|
Nightclubs to pay extra for play
|
View this Thread in Original format
| kelsta |
* Clubs to pay $1.05 per patron to play music
* Dance parties to pay $3.07 per person
* Clubs threaten to go silent
NIGHTCLUBS might charge $20 for entry and $8 for a beer but until now they have had to pay only 7c for each person to listen to a night's worth of music.
From today, clubs like Q Bar in Sydney and Melbourne's Revolver will have to pay a lot more for the right to have recorded music played on their premises, following a court ruling yesterday on copyright licence fees.
The increase awarded to copyright collection body the Phonographic Performance Company of Australia means that clubs will now pay a licence fee of $1.05 a person, based on the club's capacity, as opposed to the previous figure of 7c a person.
That means a club that holds 500 will pay $510, even if only 100 people attend the venue.
Dance party organisers will now have to pay $3.07 a person, up from 20c.
About 80 per cent of all music played in clubs and at dance parties is copyrighted.
Yesterday, Melbourne DJ Kads One, 26, said the dramatic rise could have a detrimental effect on clubs and DJs in Melbourne's nightclub scene.
"It's going to make a difference, such a big increase," he said.
"There is so much music played in licenced premises and so much of it is played by DJs."
Clubs may be silent
Anthony Ball, executive manager of policy for Clubs NSW, which represents more than 1300 clubs in the state, said that the ruling in favour of the PPCA, which distributes royalties to recording artists, could mean clubs withdrawing music from their venues.
"It seems to be out of step with commercial reality," Mr Ball said.
"If you are going to increase by that much, clubs will simply make the choice of unplugging the music.
"The economics don't stack up, and they will withdraw the service, and that will be disappointing in suburban and regional parts of Australia where a club is the only place to go to have a dance.
"I think it's short-sighted and counterproductive."
To come to an appropriate figure, the Copyright Tribunal had to delve into the world of late-night clubs and work out what exactly constituted a dance party.
It heard from a consulting company whose staff had traversed the country visiting nightclubs, noting how much it cost to get in, how much the drinks cost, and how much it cost to have their coats checked (some venues charge $5 for the privilege).
"A good DJ works through the music in an endeavour to keep the crowd involved and will read the crowd to keep people enthusiastic and dancing," the tribunal noted, adding that some well-known DJs earned up to $100,000 for a two-hour set.
Bankrupt threats 'unconvincing'
Earlier this year, a spokesman for the Australian Hotels Association said that clubs could go out of business as a result of such an outcome, but PPCA chief executive Stephen Peach disagreed yesterday.
"I find that very unconvincing, as did the tribunal," he said.
"We're talking about the amount of money that is about half the price of checking a coat, or less than 20 per cent of your average beer.
"To suggest that is the difference between nightclubs being profitable and going out the back door is frankly ludicrous."
At present, royalties distributed by the PPCA from nightclub fees are based on the ARIA dance charts.
Mr Peach said with greater revenue at their disposal, a more accurate system, based on DJs logging all the music that they play, could be introduced.
Kads One said this would be impossible.
"We often remix tracks on the spot or beforehand," he said. "It becomes a constant blur.
"There would be no way we would be able to keep track of it."
from here |
|
|
| eRRaTiK |
| quote: | Originally posted by kelsta
"It seems to be out of step with commercial reality," Mr Ball said.
"If you are going to increase by that much, clubs will simply make the choice of unplugging the music.
"The economics don't stack up, and they will withdraw the service, and that will be disappointing in suburban and regional parts of Australia where a club is the only place to go to have a dance.
"I think it's short-sighted and counterproductive." |
+1
my mate agrees too...
 |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by kelsta
adding that some well-known DJs earned up to $100,000 for a two-hour set. |
yeah, coz that's just what average DJs earn, so that should be taken into consideration. cockheads. |
|
|
| James Brooke |
i was just talking about this with some mates...here are my thoughts
The pay increase is a good thing for everyone, it will make clubs provide decent set lists meaning that artists will get paid more money from APRA
The winners here are artists and producers, whats an extra 3 bucks on the door, its one beer or half a bourbon.
If the artists don't get paid then we don't get any new music, its that simple! If it means that we have to pay an extra three bucks on the door to insure that artists get paid then so be it... |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by James Brooke
i was just talking about this with some mates...here are my thoughts
The pay increase is a good thing for everyone, it will make clubs provide decent set lists meaning that artists will get paid more money from APRA
The winners here are artists and producers, whats an extra 3 bucks on the door, its one beer or half a bourbon.
If the artists don't get paid then we don't get any new music, its that simple! If it means that we have to pay an extra three bucks on the door to insure that artists get paid then so be it... |
oh yeah. adding hundreds of thousands of dollars to the operating costs of dance nights that struggle as it is is a good thing for everyone :rolleyes: |
|
|
| James Brooke |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
oh yeah. adding hundreds of thousands of dollars to the operating costs of dance nights that struggle as it is is a good thing for everyone :rolleyes: |
clearly you missed the point here, the extra 3 dollars per person would be made up by the punters at the door...
its hardly hundreds of thousands of dollars... its a few hundred for small clubs and in bigger clubs it is only a few thousand! ;) |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by James Brooke
clearly you missed the point here, the extra 3 dollars per person would be made up by the punters at the door...
its hardly hundreds of thousands of dollars... its a few hundred for small clubs and in bigger clubs it is only a few thousand! ;) |
yeah, sorry. that figure i grabbed from another article that i think fvcked up the changes. still tho, its to be charging clubbers even more on the door than we have to already. or the fact that a night that doesn't get in many patrons will still be charged the full amount. |
|
|
| James Brooke |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
its to be charging clubbers even more on the door than we have to already. or the fact that a night that doesn't get in many patrons will still be charged the full amount. |
yeah it sucks but there isn't much we can do about it... |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by James Brooke
yeah it sucks but there isn't much we can do about it... |
rape and murder? |
|
|
| Dean Millson |
| I think the most interesting part of this is that most of the music played in the clubs that we all go too comes from overseas, not from local artists. So who is actually therefore getting the money from the $1 per person? Certainly not the artists who produce most of the music. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dean Millson
I think the most interesting part of this is that most of the music played in the clubs that we all go too comes from overseas, not from local artists. So who is actually therefore getting the money from the $1 per person? Certainly not the artists who produce most of the music. |
thats a very good ing point. i hadnt thought of that. dirty jews. |
|
|
|
|
