recording Industry mafia that has pushed these inane laws into effect.

But it's not being played publicly, it's in a private office with a select number of people.
Is it closed office? Are there visitors there during the work hours? How big a crowd is it?

They're right, you're wrong.

Welcome to wonderful world of copyrights.

When you play radio publicly it is considered somewhat similar to broadcasting music in radio, hence you're not allowed to do so without paying extra for it.

But it is self defeating idiocy by the music industry - I just won't listen to anything new and so won't buy what they are trying to sell. It is like a company demanding you have a licence to watch their adverts.

But it's not being played publicly, it's in a private office with a select number of people.

This is a good point, there was a case recently where garages that played the radio were infringing on copyright but then the argument, if I remember correctly, is that members of the public walking by could hear the music and therefore it was being played publicly.

Within a private office, I'm not sure but if they're asking I'd guess they have a case.

Is there a difference with CDs, we play off an i-pod in our office, is that infringing copyright?

But it is self defeating idiocy by the music industry - I just won't listen to anything new and so won't buy what they are trying to sell. It is like a company demanding you have a licence to watch their adverts.
But you can do it for FREE and LEGALLY and WHENEVER YOU WANT if you use YOUTUBE for it. :headbang:

For the record, IMO most copyright laws are plain archaic.

Even the UK police get done for it...

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080613-uk-police-nicked-by-copyright-cop-for-playing-radio-too-loud.html

Is it closed office? Are there visitors there during the work hours? How big a crowd is it?

Well, I'll assume it's not being played in a reception area (if there is one) but in the main office part that is closed off.

Would it be an infringement if a family of 14 all listened to the radio in their home?

But it is self defeating idiocy by the music industry - I just won't listen to anything new and so won't buy what they are trying to sell. It is like a company demanding you have a licence to watch their adverts.

This is a good analogy. I also find many copyright laws are totally outdated.

that just fucked up

So that's why they stopped playing music over the loudspeaker at work. Damn them....

And how did they know you were playing a radio at work? Or do they just send the letter routinely to lots of businesses?

I think they are just sending out letters to lots of organisations.

I think they are just sending out letters to lots of organisations.

Maybe they're randomly sending out letters to try to catch people and regain the money they lost the last time they randomly sent out letters.

I think they are just sending out letters to lots of organisations.

I'd ignore it then, depending on the size of your office.

Well, I'll assume it's not being played in a reception area (if there is one) but in the main office part that is closed off.
Which can still recieve visitors, customers or whatever more or less randomly...

I agree it doesn't make any sense but it's the law.
Would it be an infringement if a family of 14 all listened to the radio in their home?
I think within family is considered private, regardless of the size of the family.

I'm not sure I understand the situation. The radio is tuned to a radio station, meaning that you're listening to an already public broadcast, aren't you? Why would you need to pay extra for this? Do these performers get money each time someone buys a radio?

i work at a trade association, and many of our members have been getting similar letters/phone calls of late. at first we thought it was a scam, but on researching it... nope. gotta pay up.

it is pretty shitty in my non-legal (personal) opinion. apparently the society simply has more funds of late to chase smaller infringements.

but i want to know if this applies to royalty-free (creative commons for eg) music?

I'm not sure I understand the situation. The radio is tuned to a radio station, meaning that you're listening to an already public broadcast, aren't you?
Publicly playing a radio is considered a public broadcast in its own right.

Why would you need to pay extra for this?
Blame recording industry.

Do these performers get money each time someone buys a radio?
Uncertain, but at least here performers get money each time I buy a recordable medium like an empty optic disk.


Looking at the local policies, background music (incl. playing the radio) in workplace does need a license which costs roughly 5 euros/year/person. If customers are involved then the license needs to be negotiated seperately.

Weird... I don't believe a law like that will ever be passed here. Too many people's pass-time is to sit around a Falafelia or Shawarmia or just some snack store and listen to the radio there while eating sunflower seeds or some-such.

but i want to know if this applies to royalty-free (creative commons for eg) music?

That is a really interesting point - if someone set up a creative commons radio station I don't think it would apply.

Publicly playing a radio is considered a public broadcast in its own right.

Every time this comes up I can't help but wonder, how does something like that become law in the first place?


My money-hat sense is tingling.

That is a really interesting point - if someone set up a creative commons radio station I don't think it would apply.

indeed... there's tonnes of CC music available on the web (i've used lots in video work), and a lot of it is very good. certainly just for some background music in a lobby or whatever :)

At work we have a radio on while we work. Recently we have received a letter saying we should be paying money to the Performing Rights Society to buy a licence to do this. To me this seems as if the performers are being paid twice - once by the radio station and once by the listener. It seems analagous to having to pay again everytime you play a cd you have already bought. What do those of you with finer legal minds than mine make of this?

I'm with you, and they are actualy getting paid three times. Once when the radio station purchases the music, each and every time they play it, and now they want money for people to listen to it.

What other art forms get paid for more than this I wonder?

