IMRO Limited Online Exploitation Licence (1 Viewer)

[nialler9]

As much as I disagree with this licence as a music blogger, It's really up to the bands who are registered with IMRO to show their support for some kind of opt-out clause in the online licence or at least, some consultation on what IMRO members want. It's such a stupid licence that labels (like Richter Collective have been told) would have to pay it to put up tracks from their own bands. Bands uploading songs to their official website would technically need a licence too as when you sign up with IMRO you assign all your performing rights to them.

We are meeting IMRO tomorrow about this but it would be nice if IMRO-registered bands would sign this petition to show IMRO that it's not just the bloggers who care about this.

https://spreadsheets2.google.com/viewform?hl=en&formkey=dEQzcmRLVHpiNk45TE01Rnl4MzJjSmc6MQ

 

[GO]

Imma bout to fill out that petition.Had to reactivate me account!(which was surprisingly easy)

Anyway,does anyone know how much IMRO pay per youtube hit??cant find it on google..

 

[Diumraid]

Are any of those out of print bands members of IMRO though? This isn't about shutting down Pirate Bay or that kind of thing, it's about people who are members of an organisation who are billed with collecting money for them for performances/plays or whatever, right? From what I can tell by joining IMRO you actually sign off some of the rights to your songs? or recordings?

All you do when you join IMRO is give them permission to collect royalties on your behalf, you register your songs with them as your property which authorises them to give you the money that they were collecting anyway. IMRO is a non-profit organisation, all unclaimed royalties are divvied between their highest earners AFAIK.

 

[pete]

http://www.nialler9.com/2010/05/06/result-imro-music-blogger-meeting

 

[pete]

I'm not letting the fact that i've not heard from IMRO stop me sticking my oar in...

The distinction between “commercial” & non-commercial blogs is a complete red herring. If an Irish band or label approaches us (thumped.com) and *asks us* for an mp3 to be featured on the site then why should we be expected to pay a licensing fee for the privilege of advertising / publicising their work? Not going to happen.

This isn’t commercial (pirate or otherwise) radio – we’re not compiling playlists of radio friendly music so we can ‘exploit’ someone’s creative endeavours to fill space between commercial breaks, and it’s disingenuous to try to make that comparison. We’re giving bands a platform to reach tens of thousands of potential listeners, and we’re doing it for free (or more accurately we’re bearing the cost, if you factor in bandwidth charges.)

The beauty of the internet is just how easy it is to measure and quantify things. As I’ve pointed out elsewhere: “The pages containing the three most recently hosted mp3s (all of which are hosted at the bands’ request) accounted for a total of 0.189% of all pageviews for the first four months of the year. By extension, less than one fifth of one percent of revenue generated by the site [over those four months] is attributable to those three mp3s.” And as I’ve also said elsewhere, the artists in question are more than welcome to 100% of that 0.189% of four month’s revenue. Or, if they prefer, we could pull all ads from mp3 pages. Same result for us in the end, really.

Certainly, artists need a mechanism by which they can control how their material is used, but what’s needed is a waiver with a clear set of usage terms for *sites*, not individual tracks. That may not be how it’s done in radio & tv, but so what? Welcome to the 21st century.

Now, just so we’re clear, I’m only talking about sites / blogs that use tracks supplied by the artists or their label specifically for promotional purposes. If someone’s putting up unapproved stuff then that’s it’s a different matter entirely.

And why is everyone in such a rush to outsource their mp3 hosting to Soundcloud and the like? Doesn’t anyone remember what happened when mp3.com packed it in?