Organisations

Several times I mentioned GEMA (Germany’s collection society) and hassles artists as well as event managers and other people are having in dealing with them. Yet, all2gethernow’s panel on collection societies made me feel some relief in looking forward.




Continue reading "Germany's Collection Society GEMA Having a..." »

[English translation of part 3 is coming soon. Due to organisational tasks at all2gethernow, it will take an additional one or two days to translate. Since the text is available in German already, I just posted it in advance for all German readers.]

Teil 1&2 findet Ihr hier:
“Die GEMA-Vermutung als Markteintrittsbarriere (Teil 1/3)”
“Die GEMA-Vermutung als Markteintrittsbarriere (Teil 2/3)”

Glaube ist gut, Wissen ist besser.

Gleichgültig, wie das Urteil eines (notwendigen) Sachverständigen zum Thema aussieht, der Beleg für die Verfügbarkeit einer hinreichenden Größe frei lizensierten Materials muss vor Gericht erbracht werden. Denn die GEMA-Vermutung ist gängige Rechtsprechung und wird erst vor dem BGH endgültig widerlegt werden können. Aber die Schwierigkeit liegt in der Nachprüfbarkeit. Der GEMA liegen neben ihren stets aktuellen Geschäftszahlen natürlich auch die Zahlen der zu verwertenden Titel vor - wo aber sind die belegbaren Zahlen frei lizenzierter Stücke?

Aufmerksamkeit.

Darüber hinaus hat die GEMA Pressesprecher und Lobbyisten. Nicht die Künstler, die ihre Werke GEMA-frei anbieten. Für die Verbraucher existieren letztere Künstler nicht. Selbst wenn international renommierte Künstler wie Trent Reznor oder die Smashing Pumpkins Titel unter Creative Commons veröffentlichen - die Masse des Publikums nimmt es nicht wahr. Es erscheint unwichtig. Die meiste Beachtung für diese Aktionen, Marketingstrategien und teilweise auch Geschäftsmodelle wird den Künstlern durch das Web zuteil. Continue reading "The GEMA Presumption as an Entry Barrier (Pt. 3/3)" »

For parts 1&3, please go here:
Part 1, Part 3


There are two issues, and each one constitutes a well functioning entry barrier in itself. But, in conjunction they are seamlessly joint: The GEMA presumption, and closely linked the free licence composers’ and providers’ scattered acting.

Why are they that closely linked?

First off, GEMA is responsible for maintaining the GEMA presumption. Secondly, GEMA does not allow members to license selected works under Creative Commons. Free licence composers are kept out of the market without having any organisation representing them. It is plain to see why Germany’s collection society does not want to offer billing and administration of Creative Commons licences (although they could get a good revenue by doing so). But, in the end this results in increasing the demand an alternative to today’s common collection society. Latest by launch of an alternative platform, organisation or institution the GEMA presumption is going to fall. Now this isn’t at all what GEMA wants. Continue reading "The GEMA Presumption as an Entry Barrier (Pt. 2/3)" »

For parts 2&3, please go here:
Part 2, Part 3

Note.

Quite often, in any part of this article I’m using the term “free licensed” or “free licences”. That might be a bit misleading. Please take your time to understand it in the meaning of “independently licensed from any collection society (in particular GEMA)”. It does not mean that for example Creative Commons licences are always free of charge. The range of Creative Commons allows for different licences (in contrast to GEMA by the way).

Most of them (at least with music) will probably be free of charge for private use. However, commercial use in most cases depends on certain conditions and the explicit permission of the author plus paying a licence fee.

I’m aware of the fact that the line between private use and commercial use is not that clear, and it is not explicitly defined by Creative Commons. The definition rather relies on the author being the licenser. But in case you are about to license a work - just ask the author if the purpose you are intending is considered private or commercial use. The metadata of any work licensed under Creative Commons should allow for a contact option.

A slight case of overbombing.

Unfortunately, usage of content licensed by Creative Commons or other free licences in Germany pretty often fails because of the so called GEMA presumption. As of now, due to this presumption, if played, performed or copied for commercial use or in public in Germany, every work of music has to be reported to German collection society GEMA. This applies for composers playing their own music as well as for songs not licensed with GEMA - say, Creative Commons. This is confirmed and supported by German jurisdiction.
Continue reading "The GEMA Presumption as an Entry Barrier (Pt. 1/3)" »

I promised to, so I’m delivering. One thing to start with: This whole GEMA (Germany’s collections society) apparatus of rules, conditions and rates really is complex. If I get anything wrong - be it either to GEMA’s advantage or disadvantage - please tell me and I’m going update my article. Email me or simply post a reply below. I gladly will stand corrected.

I don’t know what it looks like with ASCAP et al. - I can’t imagine it to be worse than here.

First off, everybody being a member of GEMA who wants to address any of his problems with GEMA in court runs into an essential problem. Legally, it’s a registered society. That implies at least one important aspect: Any action by GEMA is based upon its members’ voice which means you - as its member - authorise GEMA’s actions.

But let’s take a closer look.

Continue reading "GEMA Round 2: Tie Your Artists Down by Membership " »

I don’t know whether this one has hit US shores already - or if there is any other country that knows about it. But there’s something going on in Germany.

