Royalties on downloads

[mazz]

I was going to post this on Martin's thread about downloading episodes but I didn't want to hijack that thread so here goes:I think it's awesome that Martin and Steve have cuts on ABC. Congrats guys. RE Downloads: More and more shows are going to be "broadcast" this way as the technology advances. Unfortuately, as the recent writer's strike pointed out, there currently are no performance royalties paid for this type of "broadcast". Since it's pretty easy to track every time an episode is downloaded (or streamed, for that matter), it would seem a no-brainer that the PROs would be all over it, but it seems that it's not happening!Just like the musician's union, the PROs seem to be lagging behind the technology and since, unlike the writer's guild, there's no composer's union to go on strike, this could affect everyone with potential broadcast income as the tide changes from "broadcast" to "on-demand".I've tried to bring this up before and I don't think I'm crying wolf on this. My question is this: do the license fees that networks pay to ASCAP, BMI, etc., cover web downloads? If so, are ASCAP, BMI, etc. tracking the downloads?I'm not sure who to ask about this but I might give ASCAP a call tomorrow and ask them.Am I the only one slightly worried about this? Mazz

[jamkern]

Good questions Mazz.. I'm also wondering about the episodes available on the networks' websites. MTV (and a few others) have a huge amount of programming available online- free- 24/7.... I'll have to start buggin ASCAP this week to find out the deal, if there is one. There are a lot of advertising dollars in these performances- the little guys should be making a cut too.

[gitarrero]

hey mazz,good question - as far as I know it's diffrent for each country. it depends if the particular PRO already reacted to the new situation (that is, this new kind of broadcast) or not.for example in switzerland there's a new pay scale for licensing a commercial spot on the net in january 2008. in the past it was very complicated because several "old" rates (e.g. for music on the telephone) were taken to license something for the web.germany has a very simple system for exactly the same use since a couple of years I think.it would be interesting to hear how's the situation in diffrent countries, and of course in the U.S. since I have music in a couple of series there.cheers,martin

[stick]

I think that line of thinking is the crux of the Hollywood writer's strike. They weren't being compensated for those web broadcasts. And my guess is, if they weren't, we probably aren't.

[tedsingingfox]

then we should all be out there picketing on their behalf. The PRO's really need to get on the ball here IMO.

[matto]

Let's please not to jump to conclusions here...this is a fairly complicated issue, and I don't understand all of it, but it's not that ASCAP and BMI aren't *trying* to license internet "broadcasts", it's that there's a legal dispute about whether they have the RIGHT to license them and exactly what they can license and if it's even a broadcast.If you really wanna do something about it, it would be best to read up on the issue and lobby your congress people to make sure we get compensated.Unfortunately it appears that our own register of copyright (yep, the person we pay all those copyright registration fees to) is trying to keep ASCAP and BMI from collecting on at least certain internet broadcasts... I think the WGA strike is about a lot of things and IMHO if it was only about internet and new media a compromise would've been struck by now.And we shouldn't forget the REAL victims of the strike, the thousands (I think it's about 15'000) of production workers (all of them lower to middle income) who will lose their jobs just in time for Xmas unless a last ditch effort is launched and succeeds.Mazz is not wrong about it being a concern of course. I don't think first run broadcast/cable tv will go away anytime soon, but the internet will definitely cut into rerun numbers, particularly on the broadcast side. So we do need an equitable solution...

[milfus]

well the problem I see, is they would have to re-organize the way they are downloaded, cause as it is, you can set a show to auto stream, have everyone you know push refresh, and buy yourself a porsche in like a day, the system is just utterly too exploitable, not that I don't agree, but there would have to be a much tighter distribution method on the internet shows before they would even consider it, because you could, if you where a little loose around the ethics, watch all your shows all day and pay your bills doing it. Esspecially now that you can defraud online voting so easy, ala american idol, with the spoofing and re-voting, and the only way to stop them willy-nilly would be to charge for the shows online, which would bring in the boot leggers, and generally hurt how many people would watch them anyway just because of the trouble it would be to get to the show. I don't have any good answers to solve this dilemma, but I can, and me being on the losing side of this argument, see why it needs a lot more thought, and people smarter than me to figure out a better system before implementation. And honestly in a situation like this where it is a stand off, the person writing the checks is going to get the win.

[mazz]

Just as an experiment, I checked iTunes Store and they are charging 1.99 for episodes of Family Guy (all seasons available). I wonder if the composer or any of the writers are getting a piece of the action on that? It's gotta be pretty easy to account for all of those downloads, after all, Apple wouldn't be doing it if there wasn't some profit in it. I'm pretty sure that the artists get a cut from the sales of music on iTunes, why not the writers and composers on TV shows, just like broadcast?If someone wants to bootleg it, well, they're going to figure out how to do it, just like with CDs and mp3s. You can't stop the criminal element completely.I'm sympathetic to the writers and also to the production workers. I also feel that the technology already exists to monitor and collect the money (iTunes, for example) but if the registrar of copyrights is hostile to the concept of intellectual property by keeping ASCAP and BMI from collecting on behalf of their members, then it's going to be an uphill battle. I'm being provocative on purpose because I think we need to start looking at this before it's too late. I need to do more research myself, I'm being reactionary here based on what I read peripherally but I believe that it's going to become a much bigger issue sooner than later and it'll be good to be educated as much as possible.Ciao,Mazz

[milfus]

Ah yeah, I wasnt meaning Itunes, that is pretty regulated, I was more referencing like nbc.com and abc.com where they just stream the internet shows and promo shows on the site, they seem to be the majority.modified to sayThat is by far my favorite coltraine quote mazz. awesome.

[mazz]

Love it or hate it, the iTunes model is working. It seems the networks could realize more profits over a longer haul by selling downloads of episodes and throwing a bone to the people that creatively helped make it desirable as a download in the first place.Mazz