Netlabels vs GEMA

[Lee]

i've been exchanging emails with socan and they seem interested in what i had to say. should hear back from them soon with some options. if they say they can't help me i'll contact gema. would probably be good if everyone contacted gema, the more people complain the better the chances of an option that works for cc artists.

cheers!

[Ronny Pries]

Can somebody check out Ronny's proposal and call his own gema agent?

if you do that, keep in mind that it's an almost public agency. do not ask things, just tell them what they should do.

in german,

den berechtigungsvertrag auf die mechanischen vervielfältungsrechte beschränken.

[Lee]

socan rep said nothing they can do but will discuss with legal department. so i'm going to contact gema and try ronny's suggestion see how they respond.

cheers
liam

[Kobbe]

Well, I'm not an expert on this subject, but... It seems like it is an label and distribution issue. A label or anyone else can't really distribute music without paying mechanicals. It has been like that since forever. The creative commons claim is a fragile armor of glass since it only exist as an idea and has not been tested at courts yet -- as far as I know of.

But what if Thinner changed politics and business construction to only exist as an blog/forum/tastemaker site that links to artists that release free music. The deal is that artists can release and host their own music since they, obviously, don't need licensing to themselves.

[Cotumo]

The deal is that artists can release and host their own music since they, obviously, don't need licensing to themselves.

When you have a contract with the gema (like many musicians in germany) you may not release stuff for free. Read the whole topic for further information.

Cheers, Cotumo

[Lee]

gema still has not replied to my repeated emails.

[Kobbe]

The deal is that artists can release and host their own music since they, obviously, don't need licensing to themselves.

When you have a contract with the gema (like many musicians in germany) you may not release stuff for free. Read the whole topic for further information.

In other words, GEMA justifies that artists will have to pay fees to themselves for hosting their own music on their own site, even when it's for free, or what?

In Denmark, KODA (is equivalent to GEMA) does not collect royalties from artists who use their own music on a website.

[Cotumo]

In other words, GEMA justifies that artists will have to pay fees to themselves for hosting their own music on their own site, even when it's for free, or what?

Yes