Same Library For Multiple Systems

[JamesY]

Gee, I feel better now -- it's on the the internet...

I got a bud at Apple, developer I used to work with on some projects. He appears to have the ears of some higher ups, so I'm gonna send him an email regarding this issue, and see if we can get some clarification...[/quote]

I don't think the advice of higher ups at Apple is going to be of much help. They are/were at odds with ASCAP over paying performance fees themselves. ASCAP insisted that they were due performance fees for the 30-second preview clips of songs, and also even tried to mandate performance fees for the actually downloading of a song.

Apple is likely biased.

I'd prefer to go with the US Code of Law which is what I will be judged against if I were ever to go to court.

 

[Proformance]

I'm not all that bitter Bob, I just know what I've had to go through to protect my IP. I'm sorta guessing you have no IP of your own, and have never had to do that. I have to pony up the bucks up front, to hire a lawyer, and sue somebodies sorry ass. I usually win, but it costs me, and I sometimes never get the money. You people disappear under the table faster than an empty beer can.

I got a bud at Apple, developer I used to work with on some projects. He appears to have the ears of some higher ups, so I'm gonna send him an email regarding this issue, and see if we can get some clarification...

"You people?" and "Sorry asses?"

Nah, you're not bitter... glad we could be a target for you.

 

[steve149]

I'm looking for honest discussion of where there are non black and white clear cut answers. A lot of what has been thrown around above is pure legalese and, while important, doesn't answer the basic questions that have peppered this thread. I am not desperate to give anyone, including Rick, any more money, just saying that what you laid out and what is in the EULAs of iTunes/Amazon and the licensing info of BMI/ASCAP are at odds.

I do not know who is right. You made some valid arguments, but no one has addressed the specifics in the EULAs/licensing and that is who has a right to do what without paying someone else. I know it's all grey and will probably stay that way for a while.

 

[JamesY]

Rick I'm surprised since you disagree with the law as it is written, that you are in the DJ business. Why would be involved in a business that clearly violates your values regarding a person's IP when you KNOW that a gazillion wedding DJ's and other private event DJ's across America are NOT paying performance fees for any of the IP they are playing?

Do you DJ private events? Do you or your private vent venues or say bride n groom pay performance fees to artists/ASCAP?

Do you advise people who purchase your jukebox software regarding the performance fees and what your views and values are on paying royalties for people's IP?

If I purchase your home use version of your jukebox software, put it on my laptop, and take my laptop to my friend's cousin's house and play music utilizing it, and they give me beer in exchange, am I violating the terms of your home use jukebox? Do I need to pay a performance fee since I profited from playing this music?

 

[JamesY]

I'm looking for honest discussion of where there are non black and white clear cut answers. A lot of what has been thrown around above is pure legalese and, while important, doesn't answer the basic questions that have peppered this thread. I am not desperate to give anyone, including Rick, any more money, just saying that what you laid out and what is in the EULAs of iTunes/Amazon and the licensing info of BMI/ASCAP are at odds.

I do not know who is right. You made some valid arguments, but no one has addressed the specifics in the EULAs/licensing and that is who has a right to do what without paying someone else. I know it's all grey and will probably stay that way for a while.

I can't speak for Amazon. But I did read iTunes EULA's. According to their EULA, the laws of California and the United States govern their terms & services. They are also contracted with ASCAP, BMI, etc. paying them mechanical fees as opposed to performance fees. Those entities are also governed by the United States per their EULAs/information. Therefore, if all EULAs within this scope are governed by the laws of the United States - which includes Copyright Laws, then I feel as thought there is no grey area when it comes to private events for family and friends where no entry fees or other revenue is generated from the guests who attend.

 

[SoftJock Rick]

Do you think we should pay Rick a percentage of whatever fee we charge?

Hey, I'm into that... xf

Heck, I'll write you a special song for that bride and groom. I don't do it for free though -- somebodies wallet has to open -- I'm flexible, but I have to pay the bills, just like you folks.

I think some of you folks think us programmers/songwriters are rich. We're not all rich -- maybe Bruce Springsteen is, but the rest of us live week to week, just like the rest of you. Every penny counts.

If somebody steals my software or song -- I don't get any money, and Faith gets no food.

