We seek to understand and document all radio transmissions, legal and otherwise, as part of the radio listening hobby. We do not encourage any radio operations contrary to regulations. Always consult with the appropriate authorities if you have questions concerning what is permissible in your locale.

Author Topic: Music licensing concerns  (Read 2462 times)

Offline tybee

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 57
    • View Profile
    • Email
Music licensing concerns
« on: September 26, 2022, 1555 UTC »
I realize probably 95% of part 15 hobbyist don't bother with paying music royalties, and in certain cases it's not even a requirement. But for those utilizing part 15 as a mean of public performance and are concerned about being 100% legal, then a reliable source of information on the subject can be reviewed in the publication "Use of Copyrighted Music on College and University Campuses" (Campus Stations are part 15 operations too)
https://www.acenet.edu/Documents/Music-Use-of-Copyright.pdf
« Last Edit: September 26, 2022, 1558 UTC by tybee »

Offline ThaDood

  • DX Legend
  • ******
  • Posts: 1226
  • Likely, not where you are.
    • View Profile
    • Extreme Part #15!
    • Email
Re: Music licensing concerns?
« Reply #1 on: October 19, 2022, 1957 UTC »
One way that I see around that is rebroadcast on your Part 15 station an LPFM, college, etc. You´d be using their music license agreement, and add, what??? Maybe, a couple hundred more potential listeners, at most? A local LPFM appreciates me putting them on Part 15 AM where I am, where it´s a geographic dead-zone, for them. Lazy´casting, for me. They provide the programming and tunage, and I provide some extra coverage for them. A grey zone here? Eh... I´m not that worried.   
I was asked, yet another weird question, of how I would like to be buried, when I finally bite the big one. The answer was actually pretty easy. Face-down, like a certain historical figure in the late 1980's, (I will not mention who, but some of you will get it, and that's enough.) Why??? It would be a burial that will satisfy everyone: (1) My enemies will say that it will show me where to go. (2) On the same point, I can have my enemies kiss my butt. (3) It will temporarily give someone a place to park a bicycle. See??? A WIN / WIN for everyone.

Offline tybee

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 57
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Music licensing concerns
« Reply #2 on: October 20, 2022, 1938 UTC »
Part 15 rebroacast of licensed stattions isnt something new.. Back in the 1950s they reused the equipment first used on the George Washington Bridge in 1940 and installed a part 15 AM cable in the Lincoln Tunnel in the 1950s ( and again in the 1980s) which, unlike the prior, usually rebroadcasted music from a variety of local stations but had the capability to break in with traffic information when warrented. I presume those rebroadcast did not pay royalties (but there's no documentation to confirm that either way). in fact I've never come across any documentations ( other than at campus stations) specifically concerning part 15 broadcasts paying for music royalties - and its not, and has never been something the FCC concerns itself with anyway.. it's just not of their jurisdiction.

The Tunnel Radio franchise installed many such systems in the decades past but the subject of copyright was apparently never addressed.

In fact its worth noting there's no known circumstance (that Im aware) of a part 15 station ever being cited by  BMI, AMI, ASCAP, or whoever for not paying royalties... so if it's not happened before in the last half century, maybe it never will .

Offline ThaDood

  • DX Legend
  • ******
  • Posts: 1226
  • Likely, not where you are.
    • View Profile
    • Extreme Part #15!
    • Email
Re: Music licensing concerns, the record companies used Part 15 as well.
« Reply #3 on: October 23, 2022, 1937 UTC »
I seem to recall a multi-followed-up story from the 1990´s about a record company using an AM Part 15 station to promote new artists' releases by a very busy NYC roadway. This was just before the internet took-off. So, since they´ve used Part 15 as a tool themselves, hopefully, they don´t want to rock-the-boat.
I was asked, yet another weird question, of how I would like to be buried, when I finally bite the big one. The answer was actually pretty easy. Face-down, like a certain historical figure in the late 1980's, (I will not mention who, but some of you will get it, and that's enough.) Why??? It would be a burial that will satisfy everyone: (1) My enemies will say that it will show me where to go. (2) On the same point, I can have my enemies kiss my butt. (3) It will temporarily give someone a place to park a bicycle. See??? A WIN / WIN for everyone.

Offline tybee

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 57
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Music licensing concerns, the record companies used Part 15 as well.
« Reply #4 on: October 23, 2022, 2045 UTC »
I seem to recall a multi-followed-up story from the 1990´s about a record company using an AM Part 15 station to promote new artists' releases by a very busy NYC roadway. This was just before the internet took-off. So, since they´ve used Part 15 as a tool themselves, hopefully, they don´t want to rock-the-boat.

You are referring to Atlantic Records part 15 install outside the Holland Tunnel but it was actually during the 1980s.. one of the new unknown artist they broadcast was Hootie and the  Blowfish.. this then unknown group grew in popularity because of those part 15 am broadcast as Atlantic Records pointed our

Offline tybee

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 57
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Music licensing concerns
« Reply #5 on: October 23, 2022, 2050 UTC »
No.. I stand corrected, your right it was the 1990s- thats when Hoitie and them was promoted when nobody knew who they were
« Last Edit: October 23, 2022, 2102 UTC by tybee »

Offline Paul B. Walker, Jr.

