PRS Demands License Fee To Play Music To Horses

An anonymous reader writes "A woman in Bushton, Wilts, has been told by the Performing Rights Society (PRS for Music) that she needs to pay an annual fee in order to play classical music from the radio to the horses in her stable, something that she has been doing for the past 20 years. The PRS claims that it's not about the horses — rather, it's about her staff of over two people, which puts Mrs. Greenway in the same category as shops, bars and cafes. 'The staff are not bothered whether they have the radio on or not, in fact they don't particularly like my music and turn if off when I'm not around,' said Mrs. Greenway, 62. 'Especially on windy days I try to play it — it gives [the horses] a nice quiet atmosphere, you can only exercise one horse at a time so it helps the others to stay calm. We are right next to the RAF Lyneham air base so it dulls the noise from the aircraft as well.'"

Comments

lolwut

[RuBLed]

She is already tuning to a local Classic FM radio station, from what i had read she isnt even playing her own CD's, tapes etc.

brb, I'm setting my radio now to max volume and pointing it at the street. Now if everyone would just do the same...

Re:lolwut

[TrancePhreak]

Yea, that sounds a lot like double-dipping to me... Since the radio already pays to play it there.

Re:lolwut

[Anonymous Coward]

In some countries it doesn't matter what the source of the music is. CDs or Radio played at the workplace/shop/gym is counted as public performing and these lovely people want royalties from that, nevermind how miniscule the audience.

It's kinda like the debacle in Finland a few years ago when the local music IP organization demanded that taxis start paying a radio play fee since radio during a fare "gives added value to the service". AFAIK ever since most taxi drivers in Finland just stopped playing the radio... Double dipping, or more like triple dipping. There really is not shame to these people.

Re:lolwut

[sy5t3m]

In some countries they actually allow copyright and royalties to expire after a couple of hundred years.
Looks like the U.K aint one of them though.

Re:lolwut

[Anonymous Coward]

In the case of classical music; the piece itself may no longer be subject to copyright, but the interpretation and any performances of it are. This is why many old classical pieces are not as freely available as you might think.
Of course, the original copy is not subject to copyright, but musical notation has changed a lot in the last 200 years.

Re:lolwut

[the_womble]

Playing a radio in these circumstances is a public performance under British law and she does need a license.

However, given that it is being played for the benefit of the horses, I do wonder whether we will need to pay more for licenses to play music if our pets listen.

Re:lolwut

[Anonymous Coward]

The copyright is presumably on the recording and not the composition itself.

Re:lolwut

[AliasMarlowe]

Playing a radio in these circumstances is a public performance under British law and she does need a license.

She could just tell them that her staff are all deaf, and thus cannot hear the music. However, she would happily pay the public performance license if they can supply a sign-language version of their music.

This assumes that the public performance license does not apply if the audience cannot hear it. But I'm not entirely sure this assumption is correct, alas.

Re:lolwut

[easyTree]

Playing a radio in these circumstances is a public performance

Yah; because every man and his dog doesn't have five electronic-devices-with-fm-radios-built-in on their person at all times. Oh wait..

Re:lolwut

[daveime]

A sign language version would be an obvious "format shifting" violation, and then she'd have to pay even more money to the man, or risk some nonsensical IP law being applicable.

Re:lolwut

[hattig]

Hmm, are there members of the public there? She only mentions her employees and the horses.

Otherwise every work place that has a radio - factories, offices, etc, will have to pay a fee.

Of course that's what this self-appointed copyright police agency would like people to believe. I'd like to see what the actual legal stance was though.

Re:lolwut

[Xest]

I'm not sure what's going on but recently the PRS seems to have awoken.

They've been on a massive collecting spree lately, going after everyone from builders playing a portable radio as they build an extension on a house through to staff of big businesses playing the radio in the office to this sort of thing.

I can only guess they've see how much cash the RIAA has racked in with it's threats of litigation against file sharers and is simply going for the same tactic en-masse (although it's always done this, just not to the degree it is now).

I didn't realise that there were limits on where you can and can't play the radio to be honest. I figure if they're going to broadcast unencrypted radio signals through the air then it shouldn't be illegal to pick them up whether it's at a stables, in an office or at a building site. With CDs I can kind of understand as the packaging can come with a licensing agreement you're told to accept before opening and/or using but there are no agreements with radio.

I'm not actually sure how strong the PRS' demands are, I was under the impression the radio stations already pay royalties to the PRS. This snippet from a Wikipedia entry was interesting:

"Further problems arise with the tactics used by the PRS in the United Kingdom because BBC radio is publicly financed through the TV licence fee and everyone has the right to listen to it free of charge."

The PRS exists to collect royalties for public performances. I would've thought there's a strong argument that it's the radio stations that are carrying out the public performances, not the radio stations AND the people receiving it at the other end.

Still it seems to work, the Wikipedia entry said they gained something like £562million in royalties in the last year too.

Re:lolwut

[dbIII]

Otherwise every work place that has a radio - factories, offices, etc, will have to pay a fee.

That's the way it is going in Australia although I haven't heard anything about enforcement. There are already a few places that take care to use copyright free music for on hold music etc - but I don't know if copyright free music exists in Australia anymore since the expiration date of copyright has recently changed to the truly bizare US standard.

I was involved with a volunteer radio station when a group first started charging radio stations a fee for playing Australian music - the instant effect was nearly every station pulled all Australian music off the air until the government threatened to cancel radio licences. The collection groups seem to absorb all fees paid without passing anything on to the songwriters. The performers are not considered at all.

In other words, it's a scam with government backing.

Re:lolwut

[rtb61]

Easiest solution is to buy each employee a pocket radio. Greed to the point of insanity, if you many people listen to one radio pay fee, if each person listens to an individual radio no fee.

Re:lolwut

[M-RES]

Yes, that's how it works. If you're broadcasting a music on radio or TV programmes to members of staff or public you need an entertainments licence.

The difference here is that it's not a local authority demanding she pay for an entertainments licence, it's the PRS who collect/distribute royalties for performing artists in the UK. Which makes this a whole different ballgame.

Presumably the PRS believe that because she is playing music which they're responsible for collecting royalties on then she is liable (as is any workplace with a radio that can be heard by multiple members of staff), but she could easily sidestep them by playing a talk radio station instead - no music, nothing for the PRS to collect. Of course she'd still need a licence officially, but that's a matter for her local authorities to follow up and no business of the PRS.

Re:lolwut

[mdwh2]

I didn't realise that there were limits on where you can and can't play the radio to be honest. I figure if they're going to broadcast unencrypted radio signals through the air then it shouldn't be illegal to pick them up whether it's at a stables, in an office or at a building site.

Indeed, especially since radio waves are a limited resource, and there'd be others who would love to fill the place if they had that privilege. It seems mad to me that we still crackdown on "pirate" radio stations (who are willing to publish for free), but then say that playing the radio of legitimate stations is also "piracy".

Let's make the right to play radios (perhaps along with other fair use rights) a mandatory requirement of broadcasting on the air. If they don't like it, they can stop polluting our public airwaves, and make room for someone else.

Re:lolwut

[Anonymous Coward]

require earmuffs for all employees

Re:lolwut

[Divebus]

Time for someone to invent earphones for horses. Problem solved.

Re:lolwut

[Anonymous Coward]

The fee Finnish taxis pay is 33 euros per year, which means less than 1 cent per ride. It's practically meaningless.

Compared with the USA many of the Finnish practices are very fair. You never see 200k+ charges brought up against granmas or students copying music off the Internet. USA is on its own level with corporatism, and as much as the Finnish nerds love to complain, there really is no comparison. In fact, I don't think anything in the world really compares with the way copyrights are enforced in the USA.

FWIW, in Finland this lady would have zero problems playing music at her stable. She could legally play copyrighted music all day long and there would be no charge at all: http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http://www.gramex.fi/index.php%3Fmid%3D268&prev=hp

Re:lolwut

[CrazyJim1]

brb, I'm setting my radio now to max volume and pointing it at the street. Now if everyone would just do the same...

People in their cards have been doing this for quite a while now. Typically its gangsta rap with the bass turned way up.

Re:lolwut

[Tony Hoyle]

Otherwise every work place that has a radio - factories, offices, etc, will have to pay a fee.

In the UK they do.

There are two organisations, the PRS and the PPL. If one gets you then the other one will shortly afterwards as they tell each other about 'violators'. You have to pay both, by law.

You need to pay even if you have an office room in your house and have the radio on. It's really stupid but there's no way around it.

Re:lolwut

[Tony Hoyle]

Legally, the PRS and PPL could jump down your neck if you did that.

I doubt even they would try that though (although I did hear of a garage that didn't even own a radio being stiffed for charges because their customers were driving in with their radios on).

Re:lolwut

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, you could say you don't listen to the radio and abhor all entertainment, especially music, and force your workers to toil like people under the rule of the Taliban?

Re:lolwut

[hattig]

If you're broadcasting a music on radio or TV programmes to members of staff or public you need an entertainments licence.

Can I just say that this is absolutely ridiculous, especially for small offices. I could see an argument for when you're broadcasting all over an office or factory floor of 20+ people. The fact that you need one to broadcast to yourself if you work from home alone is absolutely absurd and surely not in the spirit of the law. This just demeans and diminishes the valid arguments for copyright enforcement.

Re:lolwut

[el3mentary]

Actually the definition of Classical music. would make all the music out of copyright.

Re:lolwut

[Anonymous Coward]

Well fucking fix the law. These are god damned HORSES.

Re:lolwut

[Jonner]

Because of their age, all musical compositions from the Classical Period have fallen into the public domain. There are therefore no legal restrictions on performing or deriving from such compositions. However, the term Classical Music has a number of meanings, the broadest of which could include some music composed today. However, the issue of royalties for playing a radio station has nothing to do with the copyright on the composition, but only the performance and copyright on the recording of that performance.

Re:lolwut

[Jonner]

By the way, the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works was the first international agreement that tied copyright terms to the life of the author. In 1886, the term of a copyright in the US was 14 years, renewable once for a maximum of 28 years. It was the Copyright Act of 1976, 90 years after Berne, when things seemed to be getting out of hand in the US. Copyright terms can last as long as 120 years or 70 years beyond the death of the creator now. This is quite simply corporate greed. It wasn't until 1989 that the US agreed to the Berne Convention.

Even before the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement, copyrights lasted 50 years beyond the death of the creator in Australia. I think both the US and Australia are part of a global trend dominated by corporate greed, though the US seems to be ahead.

Re:lolwut

[mpeskett]

Easiest solution is to buy each employee a pocket radio.

That would be true in some cases, although I don't know that you'd find many businesses that care that much about their employees' ability to listen to a radio. In this case however, there is the small problem related to the scarcity of equine earphones.

