Commonly Used Ways in Which Music Copyrights Have Been Exploited - Coursework Example

Ways in which Music Copyrights are exploited Table of Contents 1. Introduction 2 2. History of Music Publishing and Rights 3 3. Publishing5 3.1 Collection Societies 5 3.2 Performing Right Society 6 3.3 Mechanical Copyright Protection Service 6 3.4 Collection Societies 6 4. Conclusion 7 Bibliography 7 Abstract The following paper explores the nature of copyright and publishing as it exploits music to its fullest financial potential. The paper looks at a brief history of publishing and rights, exploring the various technological advances and solutions to problems that were a result. Ways in which Music Copyrights are exploited 1. Introduction Throughout the 20th century, and more specifically in the last half of the century, the music industry had to undergo rapid changes as new revenue streams were opened up in relationship to technology. A host of problems had to be solved in order to support the rights attributed to publishing a piece of music (Harrison 2011: xv). One of the solutions came in the form of collection societies, but because fees reduced the received royalties, solutions are emerging lowering the cost of using agencies towards getting the royalties that are owed. Through an examination of the music industry and copyright law, an understanding of how the system works can be achieved. 2. History of Music Publishing and Rights The early development of the phonograph and the broadcast industry near the beginning of the 20th century set the course for publishing, but the development of music as a business actually came into existence in the 19th century. Early publishing was based on publishing song sheets, but the music had to prove to be saleable in order for the company to agree to publish the work (Baskerville and Baskerville 2010: 7). The initial income that was generated by the music industry was based upon the literature value of publishing song sheets, but as technology increased, so did the development of streams of income for the music industry. Music began its long relationship with copyrights through the Berne Convention 1886 which established that the moral right of ownership of a property had an effect on the reproduction of a property. This was extended to film through referring to it as a series of pictures in 1911 and in the Copyright Act of 1956 and then in the UK Performers; Protection Acts 1958-1972 began to solve the problems associated with copying protected intellectual property (Wagner 2007: 9-11). The Americans would not sign on to the Berne Convention 1886 (Wagner 2007: 9). However, copyright is established as a right under the Constitution which supports a general belief in the concept of ownership. All subsequent American laws are developed from this foundation of law in their Constitution. The Copyright Clause is found under Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 (Wagner 2007: 12). Emerging sources of income in the early 20th century in the music industry were defined by performance, mechanical, and synchronized income. Performance income is based upon the revenue that is earned through users who create a public performance of the work that generates benefit. Performance rights are managed through entities that hold and can allow a performance to be licensed for a fee. Mechanical income comes from users who are reproducing a piece of music through technology of some kind. When other types of media utilize a song, then synchronization income is generated (Gammons 2010: 50). The MCPS (Mechanical Copyright Protection Society) takes on the role of responsibility to administer licensed music. Through the use of a blanket license, the user is permitted use through a variety of forms of mechanical reproduction (Parker 2004: 78). The development of technologies in the 1960s created even more ways in which synchronization could be used to create multiple levels of income. While the film industry had become a well tapped resource for income as music was used liberally in movies, the television industry as it became more and more of a staple offered the music industry a new opportunity through which to develop control and income over the use of music in television programs. Every program, commercial, or musical entertainment that appears on television provide an opportunity for revenue to be generated (Hackley 2010: 154). Records and 8-track cassettes were the most common forms of mechanical reproduction. In the 1970s, television and film could be a marketing place for new songs (Cooper 2005: 4). Every performance created an opportunity for a form of media to pay royalties to the publishing companies. As the 1970s become technologically advanced with the addition of videos and at home players, publishing companies could utilize the new technology for a new stream of revenue (Frith and Marshall 2004:114). The mechanical license that allowed for reproduction of a song was often paired with a synchronization license that allowed the producer to make videos of the song in relationship to the mechanized format. Collections of songs from movies became popular and movies like Saturday Night Fever produced recordings and sheet music that could be sold on a broad level, the music exploited through as many avenues as possible. By the end of the 1970s, records were being eliminated and the cassette tape was the more often used mechanical form (Day 2000: 21). Just as the music industry was beginning to experience some lapses in usage, the 1980s brought with it the emergence of the music video, revitalizing the music industry and creating a whole new visual concept that added to the value of music. Just