PPL Licence

[alipali]

Hi, I spoke to a solicitor today, after PPL have ignored my letter and sent my invoice straight to a debt recovery agency! He told me not to pay a penny, they haven't listened to a word I said as I don't play music! My solicitor said they are a load of bullies and just keep sending them letters - which I have now sarted invoicing them for !!!

 

[Davek0974]

That's excellent, keep us posted here.

BTW the PRS don't do cold calls, it's by appointment only so nnaturally the radio will be off when they visit

 

[UKSBD]

Start a campaign against them.

If you find everyone who paid for a licence between 2005 and 2009 and got them to claim back what they overpaid it could cost them millions of £'s

Nice little way of generating a lot of commission for anyone with the inclination to set up a claim back plan

 

Also, does anyone know of prosecutions being successfully brought to court by PPL?

Nope they are a bunch of scammers.

Earl

 

[UKSBD]

Nope they are a bunch of scammers.

Earl

maybe we should set up a joint UKBF claim back scheme?

Have you seen the figures for how much people might have been overpaying for 5 years?

instead of having PPI refferal sites we might see a load of PPL overpayment refferal sites

I would love to know what the figures are for people who never claimed.

 

[Dorkins]

I posted on this subject on the 16 of August, I have now received a letter from Oriel demanding the payment as I have "not responded to PPLs several attempts to contact me", hand on heart I can honestly say there has been no contact from them. I have been tempted to pay just to get rid of the aggravation but reading the later posts here spurs me on to battle further! I agree that something concrete needs to be done about these bully boy tactics and that moaning about it is not going to get us anywhere, is there not a legal bod out there who can give us a bit of freeby advice? second thoughts maybe freeby is a step too far :redface:

 

[mac4k]

We run a small Teashop and Village Store. We took a concious decision not to play music to the public or our two part time employees, so therefore never applied for a music licence. A couple of years ago we were harassed by the PRS who insisted that because we had a radio in our kitchen (which is also our domestic kitchen, we live on the premises) that we needed a licence. After a long drawn out battle we finally got them to agree we didn't need a licence, this was after we put things in writing to them. We thought at this point that the matter was resolved.

In August we received a phone call from PPL (who I had never heard of) I admitted over the telephone to having a radio in our kitchen but explained to them that we didn't play music publicly, it was only used by us in our time. Within 2 days we received an invoice for last year this year and a surcharge. After several telephone conversations disputing this we felt like we were getting nowhere. Their staff are extremely arrogant and do not listen to what you say. We have since e-mailed them twice asking for them to state on the invoice for that we are being billed for simply having stereo equipment and our premises and no other reason. We also asked them to clarify what their definition of a public performance and public space is. We have specifically asked for a written response. We finally got a telephone call last week, where I insisted that I did not want to talk to them over the phone but would rather them clarify things in writing. (They seem very reluctant to do this). We have finally got a very ambiguous e-mail from them which does not answer our questions.

If we played music to the public then I would gladly pay a licence, but we do not. We are taking the matter up with our local MP.

I have read so many negative things about both the PRS and PPL, it looks like at least three business federations have questioned their tactics, but they seem to be able to continue. The law needs to be less ambiguous, there needs to be only one organisation dealing with music licencing, business owners need to be made more aware of the facts and they need to be better regulated. I don't know of any other agency that can ring you out of the blue and demand x amount of money and then surcharge you for something that you could not possibly have been aware of.

I have noticed there is an e-petition on the government website, it doesn't quite say everything I would want to say but I think its a worthwhile thing to sign.

 

[Dorkins]

The link to this petition is:

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/

then put in ppl

 

[gordonthegofor]

The link to this petition is:

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/

then put in ppl

Both petitions showing up when searching ppl will fail in my opinion, as previous petitions have in the past

One of the possible arguments that might work is to campaign for the copyright holders not to be allowed to charge an additional fee to business for "Non subscription based public broadcasts where they are relayed to the public without an intentional delay"
based on the premiss that the broadcaster has already paid royalties to broadcast to the public

 

[Deleted member 59730]

I'm sorry but the government is planning to go in the other direction. They plan for Extended Collective Licensing for all copyright works. Have copyright words on your website, pay a licence. Likewise photos, film, music etc etc. They plan for this to be run by commercial organisations at a profit. (At present the PRS is not for profit).

 

[gordonthegofor]

I'm sorry but the government is planning to go in the other direction. They plan for Extended Collective Licensing for all copyright works. Have copyright words on your website, pay a licence. Likewise photos, film, music etc etc. They plan for this to be run by commercial organisations at a profit. (At present the PRS is not for profit).

As far as I can ascertain the ECL would not affect my proposal of removing the need for companies to have a licence for "Non subscription based public broadcasts where they are relayed to the public without an intentional delay" as the broadcasters would be paying the royalties.