Re:lolwut

[duhjim]

What would Mr Ed do?

Re:lolwut

[idlemachine]

Easiest solution is to buy each employee a pocket radio.

Unfortunately, that probably wouldn't be sufficient to act as a noise mask for the horses.

Perhaps if she bought a pocket radio for each horse? :)

Re:lolwut

[Anonymous Coward]

She is already tuning to a local Classic FM radio station, from what i had read she isnt even playing her own CD's, tapes etc.

It's a wonder these crazy fucks don't just call everyone in the phone book in sequence. Never mind the horses -- if the caller himself can hear (over the phone) music from a radio, TV, record or CD, that's "public" enough for me.

How the fuck can they even tell if anyone else, horses included, is listening anyway? Maybe the horses are all deaf from listening to heavy metal.

So stop...

[KingSkippus]

She should simply stop. Get a buttload of dirt cheap CDs in the bargain basement bin for $0.99 each, or better yet, get a lot more stuff off a site such as Magnatune or an Internet radio station, and let the PRS rot in hell in total irrelevance. I think they've completely lost the concept that they need this woman, in actually having an avid listener, a hell of a lot more than she needs them.

Re:So stop...

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

She should simply stop. Get a buttload of dirt cheap CDs in the bargain basement bin for $0.99 each, or better yet, get a lot more stuff off a site such as Magnatune or an Internet radio station, and let the PRS rot in hell in total irrelevance.

The issue is not radio versus personally owned copy. The PRS appears to be claiming that this is a public performance (see that PRS stands for Performing Rights Society). In which case it doesn't matter how the music is acquired, only that the way she is playing it in a way that she is not licensed for.

Re:So stop...

[Anonymous Coward]

It might not be enough. As others have pointed out, CDs may be taxed as well, as happens in some countries (the keywords being "public performance", regardless of the source of music).

Even trying to play music licensed under Creative Commons or some such license may prove troublesome, as the PRS collects fees for all artists, even those that have opted out of it.

Maybe if you could prove the music was CCed and from a foreign origin...? Quite troublesome as well. The point being, where does the madness stop?

Re:So stop...

[Reziac]

My solution would be (since the other reply is right -- your personal CDs are the same as a radio for lic. purposes) to find a radio station that played ONLY royalty-free music, and make sure everyone knew WHY I chose that.

Tho the only one I can think of offhand plays decidedly unrestful music :)

Re:So stop...

[Anonymous Coward]

The thing is that music you buy in stores is, legally, licensed (just like software). While there may be no EULAs, you still are only legally allowed to use the music for personal use. The line of legal uses is blurry (playing the music to your family is clearly legal; playing it in a for-profit business like a disco or selling copies of that CD to others is clearly illegal - if you want to do that, you have to negotiate a special license with the record studio). In other cases it's a gray area, and the case in question is one of those gray areas.

The "internet radio" is legally questionable even by itself under present copyright laws as interpreted by those in power (heavily sponsored by record studios), and there's nothing to stop *AA from suing someone for using Internet radio in their "business" any differently than from using a CD.

That of course doesn't mean that current copyright laws are a bunch of bullshit, and more things are illegal under it than you'd imagine (technically operating a library can be illegal under current copyright laws!). With media like film and music, however, record companies are much more aggressive at pursuing their interests, and since they have technical legal standing, they'll push the matter pretty much as far as they are able to, no matter how low they have to stoop. Hence this story. And last time I checked, telling a judge that "what I'm doing may be illegal but it's morally right" doesn't fly too well in court.

Moralizing with these bastards is like moralizing with a poisonous viper that biting people is bad. You can't nice-talk them out of it, you have to pull their teeth.

As time goes by, however, more and more people are affected by the death-grip of the record industry/associations/whatever on average people; it's not just about the guy in the basement pirating music anymore. Once the critical mass is accumulated, we should see some lobbying against the current laws, rather than just for them, and we may yet see some change. Won't hold my breath just yet, though.

Re:So stop...

[magus_melchior]

Unfortunately, the PRS would probably still demand license fees because someone did perform the music with the expectation of being paid royalties. At least, the recording industry cartel in the USA would demand this.

What we need is a digital archive of public-domain or CC-licensed freely distributable musical recordings. At this rate, the best we can do outside of chamber music is all the classical works composed prior to World War I (composers' copyrights expired), "recorded" on a personal computer with advanced digital instruments (no performers' license rights)-- think Kontakt, Pro Tools, Logic, or the like-- and distribute the resulting mp3s far and wide, with the license terms in the comments section of the ID3 tags (no producers/labels' copyrights). I think this would have the additional advantage of giving music schools everywhere a reference to listen to and critique along with acoustic recordings that they are permitted to use-- it would give them a reference, period, if they do not have such fair use/dealing protections.

I do think, however, that even if the "broadcaster" in this case has the permission and legal standing to tell the media corporation lackeys to kindly go fuck themselves, the RIAA and their equivalents would take the bullying to the courts and squeeze the little guys for all they're worth. When will our governments understand that this is not about the copyright infringement, but about an entire industry willing to sacrifice customers in order to maintain a business paradigm that allows them complete control over every aspect of music production, and thus, stamp out any would-be competitors?

Re:So stop...

[Chrisq]

She could always get royalty free music.

Re:So stop...

[91degrees]

No. You buy a copy. The reason you can't copy it or perform it publicly is nothing to do wit a licence but to do with copyright law. You don't need a licence to listen to your own CDs. You do need one to copy or play them in public.

Re:So stop...

[jimicus]

My solution would be (since the other reply is right -- your personal CDs are the same as a radio for lic. purposes) to find a radio station that played ONLY royalty-free music, and make sure everyone knew WHY I chose that.

Tho the only one I can think of offhand plays decidedly unrestful music :)

This is the UK, the lady in question is in her 60's and running a horse stable.

I don't think she'll be rigging up a laptop to play an internet radio station any time soon.

Re:So stop...

[icebike]

Tune her radio to the BBC. They paid the fee already, and as a tax payer, she is part owner of the BBC like every other citizen. Let the PRS sort it out with the BBC.

It can not be that you have to pay a fee to transit the material by radio, and also a fee to convert the radio to sound waves without it ALSO requiring a fee to convert the sound waves to ear-pressure changes.

Does the PRS require listeners to be licensed?

Re:So stop...

[eggz128]

The only problem then is the hassle of convincing the PRS that such a thing as "Royalty Free Music" exists.

From time to time when they telephone here I consider screwing with them... trying the royalty free line... but I always end up thinking better of it and just tell them (the truth!) that we don't play any music here.

Re:So stop...

[digitig]

Tune her radio to the BBC. They paid the fee already, and as a tax payer, she is part owner of the BBC like every other citizen. Let the PRS sort it out with the BBC.

The BBC pays its fee, I'm sure. But playing a BBC station where the public can hear it still counds as a public performance, so a further license is still needed.

It can not be that you have to pay a fee to transit the material by radio, and also a fee to convert the radio to sound waves without it ALSO requiring a fee to convert the sound waves to ear-pressure changes.

It could be the case, but you'll be glad to hear that it isn't. Only the first and third fees you describe are payable. There is no longer a license fee for possessing a radio receiver.

Re:So stop...

[nausicaa]

IANAL, but, seriously, what would happen if she got a CD for each member of her staff? As in, exact same CD, just an extra copy.. Would they still complain? It seems to me that the whole system has gone off-track a long time ago..

Lots of people listen to the radio. At least here in Sweden, that means mostly the same music repeated over and over in absurdum, with commercial breaks now and then. Oh, and yes, it's free. Yet, if people are forced to listen to it in some place of business or other, the business has to pay? I'd not say anything if it were CDs being played, but radio?

Re:So stop...

[jbn-o]

The PRS doesn't control all recordings, regardless of the expansion of their acronym.

Re:So stop...

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, what if there's 1 radio for every employee? Now the horses are overhearing the personal radios of individual employees.

Re:So stop...

[MoFoQ]

that won't work...at least not directly as playing back CDs will also constitute a "performance," unless the copyright on the CDs that are played have expired.

The only other exception to it I can see is if the music is if the artists involved waive it for her; in other words, take a song that has no copyright and in the public domain, and perform it yourself (or with an artist who doesn't mind not getting a license fee).
I guess a local college orchestra who's willing to recite a song for free or whatever and release it under a public license/copyright...perhaps under one of the free Creative Commons licenses or GPL (dunno how it would apply to music though).
The key would be to make sure that the song itself (not the performance of it) is in the public domain (aka, expired copyright....which means it has to be roughly 95yrs old or older...classical music is a perfect match for this)

I wonder how a "Public Radio Station" would withstand them...fighting PRS with another PRS (fighting fire with fire).

Re:So stop...

[Anonymous Coward]

They seem to be targeting all farms lately. Playing music to the cows when milking, playing music in the tractor, etc.,

Don't open any of the letters.

Get your phone on the TPS (telephone preference service) http://www.tpsonline.org.uk/tps/
There is also ctps (corporate telephone preference service)

If they phone report them! They can get fined up to £5,000 for each call. The more people who do this the better, as it will hit them in the pocket.

They have a legal right to collect monies for their clients. Not to harrass you, or come onto your land without your permission.
If they come onto your land they are Tresspassing!

Re:So stop...

[syousef]

The issue is not radio versus personally owned copy. The PRS appears to be claiming that this is a public performance (see that PRS stands for Performing Rights Society). In which case it doesn't matter how the music is acquired, only that the way she is playing it in a way that she is not licensed for.

Buy a sound system that plays MP3 and get creative commons licensed works. Does the PRS have authority over CC works in Britain too? If not the only other issue may be that she'll have trouble finding classical works with a CC license but she should still be able to find soothing music and stick it to the PRS.

Re:So stop...

[HellYeahAutomaton]

Perhaps the PRS should stop being *thugs* (and acting like a government entity) and be a little bit more sane in their definitions.

Another huge issue here is whether or not performers should get paid for anything but a
live public performance, or whether or not the recording industry is really the only benefactor because the performers are going to get screwed by them anyway.

Radio waves travel on her property, so if anything the ability to play them could be treated as trespassing. If they don't want them heard, it should be the responsibility of the sender to create a more secure distribution system to guarantee their service is paid for.

Since the waves are traveling through and she "catches" them on her radio they could also be considered her possessions (albeit briefly).

Unless an orchestra can jump out of her radio and start playing on her property with all their instruments as a "live public performance", the PRS can go to hell, and the orchestra should get the hell off her lawn.

She should fight the PRS in court because what they are doing is unconscionable on principle as well as the fact that she had never been voluntarily in a contract with them in the first place.

Re:So stop...