about the time record collections had been replaced by music cassettes, they were no longer available on the shelves, replaced by the compact disk, or CD, which was part of the emerging computer technologies (Wikstrom, 2010:8). Even more than cassettes, the development of a CD collection meant replacing existing purchases of LPs or cassettes with the corresponding CD (Mackey and Wilmshurst 2012: 47). Changes were coming quickly during this time period as the 1990s began to develop. The internet created a whole new world through which to create revenue for music, but it came with a series of problems that had only mildly affected the music industry up to this time. Music could be uploaded and copied for free without any intermediary to make sure that the artists and their companies got their due payment. It was bad enough that music videos could be taped or copied onto a DVD from the television, but the development of the internet created digital copies with little to no effort, raising questions and causing lawsuits (Batchelor and Stoddart 2007: 114). Napster changed the nature of the music industry as the music exchange site allowed music to be exchanged for free so that suddenly the artistry of music became the center of the discussion, leaving the business end out in the cold. Napster proved that a new medium had entered into the social context, and it used that media in broad strokes creating a community through which music was exchanged and discussed (Munro 2004: 35). The business of music fought back, supporting digital downloads as a medium for distribution while insisting that it be done at a price. Digital downloads became the source of lawsuits, arrests for illegal downloads, and the emergence of a wide variety of businesses through which music could be distributed (Hull, Hutchinson, and Strasser 2011: 295). The development of the mp3 player and the iPod supported digital downloads so that a person could carry their entire library of music on a single device. Companies like Napster, Amazon and iTunes became the media for buying music, which is now also possible to be downloaded into Smartphone technologies so that one device operates as a phone and a music player. At the dawn of the new millennia, advances in technology have created a world in which old marketing methods for physical music is still in place, but publishing companies have a heightened awareness of the power of the internet. Free music, as it turns out, is a marketing bonanza, providing a taste of an artist’s music so that the consumer is more likely to buy (Harrison 2011: 130-140). The changes in the music industry have put the publishing industry in the United Kingdom in a position to evaluate their strengths and weaknesses in order to redefine the rules of copyrights. The United Kingdom has defined the new revenue streams and devised methods to license in the new technologies. 3. Publishing The definition of publishing is through the control over the copyright that it holds. The control over the copyright will likely include securing the recordings of any material they may own, securing the use of that material in different venues and forms, and the developing talent in order to use their material for further use within the various media through which music can be used to make money (Birch 2008: 60). The record company will exploit specific recordings of a piece of music while the purpose of the publisher is to use methods to exploit music in order to make money off of its creation (Birch 2008: 60). As with most forms of art, this is not easily done and creating a valuation for music becomes based on the various ways in which it can be exploited. The industry has been put into a position to enforce the recognition of intellectual property, which means that it is non-physical property (Sople 2006: 72). Sometimes music is retained by songwriters and composers so that they can benefit from the sales of the use of their music. This is called self-publishing which is referring to the control that is placed on the copyright by the writer or composer. The need for the copyright is so strong that the music itself is referred to as the copyright. 3.1 Collection Societies Collection societies have emerged so that publishing companies can be relieved of some of the responsibility of negotiating the costs of licenses (Harrison 2011: 297). Although they are often private enterprises, they are regulated by the UK government through a copyright act put into place in 1988. Because of the use of this intermediary, the royalty dues are collected efficiently and distributed fairly. Negotiations created fixed rates that make it easier for owners of the music to be treated fairly (Frith and Marshall 2004: 32). There are a number of different benefits that are obtained through use of collection societies. Administration costs are reduced, and owners have the opportunity to form alliances that can monitor and oversee all of the online activities that would be cause for royalties and fees (Harrison 2011: 298). Collection societies are based in regional pathways so that the full exploitation of music can be achieved through both primary and secondary avenues. They also have an interest in blanket licenses that operate without fixed rates. Blanket licenses allow a person or entity to use the entire catalogue within a society for a period of time. The fee involved could be a flat fee or it could be linked to the revenue that is earned through the use of the blanket license (Harrison 2011: 297). Music can be accessed by the public through a variety of media that includes YouTube, Facebook, iTunes, MySpace, and other various sites with different formats. Because the copyrights are often infringed upon, the development of digital, mechanical, and synchronized licenses has emerged (Bahanovich and Collopy 2009: 9). 