Sam Smith's music ban.

[jbarter]

Under English licencing law, a entertainment licence is required if more than two people are making music.

It's even worse now Dubh. Under the new Licensing Act the 'rule of two' has gone and even a solo singer now invokes the need for an entertainment licence. So watch out, if you get maudlin drunk and start to hum quietly to yourself you'll be criminalised.

Gary, here is the amendment obtained by Lord Redesdale (Gordblessim):

The provision of any entertainment or entertainment facilities is not to be regarded as the provision of regulated entertainment for the purposes of this Act to the extent that it consists of the provision of-
(a) a performance of morris dancing or any dancing of a similar nature or a performance of unamplified, live music as an integral part of such a performance , or
(b) facilities for enabling persons to take part in entertainment of a description falling within paragraph (a).


Discussions between the Government, The Morris Ring, The Morris Federation, and Open Morris have established that paragraph (a) includes Mumming and paragraph (b) includes post-dance sessions.

[I.D.10-t]

For me it is getting harder and harder to buy things. It seems that every CD computer program, book, appliance, or anything else has money going from the purchase towards taking away your rights to use the device in a way that you want to use it.

Tried to fix a fan the other day and it had screws that needed special tool to remove it. Half of the engineering marvels of the modern car are new ways of selling proprietary tools and making sure that only the dealer can fix it. Buy food and you never know if Monsanto’s has taken away the right of other farmers to plant last year's feed. Looking at bikes and some of them have special parts that need to be ordered only from them, like seat posts! I just wish their was a contract that was out their like the creative commons, or GPL for manufactured goods.

[dubhlinn]

Very interesting jb.
I did not know that the old "rule of two" was gone.Its been about five years now since I played in public and I'm a bit out of touch with the current state of affairs.
It did cross my mind that this could be a blessing in disguise for all you Morris Men.I mean all you got to do to have a legal session of any kind of music is to have a Morris Man on standby,dressed up in full regalia,and if the Bill stick their nose in the door,just kick him out into the middle of the room to throw a few shapes and everything would be legit.
I might look into this matter further and open an agency to supply Morris Men for all musical gatherings.

Just imagine the possibilities of getting a few Van Morrison fans together for an acoustic evening of his songs and then ....enough!

Slan,
D.

[jbarter]

I just realised that after hundreds, if not thousands, of years of Morris it's finally official: It ain't entertainment!

[GaryKelly]

I just realised that after hundreds, if not thousands, of years of Morris it's finally official: It ain't entertainment!

Just?

Reminds me of the World Championships I attended in Warwickshire some years ago. At the opening ceremonies of international shooting events, it was 'tradition' for the host nation to put on some kind of entertainment. The year before Warwick, the European Championships were held in Vitoria-Gasteiz, and in 38 degree heat we were all assembled in the town square to watch a display of Basque log-chopping that went on for hours... many of the competitors fainted in the heat. By way of revenge, the UK Committee welcomed the World's competitors the following year with a display of Morris Dancing. While our foreign guests gazed in utter bemusement and confusion, we all sloped off to the beer-tent

[jbarter]

we all sloped off to the beer-tent

No doubt you had the usual problem - couldn't get near the bloody bar for Morris Men.

[Martin Milner]

I can envisage three possible outcomes from this sort of Puritan behaviour (the Government legislation and the Sam Smith ban)

1) public live music is killed stone dead

2) it has little effect, we continue to play music, but in our own homes, or pay through the nose for the pleasure of entertaining others

3) anyone who had a hand in enacting the new laws is mercilessly hunted out and impaled on a Bb Generation, and we return to the good old days of yore.

[missy]

Martin - while, I personnally, prefer choice #3:
"3) anyone who had a hand in enacting the new laws is mercilessly hunted out and impaled on a Bb Generation, and we return to the good old days of yore."

If we did that here in the US, some Congress person would then have to try and have all Bb Generation owners be registered, which in turn would possibly lead to the banning of all Bb Generations, which could then mean all whistles could be banned because there's really no use for any of them, and on and on and on........

Missy

[anniemcu]

Martin - while, I personnally, prefer choice #3:
"3) anyone who had a hand in enacting the new laws is mercilessly hunted out and impaled on a Bb Generation, and we return to the good old days of yore."

If we did that here in the US, some Congress person would then have to try and have all Bb Generation owners be registered, which in turn would possibly lead to the banning of all Bb Generations, which could then mean all whistles could be banned because there's really no use for any of them, and on and on and on........

Missy

They can have my Gen Bb when they pry it rfrom my cold dead fingers!

It's my favorite whistle!!

[Lambchop]

In the US, just playing background music in a public place makes you liable for fees to BMI, ASCAP, SESAC, or whoever. This potentially includes things like a CD player (but maybe not a radio) in a doctor's waiting room..

Yes, but this is simply payment to the to the artists who do, really, deserve to be compensated for their works.

It specifically excludes works which have never been copyrighted. So, if you ensure to play only public-domain works, and take care to do your own "arrangement," you should not be liable to pay the fees. The establishment should have already paid the yearly fee, in any event.

Yes, music on a home radio connected to home-type speakers is exempt regardless of the size of business.

Think about it this way . . . the music encourages patronage. If I'm playing Enya in my bodywork clinic to enhance relaxation and promote a therapeutic atmosphere, I should be paying for the commercial use of it, just as I pay for oils and lotions, building rental, and the people who install and maintain the goldfish pond in the atrium. If I'm playing music in my restaurant, I'm providing an inducement to eat there by making it more pleasant, so I should be paying for the commercial use of it, just as I pay for rental of the building. If I'm using music on my phone system, to keep callers placated and hanging on until my employees can talk to them, I should be paying for it.

Why? Because in each case I am making money from the use of that music. In each case, the music is an inducement to patronize my establishment.

Of course, that raises another spectre. You know the background designs on fabric and carpet and such? Wait until the designers gang up and start extorting funds for commercial use of them . . .

[missy]

Peggy wrote:
"Yes, but this is simply payment to the to the artists who do, really, deserve to be compensated for their works"

As I said above, I have absolutely NO problem paying an artist for their intellectual property. But paying BMI, ASCAP or whatever fees doesn't insure that the artist who's works YOU are playing will get paid. The moneys go into a general "fund", the lawyers, etc. get paid, then the fund is distributed based on % of play time and air time (please, if I'm mistaken, someone correct me). So, your Beach Boys and Michael Jacksons of the recording industry will make money, your lowly folk artist may get a few cents.

A friend who's been a member of BMI for over 20 years has gotten ONE check for $20 during that entire time (and he's done a lot of recording, both on his own and session). He still thinks it was a mistake!


Missy