The Systemic Torture of Sin Club Patrons

[Chilles]

Chilles. you are missed

 

I enjoy my retirement include calm and peace about this topic because all this was discussed many many times in the past

[AHT]

Well I just went and found Lussian and I asked him if he was open to suggestions for music. He said yes and said you can send him suggestions by two methods:

 

Lussian: https://discord.gg/zFPjDGand use the Sin channel or by a message in the forum!

 

There! Easy peasy!

 

/me sends request for Wire and The Shaggs

[Chilles]

Oh indeed.

Still. You sir are missed

 

Would be a lie to say it wasn't fun

Was a nice experience, Hobby and of course a kind of passion but at least was the responsibility include costs, legal liability alone in the hand of the music hosting owner and this was it all not worth 

 

I do it still but just for private, family and close friends include alexa skill support and some things more, just like the same before with a lot less listeners and costs

[ToxicallySweet]

Why in the world is our music coming from Lussian. *facepalm* Damn I'm really out of touch with all that. When I do log in my music is muted majority of the time, until a friend is like oh yeah i like this song then i'm like ops and start listening lol  

[xdaxx]

This topic in many ways reminds me of the struggles the oft-maligned IMVU went through with people playing music in public rooms.  In the old clients, circa 2007 or so, developers could simply create products that were mp3's and just did.  Violating all sorts of licensing issues (regardless of where they got their recordings from).  Somewhere along the line IMVU (based out of Mountainview, California) got hit pretty hard and instituted a new system that made such development impossible and forced all users to purchase music directly from the IMVU site in an effort to address obvious licensing violations.  These days, regardless of whether you have purchased a copy of a track in your own collection or not, you must purchase it again via imvu to stream it in the client.  Even doing so there are restrictions:  no more than 2 tracks from a particular artist in a play list, and if you are in the US it's quite likely that many tracks you have purchased will not play for people in your room from different regions.  It can suck, but I suppose this is how IMVU is keeping themselves out of trouble these days.  As I haven't gone there in quite some time, i'm not sure if it has changed any, but my guess is that it hasn't.

 

I cannot even fathom (nor do I wish to go down the rabbit hole) of all that is required to be a "legal" DJ, and give all the props in the world to those who do.

 

In my case, when I host and stream music publicly (not often) every commercially available recording I play, I have purchased and exists in my collection as such.  That said, as noble-sounding as that may be, I understand that doesn't address the legality of streaming anything in a public setting.  However, many of my mixes consist of non-commercially available live recordings (ROIO's or "Recording Of Indeterminate/Illegitimate Origin") made by others or myself (old school "taper" who mixed and mastered recordings here) and there is some grey area that can and has been debated for years.  That said, old school "honorable" tapers always went by the notion that if it is not available commercially anywhere, and nobody is gaining or losing a profit (the latter part can be debated) that it is safe to release those recordings.  I suppose I translate that, perhaps incorrectly, in the streaming world as similar.  Again, grey area.

 

Anyway, just my random thoughts on this interesting subject.

 

 

No disrespect taken and the same to you, no disrespect is entailed. Of course. But typically with online radios, in regards to licensing it is impossible to pay every licensing body in the world a license fee for your music, there just won't be any money in it left. It's why typically local licensing bodies (Which are determined by the physical location that the online radio server is based, supply the license to you. This covers listeners to your stream, such as PRS for the UK, they cover this under their licensing acts, as long as the stream radio server location is based in the UK.

 

So if the server was based in germany for example, you wouldn't pay PRS, but GEMA and this will cover the royalties that you pay for the license to the licensing body, to make sure the music you play, which you supply a playlist to, will be paid the royalties due.

 

Edit: There is also the multi-territory license with the PRS that they've partnered with STIM and GEMA, which allows you to stream in the EU for the most part. For a singular license. https://www.prsformusic.com/licences/online-multi-territory-licences

 

Edit 2: The only issue with playing music in public is it's such a grey area. Because if you go by that logic, if someones ringtone goes off in a public place, technically they should pay royalties for that ringtone being played in public. The same if you want to "Show" your friends some new songs you got and you blast it out to your friends in public, it's just impossible to fully license music in the world with the licensing structure we have today. It needs to be reworked and improved, else Music licensing will be so stuck in the older age, that it will be difficult for any companies and venues to have music in their premises, which eventually will cave in on itself and the music industry will have some troubles. But I am not going to go into that, as that's a whole other story.

[Caren]

Jessica used to pay for a license through her dj software, I think? She told me about it once but idk what it was. I got the impression it handled the scary legal details.

 

♡