3.2 Performing Right Society The Performing Right Society or the PRS controls the right of performers to use certain pieces of music and then distributes the payment that is made so that the music can be used (Axford 2004: 154). 3.3 Mechanical Copyright Protection Service The MCPS or Mechanical Copyright Protection Service is an agent for publishers and copyright owners for licensing the music products for reproduction. This society will collect the payments and distribute them to those who have earned pay from their music. This includes license holders such as film producers, digital streaming and downloads, and recording companies (Axford 2004: 155). 3.4 Collection Societies There are a variety of collection societies that are operating in the U.K. Included in this group is Video Performance Limited, Phonographic Performance Limited, the Performing Right Society Limited, and the Mechanical Copyright Protection Society Limited. These societies have a variety of requirements that must be fulfilled for entry and subscription (Gowers 2006: 94). The downside of collection societies includes fees that are deducted from the royalties and payments so that the society can pay for its own expenses. When different nations are involved in the negotiations, deductions are made on both sides of the transaction or contract (Castendyk and Dommering 2008: 169). In efforts to gain 100% of their royalties, owners and publishing companies have looked for other methods through which to keep all the money that is due to them. One of the ways in which they are salvaging their full royalties is through Tunecore. Tunecore operates as an online service through which publishers can track their deals and collect their royalties. This replaces the collection societies and expands the amount of money that publishers and copyright holders will see from the use of their work (Butler 2012: 1). 4. Conclusion The music industry gains value from its productions through multiple avenues of income which are the exploitation of a piece of music through its use in a variety of media. This can include film, video games, advertising and digital downloads. Business decisions are often made on the basis of how best to exploit the music, which often ends up exploiting the artist. Protections for artists are keys to the development of meaningful and significant relationships between artists and publishers with both sides seeking to gain the most control of the copyright. Protection for the industry through defining the rights involved came through the actions of Napster and file sharing technologies. Word Count 2159 Bibliography Axford, Elizabeth C. 2004. Song sheets to software: a guide to print music, software, and web sites for musicians. Lanham, Md: Scarecrow Press. Bahanovich, D., and Collopy, D. 2009. Music experience and Behavior in Young People. UK Music, 23(2011). [Online] Available from http://www.ukmusic.org/assets/me dia/uk_music_uni_of_herts_09.pdf (Accessed on 22 October 2012). Baskerville, David, and Tim Baskerville. 2010. Music business handbook and career guide. Los Angeles: Sage Publications. Batchelor, B. and Stoddart, S. 2007. The 1980s. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press. Birch, Sofie. 2008. The political promotion of the experience economy and creative industries: cases from UK, New Zealand, Singapore, Norway, Sweden and Denmark. Frederiksberg: Imagine - Creative Industries Research, Copenhagen Business School. Butler, S. 2012. TuneCore, a game changer. The international News and Analysis Report, (7), 2012. [Online] Available from: www.MusicConfidential.biz (Accessed on 22 October 2012). Castendyk, O., and Dommering, E. 2008. European media law. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International. Cooper, Mark N. 2005. Time for the recording industry to face the music: The political, social and economic benefits of peer-to-peer communication networks. Consumer Federation of America. [Online] Available from http://www.consumerfed.org/pdfs/benefitsofpe ertopeer.pdf (Accessed on 22 October 2012). Day, Timothy. 2000. A century of recorded music: listening to musical history. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Frith, S., & Marshall, L. 2004. Music and copyright. Edinburgh:Edinburgh Univ. Press. Gammons, Helen. 2010. The art of music publishing. London: Taylor and Francis, Inc. Gowers, A. 2006. Gowers review of intellectual property. Norwich, HMSO. Hackley, Chris. 2010. Advertising and promotion: an integrated marketing communications approach. Los Angeles: SAGE Publ Harrison, Ann. 2011.Music--the Business: The Essential Guide to the Law and the Deals. London: Virgin Books. Hull, Geoffrey, Hutchinson, Thomas and Strasser, Richard 2011. The music business and recording industry: Delivering music in the 21st century. Abingdon: Routledge. Mackey, Adrian and Wilmshurst, John. 2012. Fundamental and practice of marketing. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann Publishing. Munro, I. 2004. Information warfare in business: Strategies of control and resistence in the network society. West Sussex: Routledge. Parker, N. 2004. Music business: infrastructure, practice, and law. London, Sweet & Maxwell. Sople, Vinod V. 2006. Managing intellectual property: the strategic imperative. New Delhi: Prentice- Hall of India. Wagner, S. V. (2007). Discussion: With Reference to the Copyright Laws of at least two Countries evaluate the Extent to which Changes to the Law have taken Place as a Result of technological Change. München: GRIN Verlag GmbH. Read More