Again, it’s about licensing. We already had our share of GEMA within the past few weeks (see Rapidshare and Jamendo). Read about it at ContentSphere, or do it over at TechDirt. GEMA, Germany’s only collections society, still is surprisingly entertaining (if you’re into cynism).

But, there’s some uprising fresh breeze, and it’s coming from Germany’s most southward located town: Sonthofen.
Continue reading "Germany's GEMA: Resistance is (not) futile" »

[UPDATE: This article is linked and commented by Michael Masnick on TechDirt].

Sorry if I'm a bit late on this one, but I've taken some days off. However, this one is by far too barefaced to be believed. I'm afraid it's no April fools' joke.

You will remember my article on music distribution platform Jamendo going with Creative Commons. Today, I just read news from a week ago that they are about to integrate a new search tool. It supports promoters, agencies, movie makers and game manufacturers by providing search categories like mood, occasion, genre and language.

Artists participating in Jamendo's distribution model can opt-in for Jamendo PRO. Business customers of Jamendo who would like to make commercial use of tracks offered can purchase licenses within Jamendo PRO. This differs from private customers who may download everything for free. Most importantly, it's an additional source of revenue for artists (and Jamendo) that adds to income from ads.

The new tool helps business people interested in searching for the right music - instead of thoroughly relying on communication and recommendation via Jamendo. Any process like this is destined to be too time consuming.

... and then there's GEMA, Germany's collecting institution.

Continue reading "GEMA vs. Jamendo et al. - Get Money for Nothing" »

Recent articles on this blog featured the problems broadcasting services have to face in the days of the internet. Just take a look at my del.icio.us bookmarks on the right to notice that the death of Project Kangaroo has been the opener to Project Canvas.

Today's informitv newsletter is concluded by a comment by Dr William Cooper, CEO informitv, addressing current issues. It's a brilliant one. Unfortunately, I can't find it anywhere on their site ("resource not found"). So here it is, straight from the newsletter...


Continue reading "Dr William Cooper, CEO informitv, on Challenges..." »

[German version] Actually, this article should have dealt with comparing Germany’s public service broadcasters current position and those of British PBS. I intended to comment on it since on one hand, there had been the turndown of "Project Kangaroo", the BBC’s joint venture with ITV and Channel 4. In Germany, on the other hand, the bill much debated for defining the legal foundations to PBS online integration (12th Amendment Act of Broadcast Treaty, abbr.: 12. RÄStV) had been signed a few months before.

Please notice: It should have. Having a closer look, each one's perspective on the bill whether affected or not, reveals some astonishing aspects. After all, even more it looks like a devastated allotment garden after a lively argument from "Picket Fences".

So what is the point of view of the persons involved? What are the issues the bill deals with it is discussed at primetime? Finally, what is the core of the matter all about?

Eventually, and maybe, there still will be a comparison between Germany and the UK. Let's see.

Digital Distribution and European Commission are expecting

The bill is not born out of anything similar to passionate love. Not really. In early 2005, the European Commission opened proceedings against Germany because of filed complaints regarding various aspects of financial regularisations of public broadcasting services.

Services affected, like ARD and ZDF, to a large extent are financed by fees. Recently, they started boosting online activities. This included media archives offering video and audio streaming for free. This was the day the bill was born. Concedings to the European Commission finally served to the closing of the proceedings. Later on, these concedings were to be integrated into the draft.

Continue reading "ARD/ZDF - The Journey Is the Reward: 12. RÄStV" »

4th February 2009 saw a sudden death to promising Project Kangaroo, the BBC's joint venture project in digital distribution along with partners ITV and Channel 4. Regulation had been expected, maybe a halt due to various reasons but certainly not the one issued by Britain's Competition Commission.

The basics of Project Kangaroo had been sketched as early as of 2004. BBC started out developing an IPTV solution for video on demand (VoD), aiming at recycling content. Despite some minor drawbacks, the Integrated Media Player (later known as iPlayer received a warm welcome and enabled a successful entry into digital distribution. In November 2007, the joint venture between BBC, ITV and Channel 4 was announced.

In the British Competition Commission's (CC) news release, CC chairman Peter Freeman calls the project a "threat to competition in this developing market" which "has to be stopped".

Why?

The CC argued the concentrated power of three out of four terrestrial broadcasting services would dominate smaller content providers, creating an online monopoly. In an attempt to urge all participating members to keep their role as competitors, aim was to support the user’s benefit.

One hop back…

I must admit, I was surprised to see the project completely stopped. The most obvious reason the BBC has to get digital is straight forward: Triple play and media convergence have been touted long since. Strategically, broadcast - and this means any broadcast service – has to stake its digital claim threatened by web services like Hulu, Joost, Apple's iTunes and YouTube.

The ubiquitous ease of mobile use can’t be achieved with old skool TV. It is not just for local ubiquity: Any content is available at any time. More importantly, as Trent Reznor does with his audience, it is a must to get interactive and get involved with viewers. The only way out is: go digital, get online and offer a sheer wealth of content otherwise lost in the archives.
Continue reading "BBC: R.I.P. Project Kangaroo - Along Comes Open..." »