Re: [Harp-L] Plagiarism and cost of licensing for performance

[windsaver@xxxxxxx]

 Harry Fox requires a minimum fee based on selling 500 copies of a recording.? The reality being that the vast majority of recordings made never sell/ship more than that amount.? I forget the exact numbers, but of all the thousands of recording made every year only something like 5% sell more than 500 copies and the percentages fall off rapidly from there.


 


 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Deifik <kenneth.d@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 6:26 pm
Subject: Re: [Harp-L] Plagiarism and cost of licensing for performance










>By the way, Juke is listed with the Harry Fox Agency for licensing;?

>evidently others have paid licensing fees to record it, which?

>establishes another precedent directly tied to this individual?

>composition.?
?

Not actually to record it.?
?

Unless things have changed radically from when I was in the publishing 
business, the only fee you have to pay upfront is that fee to the Fox 
Agency for submitting your request for a compulsory license.  So that's 
sort of like a fee to record it, but I presume you mean 'to record it and 
publish the recording' and there's no fee for that.  It used to be, you 
didn't even have to pay a fee to Harry Fox.  You just submitted your 
application for a license.  You never paid the owner of, say, the Juke 
copyright to record it, you only paid them if you sold copies, per copy sold.?
?

The fee you'll pay is for each copy of your recording of Juke that you 
sell, and that goes to the copyright owner.?
?

So somebody owns the copyright to the tune, presumeably whoever owns the 
Chess music publishing arm.?
?

Harry Fox Agency doesn't actually issue the license.  They inform the 
listed owner of the copyright (let's call him the publisher) that they have 
to issue a compulsory license, and the publisher does the paperwork and 
grants the license in writing.  I believe that once you request a 
compulsory license (and the material is under compulsory license) you can 
go ahead and publish your recording.  The proof that you requested it is 
all you need.  But the publisher will send you a license and there may be 
some requirement in that license to send them copies of the published 
recording.?
?

I forget how that part works.  I worked for a very, very large publisher 
that had a vast file of vinyl, and more was coming in all the time.  I just 
know that there was at least one office worker whose job it was to issue 
compulsory licenses when the Harry Fox people informed her of 
requests.  (Somebody else in the company negotiated synch licenses, and he 
was really good at squeezing the last penny out of those.)?
?

If I remember correctly, and here we go very iffy, Harry Fox keeps 
quarterly tabs on licensed recordings, and gets a small piece of the action 
to collect the monies owed.  I could be wrong about this.  This is where 
their money is made, I believe.  It's lots of money.?
?

But just like ASCAP and the other P.R.O.'s, the Harry Fox Agency was put in 
place to reduce the chaos.?
?

_______________________________________________?

Harp-L is sponsored by SPAH, http://www.spah.org?

Harp-L@xxxxxxxxxx?

http://harp-l.org/mailman/listinfo/harp-l?



 


________________________________________________________________________
AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.