 

[steve149]

I can't speak for Amazon. But I did read iTunes EULA's. According to their EULA, the laws of California and the United States govern their terms & services. They are also contracted with ASCAP, BMI, etc. paying them mechanical fees as opposed to performance fees. Those entities are also governed by the United States per their EULAs/information. Therefore, if all EULAs within this scope are governed by the laws of the United States - which includes Copyright Laws, then I feel as thought there is no grey area when it comes to private events for family and friends where no entry fees or other revenue is generated from the guests who attend.

I'm glad you feel that way .. I don't. It just goes to show the differences of opinions here.

Fees for them to distribute material and fees for you to perform them aren't the same, so it really doesn't matter whether they have contracted with the agencies (they need to distribute). Most venues I go to also pay their fees, but I have no idea whether they cover the myriad of music available to me. Maybe they paid ASCAP and not BMI. Maybe one of the songs is Rick's?

More so, I doubt the countless gyms, small banquet halls, Elks Clubs and such, pay all the licenses. I'm not going to sweat it, don't have a desire to pony up for fees myself, just don't want the record to show that it really doesn't matter when it apparently does to some.

 

[JamesY]

I'm glad you feel that way .. I don't. It just goes to show the differences of opinions here.

Fees for them to distribute material and fees for you to perform them aren't the same, so it really doesn't matter whether they have contracted with the agencies (they need to distribute). Most venues I go to also pay their fees, but I have no idea whether they cover the myriad of music available to me. Maybe they paid ASCAP and not BMI. Maybe one of the songs is Ricks?

More so, I doubt the countless gyms, small banquet halls, Elks Clubs and such, pay all the licenses. I'm not going to sweat it, don't have a desire to pony up for fees myself, just don't want the record to show that it really doesn't matter when it apparently does to some.

Well - I don't DJ public events - only private events. I researched the hell out of this issue before I even started the DJ biz because I was worried too. If I DJ'd in clubs I'd definitely be more concerned - but the fact is, I DJ private events - 99% weddings - that are covered by the laws that say we do not have to pay performance fees.

If people don't like the law, then I'd say hound your congressional leaders to change it, but until such time, I'm going to keep following the law as it is stated.

I am wondering now where I can find a complete list of Rick's songs to make sure I don't have any on my harddrive.

 

[steve149]

I do private parties and bars, but not weddings. I'm still concerned because I do NOT believe the "private" events are covered completely the way you believe them to be based on the language in the EULAs and music licensing sites. Hopefully they are.

 

[SoftJock Rick]

I am wondering now where I can find a complete list of Rick's songs to make sure I don't have any on my harddrive.

I've only put out one album to date -- The River Road Album. All instrumental, and I wrote it on The Farm. Took me a while to put together, and I had to get all sorts of permissions. I even had to call William Shatner's and Leonard Nimoy's publicists. PITA.


Did most of it with Paul Black backing tracks, and I did the rhythm and lead, and all the editing...


First tune is sort of weird -- it's a Star Trek thing

http://www.softjock.com/mp3/1709-CptRick.mp3

Second is something I made up when walking by the railroad tracks. and watching the trains go by. I pretty much mimicked Paul's style on this one. I loved the way he plays, and I wanted to be just like him. So I practiced a lot, and this is the result.

http://www.softjock.com/mp3/shuffleno1-captainrick.mp3

 

[ahoustondj]

I do a bar gig where the patrons are a normal circle of family AND its acquaintances .. is that exempt? If so, I can tell the owner you all agree he does not have to pay the fees. Steve, the bar owner has families not a family who has rented out the place exclusively to them. The different non related families makes the place public.

And then a wedding for a 100 is good, but one for 350 probably isn't, is that what we're saying? He is not saying that at all.

Look, I wouldn't think many of us would pay the fees for such a thing, but I'm having a hard time with the justifications used vs. the language which is pretty clear.

See above in Red.

 

[steve149]

See above in Red.

Kinda did saying a wedding was ok without enumerating the relationships. The language in the BMI/ASCAP TOA say small or normal circle of friends/family. It would be tough to say that a 350 person wedding was a small or normal circle (let alone a 100 person). There is no language that says someone renting out a place is exempt. And the 350 person wedding SURELY has lots of unrelated and probably even a few hostile folks in there. And the bar I work is usually filled ONLY with acquaintances.

Only saying the language IS NOT CLEAR and a few are saying it is.

 

[SoftJock Rick]

Damn,you folks are nasty.

None of you create any content, but you want to use it all for free.


