Slashdot Mirror


Canadian Copyright Board To Charge For Music At Weddings, Parades

silentbrad writes "The CBC reports, 'Money can't buy love — but if you want some great tunes playing at your wedding, it's going to cost you. The Copyright Board of Canada has certified new tariffs that apply to recorded music used at live events including conventions, karaoke bars, ice shows, fairs and, yes, weddings. The fees will be collected by a not-for-profit called Re:Sound. While the Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada (otherwise known as SOCAN) already collects money from many of these events for the songwriters, Re:Sound will represent the record labels and performers who contributed to the music. .. For weddings, receptions, conventions, assemblies and fashion shows, the fee is $9.25 per day if fewer than 100 people are present and goes up to $39.33 for crowds of more than 500 people. If there's dancing, the fees double. Karaoke bars will pay between $86.06 and $124 annually depending on how many days per week they permit the amateur crooning. And parades, meanwhile, will be charged $4.39 for each float with recorded music participating in the parade, subject to a minimum fee of $32.55 per day.'"

4 of 349 comments (clear)

  1. Re:When you can't innovate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Watch out, soon we will have to pay to voice our protests against it.

    I believe that is called "lobbying".

  2. Re:Why stop at weddings? by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 3, Informative

    They called Phil Dick a paranoid. Turns out he was the only one with a proper sense of reality. Go figure.

  3. Enforcement by michaelmalak · · Score: 4, Informative

    Enforcement will be via Predator drone.

  4. Re:Wedding, parade, club DJs will pay the bill by c0d3g33k · · Score: 3, Informative

    What happens if some little girl at a wedding hums an infringing tune? The event infringes; minimum payment is due. "For the artists."

    Nope. The little girl is not a registered (or paid) performer, just a private attendee. The event isn't infringing. No minimum payment due, or the plaintiff is required at own expense to prove in court that the the little girl is a paid actress contracted to provide "crowdsourced entertainment".

    Stop giving these people the benefit of the doubt by accepting every scenario they present as valid and thus proof that there is no need to resist. Fight back for god's sake!