[Akita24]

Understood, but who cares? They're being anal-retentive bureaucratic a-holes and I hope the negative PR does them a buttload more damage that racketeering the little old horse lady into paying would ever bring them. She has a ton of choices, from bargain-bin CDs as stated by another poster, to indie music. These brainless, paper-pushing has-beens need to die. Much as I'd like it to be a slow painful one, we'd all be better served by a fast one. Just got the F away.

Re:So stop...

[Anonymous Coward]

So put the 2 staffers on the books, form a stable company, and purchase the CDs in the name of the stable company. Everything then is a private business entity. Turn off the music if visitors or partrons come over.

Is it is still a public performance then?

Re:So stop...

[Corporate Troll]

No, but after this has been on slashdot, a local geek could contact her and offer to do it for her. Get an old spare laptop, download royalty free music (diverse links are found in the comments) and set it up for her. I'd do that if I lived nearby.

Re:So stop...

[Mateo_LeFou]

".. and let the PRS rot in hell in total irrelevance. "

Alternatively, she could

Let the PRS build on this victory to extend their overreaching even more.

"I'm sorry, you can't play your radio here at your campsite. As you can see, there are hundreds of ants and spiders listening."

Re:So stop...

[Anonymous Coward]

Wind chimes, white noise generator, or Aeolian harp.

The objective is to create a relaxing environment for the horses, music is not absolutely necessary.

Re:So stop...

[Anonymous Coward]

No... Everyone else should simply start. Get a bunch of people with radios to play them in public places. It's called peaceful protest.

Instead of playing by the rules of the PRS, who obviously have assets to bankroll lobbyists, play by your rules and flood the courts with PRS license violation cases until they stop being retards.

Just because it's law doesn't mean you have to blindly obey it. Some laws need to be challenged. Especially when voting doesn't help you.

Re:So stop...

[pbhj]

The thing is that music you buy in stores is, legally, licensed (just like software). While there may be no EULAs, you still are only legally allowed to use the music for personal use. The line of legal uses is blurry (playing the music to your family is clearly legal; [...]

My wife and I run our own business, if she comes into the workshop to bring me a cup of tea and I have the radio on I'm breaking the law because we are both employees. Playing the music to your family is *not* clearly legal. I wonder if we're both listening at home whether the PRS couldn't try to nab us.

Re:So stop...

[Tony Hoyle]

Try persuading them of that.

Even live music venues that play only original music have been forced to pay PRS fees. Unless you're into long legal fights it's not worth it.

Re:So stop...

[MightyYar]

Indeed, you have the solution - creative commons allows for a public "performance" of the work. Here's some CC-licensed classical music, since that's apparently what she is playing for the horses.

She could also buy royalty-free CDs, but those seem to run about $99 a pop.

Re:So stop...

[Reziac]

Well, I'm in my 50s, so don't let that stop ya :)

But yeah, I did get the idea that she wanted something SIMPLE, and wiring the barn for internet radio, as you say, isn't exactly normal procedure.

The licensing agencies think they have everyone by the balls, and that they can squeeze even the smallest "public performances" for a royalty payment. But it's not worth the money, even to big business -- that's why most use CANNED music that they buy as a package, and DON'T pipe in RADIO for their customers to listen to. If even big business can't justify the royalty costs of using radio (a nominally free source of music), how on earth do they think small business can manage it??

Re:So stop...

[sp3cialk79]

what if she puts earphones on the horse?

Re:So stop...

[calfuris]

[...]the PRS collects fees for all artists, even those that have opted out of it.

Wait, what? Are they legally allowed to collect for people who have explicitly told them not to collect on their behalf?

Solution

[esocid]

Tell them you switched to CDs and continue with the radio. This is ridiculous. How did they even find out she was using the radio? TFA states the PRS was targetting stables...so all stables play the radio for horses.
Seems asinine. Too bad this applies to both the UK and US.

Re:Solution

[Anonymous Coward]

TFA states the PRS was targetting stables...so all stables play the radio for horses.
Seems asinine. Too bad this applies to both the UK and US.

How big could the stable music market possibly be?

Re:Solution

[__aaclcg7560]

I heard Mr. Ed is a big fan of stable music--especially stable love music that gets your heart galloping.

Re:Solution

[Arimus]

Would be interesting to see what happens at our stables - smallish livery yard of 19 boxes usually with one or two of the clients having radios on while we muck out etc... no paid staff on site just the other liveries..

Most stables usually have a radio playing for the staff; its just normally what the staff want and not necessarily the horses...

Re:Solution

[MadKeithV]

Seems asinine.

I'd say equine.

Re:Solution

[PHPfanboy]

It might not be that big, but compared to the falling CD market, it's stable

Re:Solution

[91degrees]

Wouldn't help. The PRS charge for public performance of music. Not radio.

Re:Solution

[ciderVisor]

How big could the stable music market possibly be?

You'd be surprised. It's the next biggest market after house music and garage music.

Re:Solution

[digitig]

Seems asinine.

More likely equine, I think.

Re:Solution

[1u3hr]

so all stables play the radio for horses. Seems asinine.

No, it's equine.

And anyway, the horses are irrelevant, the fee is claimed for playing to the staff (of two).

Re:Solution

[esocid]

I didn't mean that stables playing radio for horses is the asinine part, the fact that the PRS is targeting stables to make more money is. Especially one with 2 employees.

Re:Solution

[1u3hr]

the fact that the PRS is targeting stables to make more money is. Especially one with 2 employees.

They're "targetting" every place of employment, apparently. Just they got up to stables recently. Blame the government for making the asinine law, not the PRS for rationally taking advantage of it.

Re:Solution

[Tony Hoyle]

A place I frequent just got stiffed (by the PRS and PPL both on the same bloody day). The building they are in has a license, covering the venue. Apparently that's not enough.. they want that venue to be separately licensed *and* back royalties for 3 years. Apparently they've been told to get stuffed.. but I can see it getting messy.

Re:Solution

[good soldier svejk]

OTOH, playing music for horses IS asinine. The horses' problem is not that they don't have enough audio stimulation, it is that they are locked in 12' x 10' boxes all day long. This is not a situation for which evolution has equipped them. It is terrible for their brains, feet and digestive systems. Stabled horses are uniformly unhealthy compared to pastured horses, and prone to debilitating and dangerous psychological problems like aerophagia. Horses have very delicate digestive and hoof systems that rely on constant movement for proper function. Confining them in stalls is convenient for humans, but severely impedes this function. Horses can't vomit, and minor digestive distress can easily kill them.

The one thing I really dislike about living on the east coast vs. Wyoming is the fundamentally abusive nature of the horse care system here. There are plenty of abusive owners out west, but the basic standard of care is far better. I actually bought a second home in the country just so my horses could have enough land to live a healthy life. Also to shut my wife up. My vet loves me for it. Every time he comes for vaccinations he remarks on how much healthier and happier and healthier my horses are than his other clients.

Re:Solution

[saderax]

haha, just kidding... Theres no such thing as a stable music market. You can thank the pirates for that... Arrrgh!

Re:Solution

[Anonymous Coward]

And just slightly larger than elevator music.

Isn't classical public domain?

[Anonymous Coward]

So, this is silly, but typical of Britain (in terms of even making restaurants pay because the cooks in the back had a radio on, and the like.) The *BIG* concern for me though, isn't classical music public domain? PRS is overstretching for that reason, IMHO.

Re:Isn't classical public domain?

[Anonymous Coward]

The music itself is, but each individual performance may not be. So if she keys the music into her midi synthesizer, she's fine.

Re:Isn't classical public domain?

[ndogg]

Copyright laws do distinguish between the work, and the performance thereof.

Re:Isn't classical public domain?

[91degrees]

Good point. But do the PRS represent the performers? I thought it was just the composers and publishers. Not sure who the publisher is in this case...

Re:Isn't classical public domain?

[Anonymous Coward]

OK, three guesses: who does the Performing Rights Society represent?

A) Composers
B) Performers
C) Publishers

Re:Isn't classical public domain?

[91degrees]

Trick question. The answer is A and C.

>What do PRS for Music and MCPS do with the money collected?

PRS for Music and MCPS pay money collected to their writer, composer and music publisher members. Both organisations are 'not for profit' and only deduct a small administration/commission fee to cover operating costs.

Re:Isn't classical public domain?

[dbIII]

With 18 board members to feed (in PRS alone) and a lot of other executives I very much doubt that anything significant gets past their "small administrative fee".

Re:Isn't classical public domain?

[lazarusdishwasher]

If she hired musicians to play classic music that has fallen into the public domain would she have to pay a license fee to the PRS?

Re:Isn't classical public domain?

[Tony Hoyle]

PPL represent the performers and record company.

PRS represent the writers, composers and publishers (ie. the record company).

Someone gets paid roylaties twice in this scheme.....

Re:Isn't classical public domain?

[91degrees]

I think she wouldn't. I also think the PRS would bully her into to doing so.

Wilts isn't a country

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean: "A woman in Bushton, UK".

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[Macthorpe]

Wilts is short for Wiltshire, which is in the UK. Let me Google that for you, just to confirm.

It's fine to list a state or county in lieu of listing a country, when it's made clear elsewhere in the summary that this took place in the UK.

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[OMGcAPSLOCK]

"You mean: "A woman in Bushton, UK"." Right on! I'd go one further - they should have said Bushton, UK, Europe, followed by a map with a big red arrow pointing to Europe. How dare a UK daily newspaper not cater to your ignorance?

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[Anonymous Coward]

That's like saying "Washington, USA", what's the OP thinking? It's a bit easier with the UK in that people were a bit more imaginative with place names, so there aren't so many duplicates. It is rather presumptuous of Americans to assume we all know what their fifty odd state abbreviations are (suprisingly, people outside the US don't have it drummed in to them at school), although I'm sure many people around the world might think that both Toronto, KS and Toronto, ON are in the same country if they saw it written down.

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[Anonymous Coward]

Hello, I'm the original submitter. Sorry I didn't think of adding UK after Wilts. I thought people would figure out from the insanity of the story that these were the British we were talking about.

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[the_womble]

That's like saying "Washington, USA", what's the OP thinking? It's a bit easier with the UK in that people were a bit more imaginative with place names, so there aren't so many duplicates.

Lot of good it does us being imaginative if the Americans copy all the place names anyway (Boston, Cambridge, Plymouth, (New) York..... ).

It is rather presumptuous of Americans to assume we all know what their fifty odd state abbreviations

Agreed, but the same should apply to county abbreviations. It also raises the question of whether you should write England or UK. I was taught to write England as a child, but UK seems to be common these days. Of course, at some point we could argue that we should reflect changing realities by writing EU instead.

Posted from Galle, I will leave you to Google for the country. The British should know anyway, given the number of them/us living here (note to Daily Mail readers, immigration goes two ways).