My problem is with companies having to pay a royalty licence if the public can hear a radio on there premises given that the radio broadcaster has already paid a fee for the public to hear the broadcast

 

[Bootyroo]

Has anyone come across my situation. I have a small beauty salon and work alone. I have a TV, for which I pay a licence fee and PPL are still demanding I pay their invoice because music comes through my TV. So the television companies pay for the use of the music, and I pay my licence fee why would I need to pay PPL?
I am being harassed by them 3/4 times daily and they are taking up so much of my time. Since I told them they are harassing me they have stopped phoning and sent an invoice.

 

[Davek0974]

AFIK, if you have a TV, you will need a TV license, a PRS license & a PPL license, they really try and cream you for having TV.

How did they become aware you have a TV? Was it a cold call, phishing phone call, did you admit to having a TV??

 

[Dorkins]

If you have a beauty salon, how are you alone? do you not have customers? not being funny but that question is the whole basis of your concerns.

 

[alipali]

Hi everyone,
I challenged the PPL. I spoke to a solicitor and told him PPL had no proof of a radio in my shop and he said stand your ground and don't give in to the threats. I started invoicing them everytime I wrote them a letter! They are so unprofessional they just rang, after a lot of tooing and froing, and left a message with my colleague to say all invoices had been cancelled and I didn't owe them anything, not even a letter!

So stand your ground everyone and don't let them bully you.

 

[jubblybubbly]

Many thanks to everyone for all your advice -I have just reveived a call today from PPL and thought I would find out as much about them as possible - this is my first time on UKBF and have found it very helpful. I will now await the written information from them and hope it isn't an invoice.

 

[FirstClassVirtualOffice]

Agents acting on behalf of PPL will "mystery shop" your premises if public.
They will gain evidence such as photos (using covert camers on handbags, etc) of cd players, radios, stereos, speakers, etc. They will also record the music. They will pretend to get their hair cut in a salon to record background music for example. The expenses are paid to the agent in order to get this evidence. The PPL are then armed with their evidence if you dispute their invoice so you cough up. If they cant get any evidence they dont have a leg to stand on.

 

[littlebiz]

It does gall me that PRS who call themselves a 'not for profit' have directors earning £480,000 pa.

I believe PRS successfully prosecuted Kwikfit for an employee listening to a car radio as he worked on it. It's yet another headache for small businesses, sadly.

 

[keat63]

We had the letters "Apparently they tried unsuccessfully to contact us" and then passed it Oriel, who then started sending us letters.
We just ignored thier letters and threats of legal action.
My boss said, "Wait until they send us a court letter and then we'll pay, right at the very last minute, make them work for the money"
The last letter we had from them, my boss wrote in large letters "WE DO NOT HAVE A RADIO" and sent it back.
We've heard nothing for at least 3 or 4 months.

 

[Christine Hough]

check this out
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17379436

 

[Davek0974]

check this out
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17379436

Thanks for that.

There are so many things in that report that make it look like all small businesses should be able to get off the fees.

In my case it would be not playing to the public, limited number of listeners, no public access anyway...

Very interesting.

 

[Jim B Pennington]

you need some more thanks for this post, Christine. It seems to be best answer so far because there hasn't been a post on this PPL thread since!!

 

[Christine Hough]

Cheers, you've made my day!

 

[cockailer311]

one of my djs has had a phone call about something to do with a ppl licence but in any of the tutorial on the net and in the shoutcast pages forums and advice pages there is nothing said about it does anyone know what it is

 

[Davek0974]

I'm pretty certain any serious DI would know everything about public performance licenses etc.

Have you checked the ppl / PRS websites maybe?

 

[khalid1]

one of my djs has had a phone call about something to do with a ppl licence but in any of the tutorial on the net and in the shoutcast pages forums and advice pages there is nothing said about it does anyone know what it is

According to www.ppllicence.co.uk

"The PPL company is a company that is tasked with the duty of providing licences and collecting licencing fees from individuals and business premises that plays music in public. The term “In public” means performing or playing music from radio, television, CDs or from the internet to an audience outside the domestic circle. Failure to obtain a licence may lead to infringement of the copyright law."

I guess this differs from the PRS licence.

 

[smutpedler]

My father owns two metal fabrication businesses and I work for both organisations. A few weeks ago a sales lady from PPL called me on the wrong number for the company she was after and then proceeded to explain why I need to give them money for a music license. She advised me that they would be sending invoices for the licence to my email address provided. At the end of the call she asked if I needed clarification on why we had to pay so I told her I was on their website looking up the applicable legislation and that; as a health & safety officer, I was very familiar with legal terminology and I would read up on the law myself.

She hung up on me and has never sent me these invoices.