The MAFIAA (Music And Film Industry Association of America).

Appropriate eh?

The MAFIAA (Music And Film Industry Association of America).

Appropriate eh?

It's E-MAFIA here (European Music And Film Industry Association) :p

Do these laws apply in the US? Because I know of at least one public radio station that billed itself as the "At-Work Network", and there are lots of shows that have "Win a breakfast for your entire office" contest, yet I've not (yet) heard of this nonsense here.

I wonder how many dentists offices have been sued/send C&D letters. Have you ever been to some one who does any sort of dental work without a radio playing?

Luckily the MPAA had its spirit broken years ago when the VCR came out or they would be trying to shut people down for having TVs in their offices.

Do these laws apply in the US? Because I know of at least one public radio station that billed itself as the "At-Work Network", and there are lots of shows that have "Win a breakfast for your entire office" contest, yet I've not (yet) heard of this nonsense here.
I'm pretty sure they do, it's just the RIAA is mostly focused on internet witch hunts but if you speak too loudly about it, they can probably find a couple of legal bulldogs to send after you.

Luckily the MPAA had its spirit broken years ago when the VCR came out or they would be trying to shut people down for having TVs in their offices.

yes, i was just wondering about TV at the workplace. my dentist doesn't have the radio on, he has a little TV in the corner instead. but for TV you do pay your licence fee already, but that's to the BBC, not some random PRS-equivalent asshats

All I can say is HOW DARE YOU!?!?!?!?

Those recording artists are out there suffering lives of poverty and all you can think of is to complain and whine about how you can't share the music in the office environment.

How can these singers afford their drugs, their Italian cars, their large mansions? You act as if they don't even deserve it! How in the hell can these artists possibly live when you cry every time they find a new way to eke out another tiny little bit of an honest living for themselves?

You should be ashamed. You should be mortified. You should be on your knees before these singers and begging for their forgiveness, then show them your remorse by cutting them a check.

Think of the children.

/satire

At work we have a radio on while we work. Recently we have received a letter saying we should be paying money to the Performing Rights Society to buy a licence to do this. To me this seems as if the performers are being paid twice - once by the radio station and once by the listener. It seems analagous to having to pay again everytime you play a cd you have already bought. What do those of you with finer legal minds than mine make of this?

getting a letter is all well and good but ANYONE actually going to buy a license or stop employees from listening to the radio at work?

getting a letter is all well and good but ANYONE actually going to buy a license or stop employees from listening to the radio at work?

We worked out it would be roughly £4000 a year in licences for the organisation. We are not going to spend that as we are a charity. So I am afraid it will be me stopping people having the radio on.

We worked out it would be roughly £4000 a year in licences for the organisation. We are not going to spend that as we are a charity. So I am afraid it will be me stopping people having the radio on.

so youre saying that the performing rights society has decided to destroy music radio by requiring licenses to listen.

where do people listen to radio these days? inthe car and at work. if you take the work part out--and why would any business pay that outragous fee-- you have ruined the radio business.

is radio no longer a significant promotional avenue for music so that artists can do without that method of getting their work heard?

sometimes the laws of the UK make me shake my head.

Does this mean its illegal to drive down a city street with your radio on and your windows open?


Or is it a violation of copyright law if i turn on a radio in a park? Or playing a radio on a boombox (besides being annoying) on a bus?

Do these laws apply in the US? Because I know of at least one public radio station that billed itself as the "At-Work Network", and there are lots of shows that have "Win a breakfast for your entire office" contest, yet I've not (yet) heard of this nonsense here.

So?

It's not illegal to listen to radio at work if you have a license. I know plenty of radio shows with traffic reports as well, I assume they expect people are driving with a license when they listen to them.

Also this is why I listen to independent radio stations on the net and why I make my own music podcast using the songs of the artists I have gained permission from. This way I can play my podcast publicly and because I have written agreement with the artists, this so called society can't do crap.


Also its FREE, like listening to the radio should be.

So?

It's not illegal to listen to radio at work if you have a license. I know plenty of radio shows with traffic reports as well, I assume they expect people are driving with a license when they listen to them.
You have to have a driver's license to listen to the radio? :confused:

Also this is why I listen to independent radio stations on the net and why I make my own music podcast using the songs of the artists I have gained permission from. This way I can play my podcast publicly and because I have written agreement with the artists, this so called society can't do crap.


Also its FREE, like listening to the radio should be.

and why wouldnt everyone do this rather than pay such a fee to do what the radio station has already paid for?

the performing rights society is destroying a good avenue for their artists to get their work heard.

You have to have a driver's license to listen to the radio? :confused:

You are confused aren't you.

Just because a radio station can broadcast to a particular audience, doesn't mean that audience doesn't need a license to do whatever it's doing, whether that's driving or listening to radio at work.

Hence, as a station I can broadcast a program for office workers while assuming they've a license to listen.

Similarly, I can broadcast a program for drivers while assuming they've a license to drive.