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[digitig]

It also raises the question of whether you should write England or UK. I was taught to write England as a child, but UK seems to be common these days.

"England" and "UK" are different things. And "Great Britain" is different again. The most general designation is "UK", or, to give it its full designation, "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland", from which you'll be able to work out that "UK" includes Northern Ireland, "Great Britain" is the rest of the country. Great Britain is, in turn made up of England, Scotland and Wales. Calling somebody from Scotland "English" is likely to go down about as well as calling somebody from the deep south of the USA a "Yankee".

England and Wales have a common legal system; Scotland and Northern Ireland each has its own legal system. So when talking about legal matters, it's best to be specific and say "England", "Scotland" or whatever. When referring to the country, it's "UK". The term "Great Britain" seems only to exist to piss off the Irish, as, for instance, when we refer to our Olympic team as "Team GB" thereby ignoring the Northern Irish contribution.

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually I'd say that Scotland is a country in it's own right, ditto England and Wales.
Best just not to refer to NI at all lest you annoy someone with a lack of humour made up for by their impressive illegal weapons cache....

Bit of a Scots nationalist here actually, hence my issue with it; Scotland is a country. It is not a "free" country since it is governed by another country, bit like a colony, albeit we have some limited input in said governance (not enough to make a difference, if the entire Scottish electorate voted one way but one tenth of england the other, we'd be overruled)...
Things they are a-changing though, but even still, Scotland, England, Wales are all country's but the UK is a nation-state.

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[digitig]

The issue is a bit confused by "Country" having multiple meanings. You're right, of course, that England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales are countries (I'm something of an English nationalist, so it's important to me, too), but within normal usage of the term so is the UK (who, outside of governnment, would use the term "unitary state"?)

The countries that make up the UK stand in a similar relationship to the UK as States in the USA do to the USA as a whole; they have their own legislatures (except Wales) but they work within a centrally decided framework. And I think many Texans will sympathise with Scotland seeing itself as a seperate country under occupation.

I do think you underestimate the power of Scotland in UK politics, though. Many elections come down to a decision of which Scot we want to lead us. And the West Lothian question illustrates the fact that there's an asymmetry in favour of Scotland in UK politics.

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[OMGcAPSLOCK]

It remains however that the parent is way off base, and if this article had been about somebody in Waverly, IA or Charleston, SC then the chances of an issue being made out of not stating the country would be close to 0%. This entire discussion emerged out of parent's need for intellectual hand-holding.

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[Anonymous Coward]

This doesn't look much different than the American insanity that the RIAA foists on us

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[Anonymous Coward]

Well I know I did. Here in the U.S. we can have some very odd stuff in the news.

But even I, as mere American, understand that British civil servants are truly inspired and yield stories that are exemplars of the pinnacle of boundless, mind-boggling stupidity.

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[Anonymous Coward]

Because of course there are no jobsworths or idiots in the US...

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[Anonymous Coward]

Calling somebody from Scotland "English" is likely to go down about as well as calling somebody from the deep south of the USA a "Yankee".

Which is to say, no one would care?

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[Anonymous Coward]

And you think us Brit's don't often have the same thing when a story is posted about an obscure small American Town/City/State we've never heard of?

But you're right, UK or GB within the article sure wouldn't have gone a miss.

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[Locklin]

So, in this case: UK is the country, Britain is the rock, and these English are wankers. j/k

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[digitig]

Which is to say that they'll probably just correct you unless they're drunk and waving a St. Andrew's/Confederate flag.

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[trewornan]

Scotland seeing itself as a seperate country under occupation.

Somewhat of an odd position to take since the Act of Union was voted in by the Scottish Parliament and was an entirely voluntary arrangement. Of course as is typical of relations between Scotland and England this act was basically about bailing Scotland out of the fiscal creek they'd gotten themselves into - a pattern which continues to this day. Scots of course will claim that they've been ripped off on oil revenue recently, forgetting that a large proportion of the North Sea Oil Reserve was actually in the area which (under international maritime law) would have belonged to England anyway. In fact a few years ago The Economist magazine actually crunched the numbers and found that even at the height of the oil boom England was still bailing out Scotland to the tune of about £19 billion per year

Not that I have a problem with Scotland being part of the UK (or not for that matter) - I just wish they'd stop whingeing about how hard done by they are while grabbing the money with both hands. Really, if you don't like it then leave the rest of us don't need the drain on our rescources.

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[phunhippy]

Holy crap no wonder you guys lost your empire!

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[melikamp]

The term "Great Britain" seems only to exist to piss off the Irish

From Wikipedia: Great Britain is an island. I hope that cleared things up a bit.

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[Anonymous Coward]

Hello, I'm the original submitter. Sorry I didn't think of adding UK after Wilts. I thought people would figure out from the insanity of the story that these were the British we were talking about.

Sorry, but we didn't see the picture with the crooked teeth ...

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[Anonymous Coward]

Calling somebody from Scotland "English" is likely to go down about as well as calling somebody from the deep south of the USA a "Yankee".

But the British do the same. They don't care where in America you are from -- you are still a Yankee to them.

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[jonatha]

Calling somebody from Scotland "English" is likely to go down about as well as calling somebody from the deep south of the USA a "Yankee".

Which of course everybody outside the USA does all the time ("Yankee" == "American" to nonUS....)

Guid sa' tha' queen...

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[syzler]

That's like saying "Washington, USA", what's the OP thinking? It's a bit easier with the UK in that people were a bit more imaginative with place names, so there aren't so many duplicates. It is rather presumptuous of Americans to assume we all know what their fifty odd state abbreviations are (suprisingly, people outside the US don't have it drummed in to them at school), although I'm sure many people around the world might think that both Toronto, KS and Toronto, ON are in the same country if they saw it written down.

Although I would question whether most Americans know the abbreviations of all 50 of our states states (as an example I've found most Americans think AK is Arkansas, AR is Arizona, and AL is Alaska), it does not seem too presumptuous if you consider the average size of a state in the US is roughly 80% the size of the UK and the average size of a Provence/territory in Canada is 300% the size of the UK.

So using your scale of the geographic importance of areas, it is rather presumptuous of the English to assume we all know what their forty-eight odd county names names are. After all, I seriously doubt you know the names of all of our counties/boroughs/parishes within the states of the US and provinces of Canada.

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[digitig]

Is it really any more complex than the USA's 46 states and 6 commonwealths, of which two are not part of the USA?

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[MightyYar]

And in Amish country they'll call you English even if you live in the next town.

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[digitig]

But if Scotland left the union, we'd have to import all our shortcake biscuits in tartan boxes! Horrors!

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[digitig]

As they say: [citation needed]. The Isle of Wight, Lundy, Caldy, Anglesea, North and South Uist, and so on, are all islands that are in Great Britain. Great Britain is many islands (although admittedly one of them is much bigger than all of the rest put together).

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[digitig]

[cough]. If you examine my posting carefully you might note that this Brit at least is aware of the distinction.

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[Anonymous Coward]

Hate to break it to you but, unfortunately, insanity isn't limited to the UK. While it is true that in the US we originally imported our insanity from the UK - which may explain why Americans could see this as coming from the US - over the centuries we blended it with that of other countries and the Native American cultures and made it our own. I'm quite certain every other nation has a fascinating account of the origins of their insanity but I'll leave it to the citizens of those countries to tell their own stories.

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[pbhj]

"England" and "UK" are different things. And "Great Britain" is different again. The most general designation is "UK", or, to give it its full designation, "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland", from which you'll be able to work out that "UK" includes Northern Ireland, "Great Britain" is the rest of the country. Great Britain is, in turn made up of England, Scotland and Wales.

To be pedantic for a moment (and who doesn't love a pedant?) - Great Britain was established by the Acts of Union (1707) between the Kingdoms of England and Scotland. Wales was (and is from what I can tell) just a part of England like Yorkshire say since Wales was annexed to England in the 1500s.

Wales actually only existed very briefly as self-proclaimed Prince of Wales Llywelyn "the Last" ap Gruffudd seized control of the local rulers (1200s). I'm not even sure, outside of the definition under annexation that Wales as defined now ever existed as a unified body though some might argue it did in the 1400s as Owain Glyndwr tried, in his failed rebellion, to pull deals to separate Wales as a country with him as leader.

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[melikamp]

The term's primary meaning is the name of one island. It is also used as a synonym for the name of one sovereign state, which is a notion entirely different from island and archipelago. Note how much EB sucks when it mixes up geographical and political notions.

Great Britain

island, Europe
also called Britain

Main

island lying off the western coast of Europe and consisting of England, Scotland, and Wales. The term is often used as a synonym for the United Kingdom, which also includes Northern Ireland and a number of offshore islands.

"Great Britain." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2009. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 31 Mar. 2009
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/243007/Great-Britain

Great Britain is an island lying to the northwest of Continental Europe. It is the ninth largest island in the world, and the largest in Europe. With a population of approximately 58.9 million people, it is the third most populated island on Earth. Ireland is to its west, and it is surrounded by over 1000 smaller islands and islets.

31 Mar. 2009
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_britain

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[Gnavpot]

Great Britain is an island lying to the northwest of Continental Europe. It is the ninth largest island in the world, and the largest in Europe.

To which continent does Greenland belong, if not Europe?

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[melikamp]

Man, I am not a geographer. I am just quoting Wiki, who says that Greenland is (geographically) a part of North America.

Re:Wilts isn't a country

[Anonymous Coward]

How about having the workers wear ear-plugs? That way only the horses hear the music. Or, supply the workers with MP3 players and let them listen to music of their own choosing.

The horses are upset by this

[Norsefire]

As is evident by their long faces.

Re:The horses are upset by this

[Reason58]

The one on the left has complained so much about this that it is a little horse.

Re:The horses are upset by this

[Anonymous Coward]

It was reported another one started shooting horse.

Re:The horses are upset by this

[tux0r]

I bet you were champing at the bit to say that.

But seriously (to remain on-topic), this really is a tail of woe. I can see the PRS riding this poor woman all the way to the bank. If the shoe was on the other foot they'd have to act differently.

Re:The horses are upset by this

[Anonymous Coward]

Posting Ac due to mods.

Tori Spelling goes up to the bar and the barman says "Hey Tori, why the long face?"
 

Re:The horses are upset by this

[SeaFox]

So horrible, yet I'm laughing. I don't know who to be more embarrassed for.

Re:The horses are upset by this

[JustOK]

so, they'll have to help pony up the fees.

Re:The horses are upset by this

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope we can reach a stable conclusion.

Easy solution!

[martin-boundary]

She should tape a few hours of music from the radio, then play it backwards to the horses. That way, she's not playing any actual RIAA music to anybody, (and the horses probably won't understand the subliminal messages anyway).

Re:Easy solution!

[Z80xxc!]