Should I give you my software or music for free? Some of you seem to think it's free, and you can do what you want.

Sorry dudes, it doesn't work that way.


Little Ricky is gonna make a couple phone calls tomorrow.

 

[JamesY]

Kinda did saying a wedding was ok without enumerating the relationships. The language in the BMI/ASCAP TOA say small or normal circle of friends/family. It would be tough to say that a 350 person wedding was a small or normal circle (let alone a 100 person). There is no language that says someone renting out a place is exempt. And the 350 person wedding SURELY has lots of unrelated and probably even a few hostile folks in there. And the bar I work is usually filled ONLY with acquaintances.

Only saying the language IS NOT CLEAR and a few are saying it is.

I'm not saying the language is not clear. What I did say was that although ASCAP may say small - the law is clear - and does not say small anywhere. ASCAP may be trying to make it more exclusive by wording it with the word small - but they did not create the law - the law is the law.

Your bar may usually be filled ONLY with acquaintances but the event - in this case the goings on in that bar during that night - are open to the general public. Weddings and other private events are open only to invitees - not the general public. So even though you may have all acquaintances at your bar at some point - it is not private; the general public is allowed and very invited at all times.

 

[JamesY]

Damn,you folks are nasty.

None of you create any content, but you want to use it all for free.


Should I give you my software or music for free? Some of you seem to think it's free, and you can do what you want.

Sorry dudes, it doesn't work that way.


Little Ricky is gonna make a couple phone calls tomorrow.

Did you pay performance fees or royalty fees for the use of the Star Trek samples?

I admit I was being a lil smartassy about some of my last comments but I was getting irritable. I apologize. But it does seem like you chastise people for using stuff for free but yet you're a DJ (I assume - ourdjtalk.com) and create vehicles (software) to enhance DJ options realizing that no one pays performance fees. It's irritating because it's illogical. Illogical irritates me.

 

[JamesY]

PS ... I really like the railroad track song.

 

[steve149]

I'm not saying the language is not clear. What I did say was that although ASCAP may say small - the law is clear - and does not say small anywhere. ASCAP may be trying to make it more exclusive by wording it with the word small - but they did not create the law - the law is the law.

Your bar may usually be filled ONLY with acquaintances but the event - in this case the goings on in that bar during that night - are open to the general public. Weddings and other private events are open only to invitees - not the general public. So even though you may have all acquaintances at your bar at some point - it is not private; the general public is allowed and very invited at all times.

If someone can show me (and no I am not going to try and read a volumes worth of legal language and attempt to come up with a coherent assemblage of information from it without a law degree) where in the LAW it says a reception of 300 invited, many non-related and possibly some not so friendly people in a public or private place is exempt from any performance licensing needs, I would love it .. ONLY because the other side has clearly provided their version, which I have shared. I keep being told it's ok, but I'm a fan of Missouri.

I am not a lawyer and can only process what is given directly, thus the problem with the law side of it. So to help clear things up for all the 100's or thousands of DJs that might come across this, if there is a paragraph that says it is OK, it would be great to share.

 

[Proformance]

Kinda did saying a wedding was ok without enumerating the relationships. The language in the BMI/ASCAP TOA say small or normal circle of friends/family. It would be tough to say that a 350 person wedding was a small or normal circle (let alone a 100 person). There is no language that says someone renting out a place is exempt. And the 350 person wedding SURELY has lots of unrelated and probably even a few hostile folks in there. And the bar I work is usually filled ONLY with acquaintances.

Only saying the language IS NOT CLEAR and a few are saying it is.

LOL. You are obsessing over the toe nails on an elephant you don't even see right in front of you.

 

[steve149]

Not obsessing Bob, and don't have the legal knowledge you do, so if you can pull out that 1 paragraph that clears it all up, that would help out a lot.

 

[Proformance]

... if there is a paragraph that says it is OK, it would be great to share.

You've been given it... you just haven't made the connection yet.

What you are asking for, a paragraph specifically about mobile DJ Steve and his 350 person wedding in the Hilton Hotel ballroom where he is also showing video clips from old movies and TV shows - doesn't exist. The law is written to be specific in case - but broad in application.

That is why case law is what you seek. It will show you what happens when Rick the song publisher's lawsuit against Bob the DJ is denied at a show cause hearing because Rick didn't understand that weddings are private, and that even if there was an infringement in such a case the liable party would be the bride not the DJ.