IMHO; it's a scam! If they had a legal grounding we would have been invoiced by now. She knew that they couldn't do anything to anyone who knows their rights. Frankly, I was going to refuse to pay until I had researched the law myself anyways but the fact that the call ended then and nothing has been received from them since makes me feel genuinely bad for anyone who has been bullied into parting with monies by these wannabe gangsters. Stand up to them and see what happens!

I haven't actually read up on the copywright laws or looked into case law as to whether anyone has actually ever been prosecuted for using a radio at work (as I was going to when necessary) but why hang up on me and not invoice me if that's the law? Let's face it; if the law says your entitled to money - your gona take it!

 

[Mike at BBA]

We've been harrassed by PPL too. Seems totally unfair! I've just now written to them quoting the following case : [FONT=&quot]In March 2012 (Case C-135/10), the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled on the meaning of ‘in public’ in the case of Societa Consortile Fonografici v Marco Del Corso.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The ECJ ruled here that "the public" refers to "an indeterminate number of potential listeners and a fairly large number of persons". They concluded that a dentist’s surgery did not constitute ‘public’. They also considered that, to be an infringement, some degree of profit making should be involved.[/FONT]
I'll let you know if I hear back

 

[Davek0974]

It's worth a punt, go for it

I would argue that our factory is not public as its not open to the public but hey-ho.

 

[Heron]

I know this is a late reply but its something I have been looking into lately. I have looked up PPLs role and found that "A PPL licence gives the licence holder the permission to play recorded music from PPL's repertoire (the vast majority of commercially released music in the UK). Playing music that is not in copyright does not require a PPL licence". This was my understanding - I can play music that is not signed to a label therefore not copyright. Also it is worth nothing that it is only music within PPL's repertoire that is subject to the fee. So perhaps a list of their repertoire needs requesting!

 

[Christine Hough]

Just because music is not distributed by a lablel does not mean it is not copyrighted. All artistic endeavors are automatically copyright of the originator.

However if the music is not on their list, I expect you can avoid paying them. You may need though to pay the artists directly unless they give licence for it to be used by others.

 

[Nord20]

I run a Yoga studio and I actually phoned PRS when we first opened (ah, the naivety) and explained that we wanted to play music in some of our classes. They made me work out exactly how many classes we wanted to play music in, then said they would charge us for each and every class - the bill came to over £1000 a year!

Funnily enough, we play very little music in our classes, which is bad for us, bad for our customers and bad for the music industry. Completely pointless.

 

[Mike at BBA]

I received a reply from PRS about the Italian dentist case, saying that in English law, Jennings v Stephens was the crucial case and taking quotes from it to support their case. I hope to get a copy of the full ruling of this so I can see if they are taking anything out of context.
PPL have simply not replied!

 

[Heron]

Hi Christine. You are now my font of knowledge!! I have spoken to a guy that promotes new bands. He is now talking to some of them about composing a CD to play in the shop. I really don't think at this stage they are copyright. I am just trying to get them exposure because that is part of the ethos of what I am trying to achieve. So is it anything I play or do I just have to have their personal permission?

 

[Christine Hough]

Copyright automatically belongs to the artists. there is no qualifying period.

They are quite at liberty to agree to you playing it for free, and often it is sensible to do so. In this case, you both benefit.

I suspect they would be wise to put it into writing in case they become hugely successful and other people play it without paying them because you did.

Flattered as I am, I am sure there are more knowledgeable people than me on the forum, but I am pretty sure about the copyright belong to the originator automatically.

 

[Deleted member 59730]

copyright also belongs to the composer at the moment of creation.

 

[Guess Who]

PPL Called a chap i know asked him if he used a radio in his garage, yes he said, so you need a licence, ok he paid, within a week PRS called him they also asked about a radio, yes i have a radio and i have a licence too, not one of our licence they said, so he had to then get 2 licence

When they called me i said no radio so go and pester someone else & i dont need a licence

if you dont join in they cant touch you

 

[Claire Dymond]

There's a moral to all this, unless someone is a customer don't give out any information whatsoever, tell them to write to you if they have a proposal. This includes the pretend directory companies who just want your details to sell on to people who will ring and try and rip you off.

Often people who ring up are just after their wages and that includes the H&S guy from the council who I told that he could come in if he a got a court order, never heard from him again.

This morning I had a call from one of those Telecoms review companies wanting to call round so I just say the same thing every time,"This company does not respond to unsolicited calls of any kind."

 

[imack]

I run a small business and play music which is not subject to copyright and therefor does not need a Licence from either PPL or PRS. Such music can be easily downloaded from copyright-free music sites on the web. This has not stopped both PPL and PRS from harassing us for payments. PPL even demanded that we give them a list of the music we play so they can check it is copyright-free! I refused and they have now instructed Debt Recovery Agents. I certainly will not be paying.

These companies are extortionists and it's time something was done about them.