She's still playing the same music, she's just playing it backwards. Of course, that means the PRS has to be payed for the music backwards — and give her money.

Re:Easy solution!

[vihung]

Maybe if she plays it backwards the PRS would have to pay HER?

Re:Easy solution!

[Anonymous Coward]

If the subliminal messages are embedded backwards in the music, doesn't that mean playing them backwards will make the messages liminal?

Re:Easy solution!

[j-beda]

I once got a tuition bill for a negative amount (I had done some course swapping and ended up with one credit less than I had paid for, so they owed me something like $45), but rather than stating "hey, we owe you some money", the computer generated form said "pay this bill soon or bad things will befall you!". As I recall, it actually stated the amount owning as a negative number. I was tempted to write a cheque for a negative amount just to see what might happen.

I think it could be a potentially useful extension to the current chequing system - if you owe me some money, I could send you a bill along with a negative cheque, and when you "deposited" that cheque into you account, your account total would decrease, and when it finally "cleared" through my account, my account total would increase.

Of course none of this has anything to do with the topic at hand....

Re:Easy solution! - one big problem

[Brett Buck]

They'll all be depressed when they think Paul is dead!

The real solution

[Greymoon]

Send £99 worth of horse shit to the PRS. Tit-for-tat.

Re:The real solution

[Anonymous Coward]

is it worth the package and postage though?

Re:The real solution

[Tenebrousedge]

That is a damn good idea.

Re:The real solution

[__aaclcg7560]

Only the horse and postman will know for sure.

Re:The real solution

[Vectronic]

Fuck Yeah!

Re:The real solution

[BitZtream]

Yes, as long as you have a camera packed in with it to get a photo of the face of the guy who realizes what has just been delivered, then it would be totally worth it.

What about space ?

[Anonymous Coward]

And all the radio waves that propagate into space ?
There could be an infinite number of listeners there...

Re:What about space ?

[Anonymous Coward]

1. Broadcast into Space
2. ???
3. Earth destruction
Wait...

Re:What about space ?

[internerdj]

That is a great idea. There is a much larger set out there than down here. We just need to launch all the lawyers willing to pursue a case like the one in the article into space.

lost sales

[naeone]

think of all of the lost sales

milking blood from the mare

[Anonymous Coward]

like squeezing blood from a stone

They need to pay.

[Ken Broadfoot]

I, for one, think the horses should pony up and pay. Musicians need the cash.

Re:They need to pay.

[Anonymous Coward]

Dear Ken Broadfoot,

On behalf of The Equine Society we are happy to inform you that your labeling of horses as ponies is a great disregard for Human Rights. We do not wish to proceed with our lawsuit if we don't have to and we are very obliging in that we will accept a cash settlement of no less than $10,000.

Yours Truly,
Department of Rights and Truth and Goodness.

Re:They need to pay.

[gijoel]

I think there's been enough horsing around on this issue.

Re:They need to pay.

[maxwell demon]

On behalf of The Equine Society we are happy to inform you that your labeling of horses as ponies is a great disregard for Human Rights.

ITYM Equan Rights.

Re:They need to pay.

[g2devi]

Sorry, I didn't want to stirrup any trouble.

While I agree Musicians need a stable income, should animals be saddled with such debt? What should our mane priority be as a society? Answering that question, is our first hurdle.

Re:They need to pay.

[VisceralLogic]

I hoof to give it to you, that single post was enough to give me my filly of puns for the day.

Re:They need to pay.

[Anonymous Coward]

OMG....

That was unbelievable... GO GEEKS!

Thank you for that...

Ken

Easy solution.

[feepness]

Horse headphones.

TFS contradicts TFHeadline

[Anonymous Coward]

The PRS claims that it's not about the horses â" rather, it's about her staff of over two people

So isn't it misleading to claim in the headline that it's about the horses?

Another bizarre attempt to stir up a controversy...

Re:TFS contradicts TFHeadline

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not like they said "Oh, alright, so you were playing the music to the horses, and not making a public performance for your employees, right there amongst the horseshit. You don't need to pay in that case."

They are still making her pay. For playing music to some bloody horses. That's your controversy right there. There's no contradiction, there's just a ridiculous attempt to force people to pay for something that there's no reason in hell to pay for.

Re:TFS contradicts TFHeadline

[loutr]

The music is played for the horses, not the humans around them, who don't like it and turn it off when they can.

It would be similar to Metallica demanding royalties to the US army because soldiers used Enter Sandman to torture prisonners...

Re:TFS contradicts TFHeadline

[FrkyD]

Ah, but what if the torturers were enjoying themselves? I mean, I realize the chances of anyone in the U.S. Military enjoying Metallica are next to non existant but still...

Re:Easy solution! - one big problem

[Farmer Tim]

Not if you play them his last four albums.

One guess who ratted on her...

[Dutch Gun]

The staff are not bothered whether they have the radio on or not, in fact they don't particularly like my music and turn if off when I'm not around.

The staff isn't bothered by the music, but they don't like it and turn it off when she's not around?

Still, stupid as can be. Enjoy your nanny state. Ours is coming soon enough.

Re:One guess who ratted on her...

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think you know what nanny state means. It is government choosing what material we are allowed to see, etc. because we aren't considered mature enough to choose by ourselves.

Recording industry having lobbied itself the power to control what we do in our houses with the music we have gotten there legally is what happens when you combine capitalism, democracy and uninterested masses. It isn't nanny state, however.

Re:One guess who ratted on her...

[Anonymous Coward]

I think it's a "translation" thing, when she says "The staff are not bothered whether they have the radio on or not" I think she means "The staff could care less whether they have the radio on or not". Which makes sense.

Re:Easy solution! - one big problem

[Brett Buck]

Not if you play them his last four albums.

  Right - then they will be sure.

How about...

[Opportunist]

...mandatory earplugs (or iPods) for the people working there? First, with an airforce base next to it, it should be easy to get this past regulators. Second, the people there ain't too thrilled about the music anyway, so they won't complain that they can't hear it anymore. And she's not paying for the horses but her workers, so the leeches can't milk her anymore.

OK

[TRRosen]

Lets just all agree to pretend that Britain doesn't exist.

Re:OK

[D-Cypell]

Where did everybody go?

Re:OK

[JustOK]

round the pub

Re:OK

[BitZtream]

Right, because this sort of retarded shit doesn't happen anywhere else.

Re:OK

[T Murphy]

Pretend?

Re:OK

[Anonymous Coward]

can't say i've ever heard of something as fucked as this in the united states tbh

Re:OK

[pbhj]

Who said that?

Re:OK

[Anonymous Coward]

Welcome to the club.

- France

Re:OK

[Anonymous Coward]

operation already in progress...

Easier solution.

[tagno25]

Ear plugs for ALL humans within shouting distance of the barn

Re:Easy solution! - one big problem

[Farmer Tim]

Relieved by a sense of karmic justice, I thought.

Horse trading

[Anonymous Coward]

She could up the ante by engaging in some horse trading over rights.

She owns the horses. She can claim that the noise the horses make are "performances" and charge them royalties when they come over to visit her... say, $500,000 per neigh. She can offer to waive the payments if they offer to waive theirs.

I'm doubtful of the legal validity of this, but it'd be funny as hell to see her try. You might say, we'd be in for a galloping horse of a time.

Alternatively, someone could direct her to our friends in Sweden. She can eat like a horse there without these bottom-feeders leeching off of her.

Seriously, it's this sort of shameless cash grabbing that makes me feel not even a little bad about music companies going out of business. They clearly don't give a toss about anyone but themselves, so why should others treat them any differently?

Re:Horse trading

[speculatrix]

if they rang her, she could charge PRS for her time in answering the telephone, and if they were on a conference phone they'd be making a broadcasting of her voice without permission.

if she wrote a letter and the PRS quoted it, they'd be breaking copyright without her permission.

Re:Horse trading

[Tony Hoyle]

if they rang her, she could charge PRS for her time in answering the telephone

That's a recognised way of getting asshole companies off your back.. I've invoiced lots of them over time - they've not paid but they've stopped calling :p

Not sure if it'd work with the PRS though.. they're the asshole of assholes..

What Would Mr. Ed Say?

[CyberSlammer]

Turnn The Mmmozart Up To 11 Wilburrrr!!!

A staff of over two people?

[theillien]

What does that come out to?

Re:Why is this news?

[Anonymous Coward]

Indeed. Shady organizations trampling on individuals' rights via the manipulation of legislation, in complete disregard of basic rules of common sense, isn't news anymore, seeing how it happens all the frigging time nowadays.

We just all just bend and take it like they think we deserve.

ugh

[Anonymous Coward]

So, let me get this straight:

If I listen to the radio.. that's fine.

If I listen to the radio and my friend listens to his radio... that's fine.

But if we both listen to the same radio, I'm supposed to pay for it?

Re:ugh

[CmdrGravy]

Almost, there seem to be some extra steps required though

But if we both listen to the same radio ...

And if when some work experience temp from the PRS phones me up and asks "Do you play music for your staff" I say "Why, yes I do !" then I have to pay for it.

Re:ugh

[maxwell demon]

Almost, there seem to be some extra steps required though

But if we both listen to the same radio ...

And if when some work experience temp from the PRS phones me up and asks "Do you play music for your staff" I say "Why, yes I do !" then I have to pay for it.

So if you employ a cleaner, you better switch off your radio while getting your house cleaned.

Re:ugh

[daveime]

Better not pick up any more hitch hikers then, because my car stereo could be deemed a public performance.

This used to be only about bars, clubs, oil-rigs (for some god only knows reason) etc where it was considered public perfromance ... now they've started restricting HORSES and anyone who "just happens to be within earshot" ?

Where the fuck did we go wrong ? I've been on this rock for 41 years, and I can't put my finger on exactly when we lost all semblance of common sense and discretion ?

Re:ugh

[Hatta]

I've been on this rock for 41 years, and I can't put my finger on exactly when we lost all semblance of common sense and discretion ?

That's because it happened long before you were born.

play public domain music

[greatpatton]

There is more than enough public domain classical music (remember that in Europe it's only 50 years for performers). So find some Mozart recorded more than 50 years and tell them to go to hell.

Re:play public domain music

[jonwil]

Knowing the way most "performance rights agencies" act (and the way that the laws are written), playing any music at all (regardless of whether its public domain or you have permission from the copyright holder or whatever) without paying the mandatory "performance rights agencies" license will get you hit with a notice.

Re:play public domain music

[ciderVisor]

I wonder what they'd make of musical wind sculptures in the garden of your workplace ?

Re:play public domain music

[Anonymous Coward]

That would only work if Mozart also played he music. The performance is copyrighted too. ;)

Re:play public domain music

[Godwin O'Hitler]

Whoops, misread your post!! Sorry!