Although the analogy is not exactly correct, in that it's not as though office workers need a license to work, the point remains the same.

Hope that clears it up, if not, buy a mac.

You are confused aren't you.

Just because a radio station can broadcast to a particular audience, doesn't mean that audience doesn't need a license to do whatever it's doing, whether that's driving or listening to radio at work.

Hence, as a station I can broadcast a program for office workers while assuming they've a license to listen.

Similarly, I can broadcast a program for drivers while assuming they've a license to drive.

Although the analogy is not exactly correct, in that it's not as though office workers need a license to work, the point remains the same.

Hope that clears it up, if not, buy a mac.

I think that this is a case of a Brit talking to a Yank. We don't have radio license here in the states. If you buy a radio or a tv, that's it, you can watch tv or listen to the radio, no more fees unless you get special service like satellite or cable.

That might be the barrier in understanding for us Americans. Radio pays for the music they play (among other costs) through adverstising, advertising rates are set by listenership, so we 'pay' for it by being a body that theoretically listens to the ads (instead of wandering the dial looking for another station that might be playing music). In this respect music played in an office is a boon because you're not as likely to wander from channel to channel like you would in a car (or just put in a CD...or talk with your passenger...or whatever). So to charge the listener for listening is like double dipping.

There is some tension on whether or not say a bar can broadcast, but since there are plenty of sports bars that all play all kinds of sports channels I assume (and if you're going to correct me at least give me a link or something) that the solution was just to count it as multiple viewers in setting rates. Or something like that.

That's incredibly messed up, glad I don't live in the UK.

I think that this is a case of a Brit talking to a Yank. We don't have radio license here in the states. If you buy a radio or a tv, that's it, you can watch tv or listen to the radio, no more fees unless you get special service like satellite or cable.

That might be the barrier in understanding for us Americans. Radio pays for the music they play (among other costs) through adverstising, advertising rates are set by listenership, so we 'pay' for it by being a body that theoretically listens to the ads (instead of wandering the dial looking for another station that might be playing music). In this respect music played in an office is a boon because you're not as likely to wander from channel to channel like you would in a car (or just put in a CD...or talk with your passenger...or whatever). So to charge the listener for listening is like double dipping.

There is some tension on whether or not say a bar can broadcast, but since there are plenty of sports bars that all play all kinds of sports channels I assume (and if you're going to correct me at least give me a link or something) that the solution was just to count it as multiple viewers in setting rates. Or something like that.

Same in the UK, the difference is when you play in public, whether in a bar, a school or a prison - hence those warnings on films.

The license we actually have is only to pay for the BBC, a state-owned service, which therefore takes no advertising (in the UK at least, its international operations do). All other channels are, essentially, paid for by advertising, we don't pay for them, buy a radio and listen.

I would have to suspect, though happy to be proven wrong, that sports bars pay for a license to broadcast to its patrons in the US, I'd be very surprised if they didn't, same with music.

Whether an American office needs a license to play music to their office is different matter, I wouldn't know but, again, I'd be surprised if the actual ruling, though possibly not enforced, didn't require them to - I'd hate to have to trawl through the RIAA site to find out though :)

There's no radio license in the UK.

Same rules do seem to apply in the US, I think...

http://www.ascap.com/licensing/licensingfaq.html

That is just retarded. Radio is free - it is supported by advertising money (or, in some cases, taxpayer dollars).

My advice: unless you can't afford a lawyer, take it to court.

Noone seems to have answered my question yet. Does this mean its a violation of copyright law if i drive down a city street with my windows open and a radio on to the level that someone outside the car can hear me?

Noone seems to have answered my question yet. Does this mean its a violation of copyright law if i drive down a city street with my windows open and a radio on to the level that someone outside the car can hear me?

Probably, but is it going to stop you?

NOT A BIG DEAL? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wji1pT9jsmQ&feature=related)

That is just retarded. Radio is free - it is supported by advertising money (or, in some cases, taxpayer dollars).

My advice: unless you can't afford a lawyer, take it to court.

You may be on to something here:

If the Recording Industry can charge you for playing their music where other people can hear it, then you should be able to charge the advertisers for playing their advertisements where other people can hear em!

By trying to stop radio at workplaces, a lot of radio stations will lose a lot of advertising revenues, which could be the end of quite a few radio stations. I wonder why the performing rights society wants to kill radio...

By trying to stop radio at workplaces, a lot of radio stations will lose a lot of advertising revenues, which could be the end of quite a few radio stations. I wonder why the performing rights society wants to kill radio...

Because it isn't paying them royalties and thus must die.

Noone seems to have answered my question yet. Does this mean its a violation of copyright law if i drive down a city street with my windows open and a radio on to the level that someone outside the car can hear me?

that seems to be an issue for the performing rights society to decide. they seem to have the UK listeners by the short hair and any use/any price is completely up to them.

so id guess that YES, you are going to have to have a license to listen to your car radio if you have passengers or drive with the windows open.