Read on Twitter
i think i will make a more comprehensive thread since i finally think i have a grasp on this.
Copyright, royalties, and networks/venues, what i learned a thread with sources--
Copyright, royalties, and networks/venues, what i learned a thread with sources--
disclaimer: this is just what I was able to gather from my research and I am by no means an expert. I appreciate any corrections or differing interpretations. I am open to opposing views.
Firstly, I want to clarify that i think its inaccurate to say that the networks/shows have to pay bts/bh if bh want to upload bts' performance on their own channel. This is bc US copyright law is unique in the way they allocate performance rights and royalties. I will explain:
There are two different kinds of copyrights, recording and composition. Usually the recording is owned by the label because the label owns the studio in which the song was recorded. and composition is shared among artists.
https://futureofmusic.org/article/fact-sheet/ascap-bmi-consent-decrees
https://futureofmusic.org/article/fact-sheet/ascap-bmi-consent-decrees
If you are a venue (such as a football stadium) and you want to play a recording of a song at your event, you would pay the Performance Rights Organizations (PROs) a fee for the year that gives you the right to play the song for the year.
https://theproaudiofiles.com/performance-rights/
https://theproaudiofiles.com/performance-rights/
Networks/venues do not pay the artist directly for playing their song. Instead the PRO distribute the royalties to the artists. So as long as they paid their fee for the year the venue/networks get to play the song as many times as they want & the PRO will calculate distribution
In that scenario all the fees would go to the artist/label because they would be paying for the studio (spotify) version of the song to be played at your venue which the artist/label owns both the recording and composition rights. However, recordings of live perfs are different
When it comes to live performances, performers do not have any recording rights. Only composition rights. The US is the only industry that does this. The recording refers to the filming and sound feed of the performance that day.
https://theproaudiofiles.com/performance-rights/
https://theproaudiofiles.com/performance-rights/
Thus the network/show own the recording but do not own the composition. This means that when the network plays bts' perf on their channel, bts are only gaining royalties from composition not recording. & as mentioned earlier, in order to play bts' composition on their venue,
+they have to pay a yearly fee to the PROs for the composition rights (not the recording rights). This is why yt videos are usually taken down after a year because thats the time when the network can either renew their yearly fee or not. If the PRO fee is not renewed, the video
must be taken down because they no longer have the licensing to play the composition of the song. However, the networks still own the rights to the performance. Although, without the composition rights it is useless. This is when negotiation with the label would come in.
At this point because the network/show no longer has licensing for the composition , they can no longer play the performance on their venue (youtube channel), but they do own the recording. I assume that at this point the label can choose to buy the recording or not.
If they do buy the recording, then the artists are free to play the video on their own venue (aka their own youttube channel). some examples of artist yt channels uploading performances from tv shows/awards shows:
The networks/shows do not have to pay bts/bh if bh any royalties if bh chooses to buy the recording of the performance because the youtube channel (aka the venue) is no longer theirs.
In conclusion, it's actually really messed up that artists do not have recording rights to their own performances. This just gives these big networks/shows like the grammy, bbmas, SNL etc so much leverage over the artist label. They can basically hold the performance hostage
until the label pays them. Again the US is unique in doing this & i think that needs to change. Even so, I wish BH would buy the recording for bts' most iconic performances. I think its worth it, but thats up to them. All we can do is let them know we really want these perfs
I also want to add. I've seen many users talk about the CDPA passed in 1988. PLEASE STOP REFERRING TO THIS LAW. THIS LAW IS A UK LAW THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE US INDUSTRY
to simplify--
there are two ways we can get the videos back:
1. bh buys the recording rights from the network & re-upload it on their own channel OR
2. the network renews there PRO payment for another year and reuploads to their channel
END OF THREAD
there are two ways we can get the videos back:
1. bh buys the recording rights from the network & re-upload it on their own channel OR
2. the network renews there PRO payment for another year and reuploads to their channel
END OF THREAD
This is a great thread for YouTube & label/show relationship! However the info comes from an Indonesian artist & their entertainment laws are different than the US. so keep in mind recording rights don’t belong to the artists in the US https://twitter.com/almostdita/status/1355379442034614272