Re:play public domain music

[tomatensaft]

Hey, where can I sign up to open another "Performance Rights Agency" and collect royalties for any copyrighted material over there? =) Sounds like a great business plan: just go around collecting royalties and pay yourself a nice hefty salary. Pay a couple of cents for artists that happen to ask for a cut of those royalties. :)

What's so special about that PRC, that entitles them to do that on behalf on all artists? Why can't a man from the street start his own agency?..

Re:play public domain music

[Tony Hoyle]

I *think* they have legal power behind them.. they certainly talk as if they do.

You could try to start a new one.. we only have two - PRS for songwriters, composers and publishers, and PPL for the performer and record company.

Maybe you could start a new one, for the guy who does the sound desk.

these people (PRS for Music)

[Anonymous Coward]

have gone Totally Fucking Insane!!!!

backwards going we are?

[nicc777]

This is insane! It's like we are going back to the dark ages...

I just can't imagine that there are people sitting some where in a room that can actually think of ways like this to milk innocent people for more money.

Ah - and now you will tell me that the devil made them do it - and for once we all might agree on /. :-)

Re:backwards going we are?

[moteyalpha]

It is a very lucrative business and many people have shared in the profit of it. Consider the "juke box" or muzak in stores and malls. The people who operate these machines have a vested interest in these profits. Their lawyers are constantly trolling for violators so that most people will pay without question. It is the key to Microsoft success, aggressive lawyers and the money flows. The problem is that people will consume the product and as silly as it is, it is not the people who embrace openness that fund this process.
I think that humanity would be served by openness in all things, however, most are willing to be enslaved by their own desires and fears.

Re:backwards going we are?

[Anonymous Coward]

I take it you haven't read anything about the RIAA or MPAA or IFPI or BPI ... organisations which do little else but think of ways to squeeze more money out of the public and/or artists.

Re:backwards going we are?

[daveime]

Congratulations, you win today's award for the "Lowest Possible Depth Sunk To Slur Microsoft".

The article, in case you hadn't noticed, was about "Music for Horses", NOT "Microsoft". I realise they both start with the letter "M", and this obviously stimulated one of your three neurons enough to generate your post. Really, is there no limit to these trolls ?

Re:backwards going we are?

[moteyalpha]

And where is the slur ( unless you mean the music for the horses should be played legato)? If I said that Microsoft was in business to make money, would that be a slur? It is a fact that businesses try to make money. If I were going to run down Microsoft, it would be for monopolistic practice, and selling crap as the LCD and not for being like everybody else.
On the other hand, you seem to selling half of a duck.

Multiple Radios?

[shitdrummer]

What about buying a cheap radio for each of the Staff? Then they're all listening to their own personal radio, just all set to the same station. No public performance at all.

This is pretty stupid though.

Re:Multiple Radios?

[Gerafix]

No, then you're paying for multiple performances, duh. Think of these poor people working for the PRS, if you played the radio and people heard it, you're cheating them of their HARD EARNED MONEY. Please have some respect for these people, don't steal radio performances.

Re:Multiple Radios?

[reiisi]

Different stations, with earplugs.

If only one person is listening to each radio, it's not a public performance any more.

And the stuff can listen to what they like, since they really don't like the classical. (Although, she would then have problems with some staff playing head-banger music loud enough to spook the horses through the plugs.)

What won't the PRS do?

[Asztal_]

Let's not forget the time the PRS sued the police! This is all getting rather silly.

Re:What won't the PRS do?

[AnalPerfume]

It's stories of this sort which makes me root for Google / YouTube to REALLY shaft them on prices. PRS are complaining that they have a gun to their head during negotiations (figuratively speaking) and that Google / YouTube can dictate terms and price, and has the option of complete removal which they've opted for now. Offer them even less per play than PRS walked out on before....fuck them and all their members.

Anyone who promotes their members via affiliates, switch to different non-PRS member content. While technically they may be within the law, this type of bullshit seems like pure greed to me. More examples of this type of ludicrous bullshit can only help seal their fate in the eyes of the general public.

Re:What won't the PRS do?

[HTH NE1]

What's the state of copyright law in Panama? Did Noriega have to pay license fees for his music torture?

Perhaps the PRS should be given the Noriega treatment. Maybe then they'll reconsider whether being subjected to music in a public place is a "value-add".

In Holland it's even worse

[Farenji]

I have a business at my home with me being the only employer. But I received a letter from the SENA (equivalent of PRS) stating that I need to pay for music played in my own home, for my ears only. The letter showed 2 options: "1. I don't play music at all" and "2. I do play music, please send me a check". I missed the option "3. I have a private business in my home without any personnel so I can play any music I like for free, sod off". I complained about that and after a few months and several letters, I got the answer: "you're right sir, but most people pay anyway!" We're talking about 90 Euro each year minimum.

Please note that this SENA is backed by the government. It's a crooked world.

Re:In Holland it's even worse

[Anonymous Coward]

My school got a message, that you are not allowed to play music inside the school on even a MP3, on my own headphones! And they cant even hear what im playing! I tell you this thing is going off the wire.

Re:In Holland it's even worse

[Ronald Dumsfeld]

...I received a letter from the SENA (equivalent of PRS) stating that I need to pay for music played in my own home, for my ears only.

Same shit applies in most European countries - seen it in Belgium. The irony of the case I saw, was it was a Thai supermarket - they only played music off imported Thai CDs. Do you think any of the original artists get a cent from this collection body?

No, neither do I.

Re:In Holland it's even worse

[spire3661]

Isnt that fraud?

Re:In Holland it's even worse

[Halo1]

For Dutch people: look here for a short FAQ regarding what to do about these letters (summary: ignore them, they're misleading and baseless if you just play music for yourself).

Re:In Holland it's even worse

[jimicus]

If there is legal backing for at least some of the money they take, it suddenly becomes a lot harder to convince anyone in authority that it is an orchestrated fraud rather than a mistake.

Or, to put it another way, you have to make a lot of mistakes before anyone will suspect foul play.

Re:In Holland it's even worse

[Anonymous Coward]

That's going to really upset the school's bandmaster.

Re:In Holland it's even worse

[JaredOfEuropa]

Send them a letter telling them to "go to hell", using those exact words. I replied to them thusly, as well as to the "Stichting Reprorecht", a foundation that has the authority to collect IP fees on material such as books and magazines being copied for business purposes. I've never heard from them since, even though you are right that they actually empowered to collect those fees. Sadly we have no such thing as congressmen to write to about this, but if you know any politician involved in this stuff, write to them.

I remember an interesting case involving BUMA, an organisation similar to SENA and the PRS. The band U2 visited the Netherlands and gave a performance for some charity. They were subsequently charged by BUMA to pay royalties for publicly performing their own music. And of course they'll never see a penny of those royalties; these foundations can deduct overhead from the royalties paid out, and they are masters at Hollywood accoutning.

Bring it on...

[BrokenHalo]

In any case, demanding isn't getting. The simple thing to do with such a demand is to just tear it up and file it in the recycling bin.

Sure, they could send an army of lawyers and bailiffs after her, but all she has to do in court is say she's unable to pay, and that will pretty much be that. The court will stipulate that she has to pay (say) 50p per week, and the cost of administration will swallow it up.

Re:Bring it on...

[digitig]

Sure, they could send an army of lawyers and bailiffs after her, but all she has to do in court is say she's unable to pay, and that will pretty much be that.

Considering it's "her stable" she may have difficulty showing that she doesn't have the assets to pay the fine or for the license that she will still need. If the ordinary small business can't cover its liabilities then it goes bankrupt and the creditors take its assets (it has to be a really big business before the government steps in and gives the failed business its creditors assets).

As others have pointed out, it's nothing to do with playing the music to the horses and everything to do with other members of staff being able to hear it. That needs a licence in England and Wales (don't know about Scotland). So scrub the stuff about horses; all this story is is "You need a licence to play a radio in an English workplace", which we don't like (although at least we no longer need a licence to operate a radio receiver anywhere) but isn't news.

Re:Bring it on...

[Anonymous Coward]

bullshit.

Re:Bring it on...

[EtherMonkey]

Don't you folks also have a law that requires you to buy a TV license for any device that can show TV shows, (including laptops and mobile phones)? Anyway, a simple solution is to buy (or rent) music that includes the license fees for public performance, or use royalty-free music such as available from RoyaltyFreeMusic.com. Even the commercial services from Muzak and 3M are a better bargain than most PRO license arrangements.

Re:Bring it on...

[digitig]

Don't you folks also have a law that requires you to buy a TV license for any device that can show TV shows, (including laptops and mobile phones)?

No. The requirement only relates to devices that can show TV as it is broadcast, so only covers laptops with TV receiver cards, and no mobile phones that I know of. And it's the residence that needs to be licensed, not the device; portable devices are covered by the license of the owner's residence. There used to be a similar requirement for radio receiving equipment, but that was dropped in 1971.

Anyway, a simple solution is to buy (or rent) music that includes the license fees for public performance, or use royalty-free music such as available from RoyaltyFreeMusic.com. Even the commercial services from Muzak and 3M are a better bargain than most PRO license arrangements.

Yes, but as others have pointed out, the PRS won't take that lying down, so she'd have a fight on her hands. A fight she should win, but hassle I doubt she needs.

Re:Bring it on...

[Tuoqui]

Yet if each worker had their own headphones and radio it'd be perfectly fine for them to tune in to whatever they want.

Please, cant the god damn courts use COMMON FUCKING SENSE? Plus if it's over the air radio they've already paid the royalties therefore the PRS would be guilty of double dipping.

Re:Bring it on...

[Patch86]

TV licence is only for devices with TV tuners (so PCs with TV cards would qualify, without wouldn't). And it's not for individual devices; licences are for a residence or business with TV-capable devices.

As an aside, there used to be a Radio licence too. It was dropped with the rise of portable radios, and the age of radio-capable devices being everywhere. We're all waiting eagerly for computers to pull the same trick for TV.

Don't tell the PRS

[Chrisq]

But I play music for the dogs on Guy Fawkes night. The music distracts them from the sound of the fireworks. It would never have occurred to me that this could be a "public performance".

Re:Don't tell the PRS

[Gerafix]

This is a common misconception among the uneducated masse... err the public. You see, dogs can greatly appreciate the music. This is demonstrated by dogs ability to create their own music, howling or barking with patterns of intricate information. So, since dogs can make their own music, they must pay to listen to music produced by us. If you don't agree with this you will be fined and/or jailed, and your dogs sent to a Re-Education Institution For Canine Criminals for the crime of music piracy.

In other news....

[Anonymous Coward]

This just in, any citizen standing, sitting, eating, sleeping or breathing within a gaseous medium permeated by electromagnetic radiation which contains copyrighted audio signals of any kind must pay fees to the PRS. So pay up you thieving bastards!

