MPLC License

[Sam91111]

We're looking for some advice on the MPLC license.

We're a small sports centre which is part of a comprehensive school. We do not wish to broadcast films or television, either to our customers or to our staff. We own no televisions but have two desktop computers on the front desk which are for work purposes only.

On the basis of our ownership of these two computers we are being told by the MPLC we need a license. They've explained we need to buy one so that we're covered just in case a member of staff streams a film or television from one of our computers. I've explained that this would be against our Internet Usage Policy but they've told me we're still liable if one of our staff does this and could be prosecuted as a result.

I wanted to find out if this really is the case? I'm a little suspicious because it would imply every single business with a working internet connection would need to buy a license. The MPLC staff were also quite aggressive on the phone and disbelieving when I told them we don't own a television.

 

[The Byre]

You definitely do not need an MPLC licence and the call centre that is working for them obviously do not understand who does require a license and when and what for.

1. You are part of a curriculum-based school and therefore totally exempt.

2. You only require a license for the actual showing of films to the public and the licensing body must represent the specific films that you want to show. MPLC is a private agency and cannot issue licences for all films, just those it represents.

3. These licences are for PUBLIC viewing. Someone streaming a film for private viewing (albeit against your in-house policies) is not subject to the laws governing public viewing of copyright material.

4. Prosecutions are for criminal offences. They can litigate, but not bring criminal prosecutions!

 

[Sam91111]

You definitely do not need an MPLC licence and the call centre that is working for them obviously do not understand who does require a license and when and what for.

1. You are part of a curriculum-based school and therefore totally exempt.

2. You only require a license for the actual showing of films to the public and the licensing body must represent the specific films that you want to show. MPLC is a private agency and cannot issue licences for all films, just those it represents.

3. These licences are for PUBLIC viewing. Someone streaming a film for private viewing (albeit against your in-house policies) is not subject to the laws governing public viewing of copyright material.

4. Prosecutions are for criminal offences. They can litigate, but not bring criminal prosecutions!

Thanks!

Though I would clarify that we are a separate limited company to the school. Not sure what difference that makes.

They have now told us the only way to get out of paying is to block all websites that stream their member's content and provide evidence of this! Any idea what my next step should be?

 

[Root 66 Woodshop]

simple

copy & paste - then email to them...

1. You are part of a curriculum-based school and therefore totally exempt.

2. You only require a license for the actual showing of films to the public and the licensing body must represent the specific films that you want to show. MPLC is a private agency and cannot issue licences for all films, just those it represents.

3. These licences are for PUBLIC viewing. Someone streaming a film for private viewing (albeit against your in-house policies) is not subject to the laws governing public viewing of copyright material.

4. Prosecutions are for criminal offences. They can litigate, but not bring criminal prosecutions!

All factual

 

[The Byre]

I had better explain what is going on with these people and with MCPS, PLL, PRS and a few other agencies.

Call centres that specialise in this kind of work go touting for trade and do the heavy sell to as many agencies as possible, promising a vast increase in license fees. Someone at the agency thinks "Hey, that's a good idea. We'll sign up for a few years and see how it goes.!"

That's when the unpleasant calls to totally unsuitable targets begin. SMEs and small independent shops come first - they are easier to intimidate with pure BS. Then the complaints begin and the agency realises that they have signed an idiotic and open-ended contract. They cannot stop the calls and the call centre wants money for every fish they catch.

The call centre goes out of its way to misrepresent the law governing whatever it is that is being licensed or permitted. Just owning a computer, any computer - or even a cellphone - means that you must be playing music, watching films and stealing copyrighted material left, right and centre! All totally BS.

But the owners of the call centre have the agencies by the balls. The agency cannot make any public statement that it is all rubbish or a large part of their clients who are paying rightfully will use that as a sign that they need no longer pay. New money is coming in, so they smile sweetly and put up with the very bad public image that those calls are creating.

Yes, you must get a suitable license for the showing of films and other moving images, either directly from the copyright owner or from their agents - who are not necessarily MPLC. If Joe Blow makes a movie and you want to show that movie at your film club, pub, youth club, hotel, shop, zoo or any other public place, you need the permission of one Mr. Joe Blow - and nobody else!

Having an MPLC license will not help you in any way if what you are showing is not registered with MPLC, but with the international market leader 'Filmbank-Media'.

These licences are there to enable screenings in a variety of non-theatrical venues such as community film groups, entertainment venues, public buildings, art centres, museums, libraries, hotels, ferries and trains. The agency can provide you with posters, film clips and trailers and other promotional material and merchandise. They can also provide films for your public screenings BEFORE they are released on BR and DVD and shortly after the theatrical release.

They can provide the movie as a BR or as a DCP (digital cinema package) and provide a whole range of technical services and technical advice on screening and sound.

To claim that you must have a general public viewing licence because you own a computer is absurd, dishonest, deceptive and a gross misrepresentation of the law. It may actually constitute the committing of the criminal offence of obtaining money by false pretences.

 

[paulears]

Totally agree, but it's also possible the school's licence for all things copyright would extend to all activities on their premises anyway?

Copyright compliance is always something discovered after a deed has been done really. You don't, as the Byre says, need a licence because you could watch a movie, you need one when you do. Any agency can take action if they have the rights when you've done something and they find out about it, or you could pay every single person or organisation who will take your money, often for the same product! However, if you did pay these people, then only their rights holder are covered, and if you accidentally allow members of staff to stream something that belongs to someone else, then again you're in the same position.

As it happens I'm a firm believer in paying for what you use, rights wise, but this is too extreme, even for me. If I was going to pipe video streams to monitors, I'd do it properly, but paying for something people might do, is ridiculous.

 

[The Byre]

It gets even worse - I have been told that some of these call centres have absolutely NO RELATIONSHIP with the agency they purport to represent. They try to gather together a number of potential licenses and sell them to the agency.

They give themselves away as Dewee, Cheetem & Howe call centres by stating "I am calling on behalf of the XXX agency." or "I am calling for XXX"

In that case, ask them if they work for XXX. Ask them to state clearly "My name is Joe Bloggs and I am a full-time employee of the XXX agency."

If they cannot fulfil that simple request, put the phone down.

 

[Sam91111]

I got in touch with Buy with Confidence (MPLC are members of their scheme) and they confirmed we don't need a licence and will be forwarding the complaint to Trading Standards.

MPLC have now also conceded we don't need a licence and have said there was some "miscommunication" with the member of staff we spoke to.

 

[Sam91111]

It gets even worse - I have been told that some of these call centres have absolutely NO RELATIONSHIP with the agency they purport to represent. They try to gather together a number of potential licenses and sell them to the agency.

They give themselves away as Dewee, Cheetem & Howe call centres by stating "I am calling on behalf of the XXX agency." or "I am calling for XXX"

In that case, ask them if they work for XXX. Ask them to state clearly "My name is Joe Bloggs and I am a full-time employee of the XXX agency."

If they cannot fulfil that simple request, put the phone down.

On a side note, the member of staff I was dealing with used a @mplc email address to follow up after the initial phone call