Netlabels vs GEMA
Get them on the phone. They seem more helpful that way as they can pull resources and speak with you back and forth much more rapidly.Lee wrote:i already have contacted socan, and they did actually seem very helpful but i think in the end the problem was beyond their reach as an organization. last email i recieved from them said they would discuss it at the next meeting with the "legal department". haven't heard from them since.
i actually did speak to a rep on the phone briefly, only to confirm the problem though. i think socan is at a bit of a loss because the regulations in canada are ok, the problem lies in how gema collects fees for socan members. in order to help solve my problem socan would have to attempt to influence a change in gema's practices.
the only legal option i can think of would be to allow an ammendment to my contract waiving all digital collection fees, or all gema's collecting fees. when i questioned socan on this point, the rep responded by saying an ammendment to my contract is not possible.
my experience has shown me that gema and socan are large, slow moving organizations. in my opinion, this problem will persist for the coming years because even if socan and gema want to find a solution for me, making any change happen within the organization is a bureaucratic nightmare.
the only legal option i can think of would be to allow an ammendment to my contract waiving all digital collection fees, or all gema's collecting fees. when i questioned socan on this point, the rep responded by saying an ammendment to my contract is not possible.
my experience has shown me that gema and socan are large, slow moving organizations. in my opinion, this problem will persist for the coming years because even if socan and gema want to find a solution for me, making any change happen within the organization is a bureaucratic nightmare.
You can count on thatLee wrote:my experience has shown me that gema and socan are large, slow moving organizations. in my opinion, this problem will persist for the coming years because even if socan and gema want to find a solution for me, making any change happen within the organization is a bureaucratic nightmare.
-
theclockstrucktwelve
- mnml mmbr
- Posts: 413
- Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2006 11:20 pm
- Location: The sewers
not sure exactly what u mean by that, i think you're speaking preteen american english and the translation is something like "gema dosen't care because netlabels aren't important."
the label is not relevant, the problem is between independent artists and the collecting organizations. bottom line is artists want to have the right to distribute free mp3's online for promotional purposes through a third party. the issue is just currently adversely effecting netlabels.
the label is not relevant, the problem is between independent artists and the collecting organizations. bottom line is artists want to have the right to distribute free mp3's online for promotional purposes through a third party. the issue is just currently adversely effecting netlabels.
The large agencies in the US are BMI and ASCAP.
http://www.bmi.com/
http://www.ascap.com/
Rather than the CC agreements (which are user-end imo, not artist/label contracts) what would really challenge here is if a netlabel in a predicament such as this had signed contracts from it's artists. CC is not meant for this type of use. For example, I and some others I know through work and from music have often had music used or licensed by people through private contract. And often in these contracts are sections that contain a waiver on residual royalities, and statements to the end that any other associations or royality collection group claims are null and void. This is common practice. If I was ever confronted by any of these groups (and its possible because many of the artists @ One are part of such groups
) my resolution would not be to remove the music but to have them sign an actual contract under such agreements.
Actually, the contract NI used w/ me, Ronny and the other netlabel artists that were part of the Traktor 2.3 distribution had something to this end (IIRC). I dont have a copy any more though.. at least that I could find. Agreements like this though probably depend on use, how much use, what type of use, etc. Which is why contract sections/clauses from these collection societies that cover other use, etc. would be important to check out or ask a representative about (but i would still prefer to read the contract).
So really, I think this is much ado about nothing and could easily be situated peacefully w/ a bit more research.
BTW, this is all still just opinion and I could be wrong on all accounts as I have not done any fact checking outside of my experiences and I've never had to deal with GEMA which has an exceedingly bad reputation for these things.
http://www.bmi.com/
http://www.ascap.com/
Rather than the CC agreements (which are user-end imo, not artist/label contracts) what would really challenge here is if a netlabel in a predicament such as this had signed contracts from it's artists. CC is not meant for this type of use. For example, I and some others I know through work and from music have often had music used or licensed by people through private contract. And often in these contracts are sections that contain a waiver on residual royalities, and statements to the end that any other associations or royality collection group claims are null and void. This is common practice. If I was ever confronted by any of these groups (and its possible because many of the artists @ One are part of such groups
) my resolution would not be to remove the music but to have them sign an actual contract under such agreements. Actually, the contract NI used w/ me, Ronny and the other netlabel artists that were part of the Traktor 2.3 distribution had something to this end (IIRC). I dont have a copy any more though.. at least that I could find. Agreements like this though probably depend on use, how much use, what type of use, etc. Which is why contract sections/clauses from these collection societies that cover other use, etc. would be important to check out or ask a representative about (but i would still prefer to read the contract).
So really, I think this is much ado about nothing and could easily be situated peacefully w/ a bit more research.
BTW, this is all still just opinion and I could be wrong on all accounts as I have not done any fact checking outside of my experiences and I've never had to deal with GEMA which has an exceedingly bad reputation for these things.