Re:In other news....

[maxwell demon]

This just in, any citizen standing, sitting, eating, sleeping or breathing within a gaseous medium permeated by electromagnetic radiation which contains copyrighted audio signals of any kind must pay fees to the PRS. So pay up you thieving bastards!

You may currently be in a faraday cage, shielded from any electromagnetic transmissions. In addition you may not hear any copyrighted stuff just now. However, you are breathing oxygen, some of which was produced by plants while they were under the influence of sound waves originating from copyrighted material. PAY!

Double dipping

[Alioth]

The thing that really annoys me about this is that the PRS wants you to pay for listening to publically-broadcast radio. The radio station has *already* paid the PRS, so this is double dipping. The PRS, incidentally, also wants you to pay if you listen to *talk* radio.

Here are some Public Domain & Copyleft music

[JumperCable]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sound/list

Problem solved.

We need an LRS

[dontmakemethink]

We need a Listener's Rights Society, where we can be compensated for hearing music we DON'T want to hear. Think about it, how many times do you hear an awful song in a situation where you can't turn it off? And they want royalties for that?!

Re:We need an LRS

[Ronald Dumsfeld]

We need a Listener's Rights Society, where we can be compensated for hearing music we DON'T want to hear. Think about it, how many times do you hear an awful song in a situation where you can't turn it off? And they want royalties for that?!

Bring it on!

I can't wait to see Brittney Spears and Michael Jackson made bankrupt for offending my ears!

Re:We need an LRS

[Anonymous Coward]

Damn good idea. If they want paying for it, then they can take responsibility for it. It works both ways.

Oh Great

[Chrisq]

This is demonstrated by dogs ability to create their own music, howling or barking with patterns of intricate information.

This means that next time the dog barks I will probably have the PRS round to collect royalties on behalf of him!

Not a Bad Result

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks to the PRS this woman is either paying for a licence, or listening to public domain music.

But also thanks to the PRS hundreds of thousands of UK citizens reading a Telegraph fluff piece are being informed about the asinine copyright and performance laws they are subject to.

That Streisand lady is a performer too isn't she....?

Re:Here are some Public Domain & Copyleft musi

[Anonymous Coward]

Doesn't performance rights extend to performances of PD music?

omfgponies!

[Anonymous Coward]

so who ratted her out?
the PONYS?!??!?!

Re:omfgponies!

[speculatrix]

it was probably the donkeys nearby that ratted on her, they have no taste I tell ya!

Re:omfgponies!

[eXonyte]

Ugh. What a bunch of asses!

Re:omfgponies!

[Critical Facilities]

Nah, it was those pikeys. From TFA:

An American harpist reported that her music helped calm sick digs at a Florida vet's clinic and one online retailer sells specially selected CDs for cats.

Excerpt from "Snatch" for reference:

- Is the big fella not coming with us?
- He's minding the car.
- What does he think we are, thieves?
- No, nothing like that.
- He just likes looking after cars.
- Good dags. Do you like dags?
- Dags? - What?
- Yeah, dags. - Dags. You like dags?
Oh, dogs. Sure, I like dags.
- I like caravans more.
- You're very welcome.

Pikeys are well-known for their skills of negotiation in business. It's probably why they talk like that... ... so you can't follow what's being said.

Get the Employees their own radios

[deadcrow]

If she got the employees their own radios, even if they listened to the same station, it would not be a public broadcast on her part, since they each would have their own receivers of the original broadcast(s).

Re:Get the Employees their own radios

[deadcrow]

Forget the above reply.. I just saw the same idea in another reply from earlier.

Forgive me greater Slashdot community at large, I did not mean to accidentally copycat a prior reply!?!?!?!

Re:Get the Employees their own radios

[daveime]

You are forgiven my son ... hell, you have to be able to copycat entire articles before you can become an author here !

PRS paying itself?

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder if they pay fees for their head louses listening to the music along?

Simple

[spike1]

Sound recordings in the 1950s were adequate quality so invest in some vintage vinyl.

Rip it, run it through a scratch and pop removal program, mp3 it and play that to the horses.

50 years, then copyright expires, so she can go and get any old record published before 1959 and play that without hindrance.

They take her to court, she screws them for libel. :)

Re:Simple

[91degrees]

But this is just a nice lady who keeps horses. She'd have to pay out for an mp3 player, a record player and possibly even a computer and software, all to avoid paying a £99 annual fee that she shouldn't have had to pay in the first place.

And they'll probably never take her to court (because they're too likely to lose), but it's a lot easier to say that when it's not you fighting a highly resourced organisation.

We need the PRS in south London

[Anonymous Coward]

If only the PRS would target those ignorant fools who have their music turned up full volume blasting their neighbours. If the PRS did that, I'd give them my support... but no, they target horses listening to classical music.

Re:We need the PRS in south London

[maxwell demon]

Well, if you hint the PRS about those public performances, they might target them. Just make sure they get the dollar, err pound signs in their eyes ... :-)

Re:...at all

[TaoPhoenix]

{X-Men}

"If you give the performance rights angencies any momentum at all, their notices cannot be stopped."

{/X-Men}

Hey, Loronzo..

[Anonymous Coward]

Every organization wants to be the new mafia these days. Stupid mafia.

You guys are being unfair

[caudron]

I mean, think about it. If she weren't letting those horses listen for free, they might have had to go out and purchase the CDs themselves, which is the very core of her sins against the music artists! I mean, if we allowed this, what next? Would she try to hang a painting up in there for just anybody to enjoy who could see it?!? I think you see the sort of anarchy, mayhem, and potty-mouthed language that would ensue in a world where music was just allowed to carry out over free and unencrypted manure-laden air.

Tom Caudron

I still have hope

[Lazypete]

I still have hope that someday we will look at those dark time when greed is king and say. "Feew we went over that... and now we're en enlighten society." Man these news are depressing... Can someone tell me how doing this will bring money to them.. I mean dont you have bigger fish to catch.. she's a horse trainer.. god damn it.. she not trying to make a illegal bar or playing it over the internet.. she's putting music on in her work place. I cant wait for them and come tell me that I have to pay fee to play my MP3 on my laptop when my cubicule mate is listening !
When are we going to riot over these things and show those "as**" that we wont take this bullshit anymore?

They are scum!

[Fuzzypig]

The PRS are worse than the **AAs, they are not an officially recognised law enforcement agency, they have no powers, they are merely a tool of the music industry. Although more often than not the music industry hates the PRS too, they stop all the free publicity that the record companies like, so quite frankly the PRS can go f**k themselves backwards over a barrel!

It's on the radio

[Uzik2]

Hope she tells em to p*ss up a rope.

Lying in the headline.

[DaveV1.0]

This is not about playing music for horses. Rather, it is about her playing music that her employees can here. The latter is enough for ridicule, but lying in the headline undermines any argument made by the article.

Re:Lying in the headline.

[duhjim]

What if the employees don't have very good hearing, Is the woman going to be charged for the high, or low notes that many of her elderly employees can not hear?

Re:Lying in the headline.

[DaveV1.0]

Try reading the fucking article.

Anonymous Coward

[Anonymous Coward]

This is absolutely rediculous. So are they going to start charging people for playing music off the radio or a CD when they have guests in their car?

Those organizations have too much power and to go an attack a woman with a horse barn is a little over the edge. It would be one thing if it was a bar full of patrons, but it is not, still even then the music has already been paid for by the radio company or it is a CD that was bought. How retarded.

Vermont Public Radio

[Timberwolf0122]

Great, just great. I leave the radio on for the cats now I've got to convince them that come pledge time to send in a donation, do you know how hard it is to get a cat to do anything? Let alone reach Golden Producer level donations.

The best solution is, one radio per employee

[BubbaDave]

If she gives a cheap radio to each employee, and they are all tuned to the same station, each employee is listening to their own gov't-mandated free broadcast.

No public performance, no problem.

Dave

I haven't even heard of PRS...

[ghostis]

Ya know... Someone could just construct a "rights association" for some medium and start hitting people up for cash under threat of lawsuit. Given the fear of today's lawsuit-happy media companies, such a scam could go on some time unnoticed.

Precedent

[hesaigo999ca]

I hope the courts throw the book at the PRS for such insane behaviour. I have a company here that plays music in the warehouse sometimes to help the workers concentrate without going bananas over all the noise, and I guess they would have to pay a license too???

This makes no sense....anyhow if she looses, I would gladly donate a p2 laptop I have, and set her up with small speakers so she can use windows media player and play songs for her staff and horses. F*CK the PRS

Re:Precedent

[duhjim]

What about when the U.S. government blasts rock music at prisoners or at the likes of old friends like Manuel Noriega. i quote wikipedia, "He (Noriega) was discovered to be in the Apostolic Nunciature, the Holy See's embassy in Panama. During the resulting stand-off, U.S. forces bombarded the embassy with loud music played through boomboxes." Are there special rates for torture?

Re:Precedent

[hesaigo999ca]

Yeah, wait a second, when they were playing that rock and roll music in vietnam to disrupt vietnam life, did they pay dividends and royalties on those songs....I digress, I truly digress.

What we should really do

[tritonman]

Come on people, we can survive without music for maybe 6 months. That should be long enough to bring them to their knees. If we stopped listening to radio and buying music online or in stores, this would stop all of their craziness when the radio stations go out of business because they were trying to bleed us dry.

Re:What we should really do

[FreeFull]

The problem is that most of the population don't even know, and will continue to buy the music.

So what's next?

[bytethese]

I live in NY. I can hear people's radios BOOMING from their cars. Just because I have a loud stereo, should I have to pay a "performance" fee? Sounds a little ridiculous to me...

MIDI

[Anonymous Coward]

She could grap a synthesizer and play some Mozart, Bach, etc MIDI files to the horses, and then the PRS can't do anything to her.

PRS wants middle-aged kicks all through the nap

[David Gerard]

The Performing Right Society and UK Music have come out strongly against YouTube and Google for not just handing them both buckets of money.

The furore started when the PRS demanded that YouTube pay them more money or remove their members' videos, and YouTube removed their members' videos. "It is clear they are too powerful," said Feargal Sharkey, whose bank account died before he got old, "because they were actually able to just tell us to bog off. I am sick and tired of bogus outsiders who spout unworkable utopian visions. Instead, they should give us money because we want it. Just like the record companies used to ... er, hold on, I'll start again."

"Our main focus is on compensating the artist," said Howie Singer from Warner Music. "In theory, I mean, not out of our own pockets or anything. It's amazing what you can make recoupable. As such, it's vital that Google and the ISPs give the artists all the money that can be dragged out of them, plus a perfectly reasonable 87% for us. The six, er, five, er, four majors actually having to write a cheque would be an unsustainable imposition."

