"The BBC reports that if you're a DJ, playing your digital copies of files off a laptop or mp3 player is illegal. The UK royalty collection agency, PPL, demands that such DJs pay £200 for a license in order to do so. From the article, 'Many DJs are still unwittingly breaking the law by playing unlicensed digital copies of tracks months after a new permit scheme began, the BBC has found. This includes legally-purchased downloads, which are normally licensed only for personal use, as well as copies of tracks from records or CDs.'"

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/01/13/1814219

The summary is a little unclear, its a public performance that makes it illegal, not just playing songs on your laptop.

Discuss...

and I assume that 200 pounds will go directly to the artists?

quote:

Originally posted by RapidFire and I assume that 200 pounds will go directly to the artists?

only in a perfect world it would...

Give em a break. Try gettin citizens off limewire and shit before puttin anythin on djs

What if the digital dj is playing music that isnt being pushed by the major labels, like ameteur music that is freely shared on the internet from pages of the artists which explicitly say "you can play this in public performance"

I find many Digital DJ's are digital because their music is from esoteric sources that freely allow this kinda stuff, rather than being itunes downloads of major label music licensed only for personal listening.

djs in sweden aren't even allowed to copy their original cd, and play that out. they must bring the originals. i wonder what will happen to the big name djs visiting sweden

___________________
soundcloud.com/kiskelfacit

RIAA can suck a very large cock... prefrerably not mine

im glad we dont have any laws like that in the US, not that i know of yet anyway but if there was such a law, I would have to register and get a business license and right that fee off on my taxes as cost.

What ppl dont understand is that radio stations have to pay copyright costs as well. Im not familiar with it but i believe they pay something like .02 cents everytime they play a song. So technically, this fee is fair and legal because what would stop any of us to start our own radio station playing tunes for free?

You can argue that without DJs, producers wont get recognition blah blah blah. . . .but the radio business has been goin on for a long time and theyve been payin these copyright fees since day one.

The DJ in the article is right, that is a HUGE fee. I think having a fee is fair, but needs to be more affordable because there isnt a lot of money in djing.

___________________
When you start to criticize the times you live in, your time is over. ~Karl Lagerfeld

Last edited by Greedy on Jan-14-2006 at 00:40

quote:

Originally posted by RapidFire and I assume that 200 pounds will go directly to the artists?

from the article:

"The licence money goes to the 3,500 record companies represented by PPL. "

___________________
When you start to criticize the times you live in, your time is over. ~Karl Lagerfeld

This is very unlikely to be enforced in any meaningful way.

quote:

Originally posted by iammesol RIAA can suck a very large cock... prefrerably not mine

This isn't the RIAA.

this is getting way out of hand
people only buy good music
maybe if most artists would stop pulling stuff out of their asses and actually put some thought to their music, we wouldn't have these related problems.


i buy good music in hopes to seperate good artists from horrible artists, financially.