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 440
  • McGrath, Alaska, USA
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Music licensing concerns?
« Reply #6 on: November 02, 2022, 1708 UTC »
One way that I see around that is rebroadcast on your Part 15 station an LPFM, college, etc. You´d be using their music license agreement, and add, what??? Maybe, a couple hundred more potential listeners, at most? A local LPFM appreciates me putting them on Part 15 AM where I am, where it´s a geographic dead-zone, for them. Lazy´casting, for me. They provide the programming and tunage, and I provide some extra coverage for them. A grey zone here? Eh... I´m not that worried.

Nope, its yuour airwaves your responsible.. doesnt matter who the programming is coming from. Not a gray area.

I managed a talk station, but the network i ran used real music as bumpers, i had to pay music licensing.

Doesnt matter if youre running talk or rebroadcast someone else, if you are broadcasting real music.. you are supposed to pay.

Paul B. Walker, Jr.
paul@alaskaradionerd.com

Program Director: KSKO 89.5 McGrath, Alaska www.kskopublicradio.com

Afternoon Air Talent: Hits 106 KLMI Laramie, WY 3 to 7pm Mon-Sat www.myhits106.com

Available for voiceover work, use the email listed above!

Offline tybee

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 57
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Music licensing concerns?
« Reply #7 on: November 02, 2022, 1807 UTC »
..I managed a talk station, but the network i ran used real music as bumpers, i had to pay music licensing.Doesnt matter if youre running talk or rebroadcast someone else, if you are broadcasting real music.. you are supposed to pay.

Something I noticed.. I like listening to the late night Coast to Coast AM program, so I'm also a subscriber so I can download the programs to listen to whenever I want. I noticed that the downloaded versions used to always omit the  copyrighted bumper music.. Well not sure when it changed but now the downloaded versions of the shows DO include the bumper music. I've been curious what changed recently (in the past year or so) to allow for it.

Another thing.. When looking back at the campus stations of the 40s 50s and 60s, I've never found reference to if they had to, or if they did, pay any royalties or not.
« Last Edit: November 02, 2022, 1816 UTC by tybee »

Offline TRI International

  • DXing Phenomena
  • *******
  • Posts: 3039
  • U.S.A
    • View Profile
Re: Music licensing concerns
« Reply #8 on: December 21, 2022, 1147 UTC »
We used and have posted the Fair Use Copyright Act 1976 which says: Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.

With out going into details when we had a visit from Uncle Sam, we were told that because we were NOT advertising / not for profit etc this was fine, To this day we have lived by this  8)

We need another card to shut out the draught HW ABT URS?
Use Shazam app. to ID songs, listening direct Airspray RTL SDR , Ham It UP Plus connected to 2 V shape long wires  40ft. high with a MFJ 941C Antenna tuner
QSL to trlinternational@yahoo.com or  trlinternational@protonmail.com

Online redhat

  • DX Legend
  • ******
  • Posts: 1587
  • USA
  • Music is my drug.
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Music licensing concerns
« Reply #9 on: December 22, 2022, 0804 UTC »
Music licensed for broadcast may or may not include licensing for recordings of the same broadcasts.  This all depends of the terms of the right you pay for, and is handled through ASCAP or BMI usually by a third party like sound exchange.  In regards to Art Bell, rumor is he had some sweetheart deal for royalties, which is why there was so much music in his shows.  This may have changed when George Bory took over the show.  They may have secured broadcast rights for the music, but not recorded rights.

I could be wrong, but that's my understanding of how it works.

+-RH
Somewhere under the stars...
Airspy HF+, MLA-30/Mini-whip/Chi-Town Loop
Please send QSL's and reception reports to xfmshortwave [at] proton [d0t] me

Offline Pigmeat

  • Marconi Class DXer
  • ********
  • Posts: 6684
    • View Profile
Re: Music licensing concerns, the record companies used Part 15 as well.
« Reply #10 on: December 22, 2022, 2150 UTC »
I seem to recall a multi-followed-up story from the 1990´s about a record company using an AM Part 15 station to promote new artists' releases by a very busy NYC roadway. This was just before the internet took-off. So, since they´ve used Part 15 as a tool themselves, hopefully, they don´t want to rock-the-boat.

You are referring to Atlantic Records part 15 install outside the Holland Tunnel but it was actually during the 1980s.. one of the new unknown artist they broadcast was Hootie and the  Blowfish.. this then unknown group grew in popularity because of those part 15 am broadcast as Atlantic Records pointed our

With the number of straight and tranny hookers working the NYC side of the Holland Tunnel, hoochies and blowfish owned that stretch of road decades before those other guy's were playing open mic nights in Harrisonburg,VA.

Offline Pigmeat

  • Marconi Class DXer
  • ********
  • Posts: 6684
    • View Profile
Re: Music licensing concerns
« Reply #11 on: December 22, 2022, 2247 UTC »
No.. I stand corrected, your right it was the 1990s- thats when Hoitie and them was promoted when nobody knew who they were

You did if you lived in the Virginia's. They hailed from Virginia Commonwealth University in Harrisonburg, VA. up in the Alleghenies near the W.V. line. You couldn't turn on the radio w/o hearing Darius Rucker singing through his nose for about a year before they got famous.

It was a terrible time up in the hills. The chickens wouldn't lay eggs and milk soured straight from the cows. I'll just touch on what it did to the turkey farms, a big industry in the Harrisonburg region, they never recovered. The turkey's thought Rucker was one of them due to the noises he made and flew the coop, never to be seen again.