On Tue, Nov 14, 2000 at 03:36:17PM +0100, Paul Slootman wrote: > The *same* fee? So if you operate a broadcasting station that can > reach 10 million people, you pay the same amount as a shop that has > standing capacity for 10 people?
no, i don't believe it's the exact same fee. i don't know what radio stations pay. i used to know what cafes etc were expected to pay but that was 5 years ago. any kind of public performance (including hold music/muzak on telephone systems) incurs some fee. > > what's worse is that they still demand you pay even if the only > > music you play is your own material or licensed direct from the > > artists (who happen to be your friends). they assume that because > > you CAN play other material that you in fact are. > > That's very similar to the Buma (http://www.buma.nl/uk/home.htm) here > in the Netherlands. to tell the truth i don't mind the basic idea, it's nice in theory - artists should be compensated for public performance of their work. in practice, however, almost all of the money goes to a handful of the more famous bands because ARIA have a yearly "ratings" week and artists get paid proportionally according to the playlists for that week...so all the small bands get their friends to call the request shows and ask for their music just so they can get a miniscule fraction of the loot. most bands get nothing, some get slightly more than nothing, a few get the rest. > They also wanted to levy a surcharge on the sale of blank cdroms > because as you can use them to duplicate audio cds, you *will*. Very > nice if e.g. you're trying to distribute debian cds. However, that > attempt fortunately died a silent death. they managed to get something like that through here in oz for blank tapes. they tried for DAT tapes too, but I think they failed because they are mostly used for professional purposes (including computer backup) rather than for consumer audio. can't remember exactly, i could be wrong. this is veering wildly off-topic.... craig -- craig sanders