The PRS noted its work on increasing the total revenue pool for songwriters by demanding stables pay to play music to horses, people in cars pay if they wind down their windows with the stereo on, and people singing in the shower pay if anyone else in the house could theoretically hear them. They will also be removing 6.75% of buskers' earnings from their guitar cases and 6.75% of children's lunch money in case they sing songs on the way to school, which the busker or child can then apply to get back minus a reasonable handling fee.

Re:Obama Policies Will Bankrupt USA Tsarkon Report

[MightyYar]

The best is that it's a big ol' hate-filled diatribe, and doesn't seem to contain a single suggested solution - at least based on a random sample.

It's also written by a deranged person - check this logic out: "Obama Policies Will Bankrupt USA"... why? "Obama himself is a racist..."

Oh! Now I get it! LOL.

BULL S*IT!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

That lady would be DUMB if she actually listens to the PRS and pays an annual fee!! I'm not saying she's dumb, but if she actually pays them, that would be dumb. No one is EVER going to stop me from playing my radio as loud as I want to whoever may be around. You know what? I don't even care if the music is from my own CD's. People do it all the time! I frequently have 1-3 passengers in my car and playing my CD's while they're in the car is perfectly fine, let alone the freakin' RADIO. Let's just say that nobody is going to stop me or try to charge me a fee. I won't make illegal copies for anybody but I'll play whatever I damn well please! I think that woman should do the same for her horses. Play what you want, no matter how much of an audience you have!

If anyone objects to this, PLEASE reply to this. I want to be humored!

Re:BULL S*IT!!!

[fugue]

Dunno--depends on what you listen to. I like the sound of "Your music sucks; turn it off or I'll report you to PRS!"

Music for the dogs on Guy Fawkes night?

[denzacar]

Some Tchaikovsky I hope?

Equal rights?

[fugue]

So horses are people too, I guess. But if you kill a horse it's not murder, and if you keep a horse in captivity it's not slavery, and you don't have to send a horse to school or wait for it to reach legal drinking age before letting it sip Dos Equis through (a) straw.

Or perhaps this is indeed the first step to having horses recognised as people throughout the law, so that we learn to stop complaining about the horseshit that comes out of politicians.

Radios at construction sites?

[Anonymous Coward]

I am guessing this means playing a radio while working just about anywhere where people are working requires a license? What comes to mind is construction workers-there always seems to be a radio playing at a construction site....

Heck, what about the individuals that like to play music softly in their cubical? The music is only meant for the individual who brought their personal radio to work, but sound waves propagate. Who would be responsible for paying the fines/license fee for a a worker playing a radio while working? The employee or employer?

If it is ok for an employee to play music while working, the lady with the horse stables should give her radio to a worker as a gift. Then explain to her workers that only a worker can turn on the radio for the horses listening pleasure.

The REAL solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Whenever you hear someone performing music publicly report them to the PRS.

- Getting your car worked on and overhear the radio the mechanics are listening to? Report it.
- Someone listening to their iPod loud enough for other people to hear it? Report it.
- Youtube video with a soundtrack? Report it.
- Neighbor's party playing music? Report it.

Either public outcry will be too great once everyone gets sued or the PRS will get so flooded with reports they wont be able to get any "work" done.

House party

[AnalPerfume]

Does a private house party class as a performance? It seems to be on the number of people listening, and a party of one is not a very big party. If that's the case, how many people do you know have had a party interrupted by some dickhead with a badge demanding money or the music turned off? If not, why not? Is it because the party is private? What if the party is in the garden where neighbours can hear? Is it still classed as private? Is it because it's non-commercial? If so, why are charities not immune from the PRS bullshit? Is a school classed as non-commercial?

Or are they just like any other bullies.....they select their targets on the basis of whether or not their victim will fight back.

Instead...

[Incredible Elmo]

Why don't they file for injunctions against those idiots who play their MP3 players too loudly in the bus?

anonymouse coward

[Anonymous Coward]

would it be legal to send them a letter stating that you will charge them for frivolouse letters and set that up as a business plan in which you play a radio in your house

I've been whistling this song in my head all day.

[neo]

Crap. This means I probably owe the author some money.

Hey, what about all the times I just "heard" the song in my head. Should I have to pay for that.

But I guess if the song is really catchy it's their fault that I'm hearing it over and over. I don't even want to hear certain songs in my head.

dum da deeda dum de dum.... crap.

public performances and playlists?

[littlesparrow]

can someone tell me what the difference is between a 'public performance' and sharing your playlist across a network on itunes?

because wouldn't this technically be a public performance? i am afterall, distrubuting the music to an 'audience', right?

and how does this affect something like podcasting?

Stick it to the station solution?

[cdpage]

put out a petition telling everyone to stop listening to given radio station(s)...

stations stay alive cause of advertisements... if companies find out that no ones listening, they'll stop paying for ads.

Forcing them to FIX the problem, or Bye Bye Radio station.

Just have the horses wear headphones

[Anonymous Coward]

If it's about the employees being able to hear the music, just put headphones on the horses. What do you expect from a country where you have to pay a yearly tax just to watch TV (tvlicensing.co.uk). And the fee goes up today!! How wonderful. I hope no horses watch TV at those prices...

head Phones / Car stereos

[cdpage]

Agreed!

or the Morons with Boom Boxes in their Cars too loud.
Course we only hear the Bass line so maybe they'll on give them 1/2 the fine?

Seems pretty simple

[Maxo-Texas]

Get CD's that are out of copyright from dead classical artists.

Or do you have a law that money still has to be paid for Mozart?

I assume the issue is replaying the performance of a recent opera which is still under copyright.

For that matter, use a creative commons or midi version of the music.

but yes it is insane.

Re:Obama Policies Will Bankrupt USA Tsarkon Report

[Anonymous Coward]

The truth carries no weight when posted by Anonymous Cowards.

QED. So the truth is not what matters, but how it is delivered to you. Prepare to live a life of servitude in your fantasy.

"And the sign said "The words of the prophets are written on the subway walls
And tenement halls
And whispered in the sound of silence "

Re:Obama Policies Will Bankrupt USA Tsarkon Report

[Anonymous Coward]

Wrong answer.

That screed contains numbers facts (and observations) about how this bankruptcy is being engineered by a malevolent government, treasure and Federal Reserve system, and drastic amounts of corruption in this administration is abound.

The deep character flaws point to how unlikely this man would every become President on his own, he is an imposter and a creation of the true powers that be.

The only "LOL" "I get it" you will ultimately get is the fact that your standard of living is dropping and the puschasing power of dollars saved is in severe jeapardy and your country's sovereignty is a at severe risk, and dont think this free speech on the internet will continue forever. You are squandering one of your last chances to do anything about it.

It's not a performance

[patrickgamer]

Maybe I missed something here, but she isn't playing it for the public. People don't walk in off the street to pet the horses and get background music. Coffee shops and such are playing music to a a public - their customers. If this women is playing to horses (not likely considered general public) and those in her employ listen as well, that should still be counted as private play right? It's not the same as giving paying customers background music, is it? I don't see how playing this music is NOT private (i.e. playing music over dinner in your own home). ... Unless PRS says I have to play royalties every time I play the radio when serving dinner to guests...

Re:Obama Policies Will Bankrupt USA Tsarkon Report

[MightyYar]

your standard of living is dropping

Well, THAT seems awfully presumptuous.

That screed contains numbers facts

A lot of those "facts" are unsubstantiated, and most of it is laced with insults and obscenity. A very unbalanced person wrote it.

My Bus Driver

[Anonymous Coward]

Is so screwed.

Obvious solution

[Locke2005]

Get each of the horses a set of wireless headphones. If it's only horses that can hear the music, I don't see how they can charge performance rights for it. After all, where would you draw the line? Every time I listen to music, the millions of bacteria in my ears get hear it for free too... Damn freeloaders! Mice, roaches, birds, termites... there are literally billions of little creatures sponging off of our performances.

PRS ... license fee to play ... horses

[EventHorizon_pc]

Just let the horses play paper-rock-scissors if they want to. Besides, do you have any idea how painful it is for them to throw paper or scissors?

This is a bad idea overall, as I'm sure this will provoke a response. Perhaps human astronauts/cosmonauts will no longer be able to use the toilet or gym in the equinaut section of the ISS without paying a hefty fee...

Fee , Tax ?

[Spc01]

Doesn't a local radio station pay for the music they have / play on radio ?
If that's the case then the songs and music is ALLREADY PAYED and i don't see any reason why someone must pay for listening to it.
It is payed allready i don't see why people should pay three times.

Re:Obama Policies Will Bankrupt USA Tsarkon Report

[Anonymous Coward]

Whats obscene in there. nothing. all you can do is attack the format and not the message. QED.

Horses

[jimbob666]

Hold your horses PRS!! You are obviously flogging a dead horse here..

Re:Obama Policies Will Bankrupt USA Tsarkon Report

[daveime]

Nonsense ... by that logic, you will accept as "truth" something told you by a friend if a friend of a friend of a man you met in the pub ?

Credible ? I think not. Like I said, put your name to your spiel, and validate it, if only to those of us who don't trust people who throw stones from behind an impenetrable barrier.

Re:Obama Policies Will Bankrupt USA Tsarkon Report

[MightyYar]

I'm not going to read the whole thing - it's insane, and not a single citation for any fact in the whole thing.

Take the very first bullet point:

President Barack "The Teleprompter" Obama is deeply connected to corruption

Completely unsubstantiated, and ambiguous. "Connected" could mean anything.

Rahm Emanuel, his Chief of Staff, is radical authoritarian statist

Again, an attack without anything to back it up.

whose father was part

Great, now he's bad simply because his father was an asshole? LOL.

Barack is intimately connected to disgraced Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich

I don't think "intimately" is the word you were looking for here. Certainly they were connected - they both represented the same state and ran under the same party. If you have evidence of a criminal "connection", then offer it up.

Barack Obama is also connected to William Ayers (who ghost-wrote his books)

My word, that's pretty funny. Mind backing that up?

is a man who had much influence on the young Barack Obama

Okay, no proof, and in addition we are now going after the young Obama? Don't you think that perhaps people change a little over time? Are you going to argue that his cocaine use continues, too?

Barack also subscribed to Preacher Jeremiah Wright,

Finally, a well-known fact! Did you miss the part where he strongly distanced himself from the man's views and quit his church? And just before that, he made one of the finest speeches on race that I have ever seen.

Look how deranged that very first bullet-point is... why the heck would I read this whole thing?

Royalty Free Music Radio

[Anonymous Coward]

Well why not use www.rfmradio.co.uk its a radio station playing royalty free music here in the UK CDs are available for businesses without internet access.
See website for more details