#1
The PRS (Performing Rights Society), the so-called guardians of musicians' and performers' intellectual property rights, are killing music in this country. Yes, during this financially wrenching, depressing economic recession they have decided to force all UK businesses to pay around £150.00 for the right to listen to a radio at work. Even if you work alone, or never have members of the public enter your workplace. The result is that workplaces all over the UK are falling silent, fearful of that random inspection and subsequent fine.
Following the PRS attack on YouTube, which resulted in Google removing thousands of pop videos and music content (much to the disgust of the artists themselves who have now lost a valuable outlet), and targeting various social networking groups, it seems that it is rapidly becoming an act of piracy just to HEAR music.
Personally, I don't illegally copy or pirate music, every single second of music I own I have paid for and downloaded legally. But not only do I have to pay for the music, I now have to pay for the right to listen to it anywhere except at home!
I did challenge the PRS on the phone about several matters and these facts emerged:
1. Only a handful of artists are members of the PRS, mainly skint, up-and-coming bands whose music we aren't generally listening to anyway. They get a slice of the takings to support their career. Hey, can us graphics people have free hand-outs when our workload gets light too?
2. "Musicians cannot continue their careers without the support of the PRS". I kid you not, he actually said this! So Robbie Williams, Kylie, U2, etc etc have NOT become multi-billionaires through album sales and concert tickets, but through the act of ripping off small businesses in the UK.
3. Even if I was a musician, and was not a member of PRS,I would not be allowed to play my own original music at work without a PRS consent license. FACT! This is now starting to reek of a con trick.
4. Radio 1 and all the other radio stations already pay the PRS every time they play a track. But now when at work, we have to pay the PRS to hear it as well. Many of the albums I have bought have been the result of hearing it played on the radio, often during the work day, so this has in fact helped music sales rather than hurt it. PRS have killed this.
The PRS license is nothing more than a cynical revenue opportunity on the back of a dumb copyright law which benefits nobody except the PRS and its members - NOT the music industry as a whole. What possible protection are they offering artists if they are so actively engaged in the wholesale destruction of free-promotion and small enterpirise?
The music industry has learned (at last) that the removal of DRM (digital rights managed) MP3 music has been the golden egg for online music sales. Once DRM was removed, sales went UP, instead of the much feared piracy that they have always dreaded. When music was DRM, users who bought it were endlessly peed-off at not being able to use the tracks the way they wanted. Now, we can buy it, play it on our computers, iPods, Playstation 3s, and so on, without any DRM hindrance. No, we now have a new and even worse enemy in the PRS who simply want us to pay for music, pay to hear it, and pay again for any other arse they can dream up.
The PRS really grinds my gears folks - they are the hands-down winners of the biggest bunch of miserable jobsworth lousy ****s on the planet and I hope they get banned by the industry once music sales start to feel the effects of their greed.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#2
i thought that this had been the case for years.
i was informed that if music was played at the back of the shop/office/warehouse that it might be possible for someone wandering past to hear it.
i am afraid that all the initials used have gone right over my head.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
#3
I completely agree with you Rick.
When Jean and I had our Guest House, they phoned up one day and said we have to pay them, so I asked why, I don't have a radio or TV in the breakfast room, but they then asked if we had alarm-clock radios and/or TV's in the bedrooms which I replied yes to both.
Ah, he said, you'll have to pay for the radio as it may play music.
The whole point of this PRS is public entertainment, but my guest rooms were not open to the public (nor was the breakfast room come to think of it, as people only had breakfast if they had paid for their private bedroom), they were private, people paid to use them; for the period they stayed with us, that room was theirs and theirs alone.
You can imagine I was getting very angry at this point (without swearing I hasten to add) and told him there was no way I would be paying them any money, where ever the music was played was a private area - not for the general public.
They never came back to me and I emailed all the members of the Dover Guest House Association - who still advertise on here, advising them not to pay either and use the same arguments.
On the other side, about assisting musicians, I also agree with Rick, it is, in the majority of cases, counter-productive.
It doesn't really help any one, only those employed by the company - as Rick says, it's a con.
Roger
Guest 650- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 542
#4
In previous lives we've come across the PRS also, but were in a different situation where it was right we should pay, and from our point of view this turned out a helpful service.
At a tangent, and with sympathy to Rick's and Rogers' descriptions, for my own part anything that helps a bit of silence is welcome to me. But that's only because I suspect I'm allergic to noise (and "music"), and can work much better in silence. I also shop better and stay longer in shops without background "music" going on.
It's not just a personal thing, though. There are particular disabilities which render it difficult or even impossible to cope if there's extra sound, and it's even possible to exacerbate some conditions by this.
Just a tangent, as I say, and not intended to detract or distract from Rick's and Roger's posts. Any musicians with a view?
#5
A bit of quiet would be a blessing, and we could then choose whether or not to listen to music, visit a public music venue, whatever. There are a significant number of people, as you say Maggie, with a low tolerance for external stimulation like music, and shopping trips or other social events can become a nightmare for them. And, good on you Roger, standing up to people. Too much intrusion into our privatre lives as it is.
