PRS - working from home ???

[geoffb]

Just had a letter from the performing rights saying I should pay a license fee.

We run our company from our lounge .......
sometimes we have the tv / radio on in the background (mainly the TV)

do I need a license ?

Geoff

 

[james_firmsites]

Do you have staff? If no then don't worry as it's just the PRS trying to make money.

http://www.prsformusic.com/users/businessesandliveevents/Pages/DoIneedalicence.aspx

http://www.businessbrainstorming.co.uk/expert-business-advice/print?id=115
"What About Working from Home?"

PRS does not usually charge a licence fee where:

• You have your home office in a private residence. That is, an individual working on their own in their home office with others who are permanently resident at that address. However, if you have colleagues who work with you (who live elsewhere) or customers/clients coming to see you (and music is played at these times), then this is not exempt and a licence fee is payable.
• You are a lone worker - workplaces with only one worker, where music is not made available to any visitors or customers at the premises.
• Personal portable devices. For example, where your staff listen to music or the radio through personal headphones on an MP3 player. Whatever is being listened to should only be audible to the individual through the headset attached to their device and not to any other individual in the workplace."

 

[geoffb]

No staff - do I contact them or ignore the letter

 

[james_firmsites]

Ignore them I would, they may send someone eventually (who can you can 'politely' ask to leave as by their own rules your not required to pay) but most people think they just send these letters out to hope people pay up without argument.

 

[RapidFormations]

As above, as long as you don't have employees working from your home or regularly have clients round for meetings in your home (with music playing) then there is no reason you should need to pay a license. They probably won't follow it up.

 

[paulears]

If you write to them, stating the position, your letter would be considered as evidence no unlicensed activity is taking place. They can also do this on the phone. PRS visits are expensive for them and unlikely to happen except where major revenue avoidance is likely. PRS and PPL who both have a right to collect money for their members seem to use mailing lists as their prime source of contact. If you ignore the letter, then at some point you will get another, and best practice is to simply tell them you don't owe them anything. A business who doesn't respond looks a more likely subject to investigate, doesn't it. You don't need the hassle, so just say you don't use any music that has a copyright implication.

 

[james_firmsites]

If you write to them, stating the position, your letter would be considered as evidence no unlicensed activity is taking place. They can also do this on the phone. PRS visits are expensive for them and unlikely to happen except where major revenue avoidance is likely. PRS and PPL who both have a right to collect money for their members seem to use mailing lists as their prime source of contact. If you ignore the letter, then at some point you will get another, and best practice is to simply tell them you don't owe them anything. A business who doesn't respond looks a more likely subject to investigate, doesn't it. You don't need the hassle, so just say you don't use any music that has a copyright implication.

While I agree, I don't see why they should do them any favours given the way the PRS throw their weight around. They can't charge any thing and the only time/money they will waste is their own. Perhaps I am the only one who takes a dim view of the PRS methods...

 

[paulears]

Simply because they have the right to charge people who use copyright material without permission. Not liking it doesn't really come into it. Whenever copyright is talked about somebody always objects on principle - and decries PRS's attempts to collect money for the members they serve. I really do understand people objecting to having to pay what they feel is a kind of unwelcome tax, and maybe even objecting to PRS's tactics - but nobody EVER has a suggestion for any other way to collect money that is legally owed to the owners of the copyright. Phone calls and letters are pretty well it. A few visits to shops in towns and that's pretty well it.

TV licenses are to be decriminalised meaning the BBC may well have to start doing what PRS and PPL do.

I don't see why they should do them any favours given the way the PRS throw their weight around.

If you consider PRS to be debt collectors for people who are owed money, then they could be much worse - I consider a few letters and phone calls pretty 'light' treatment for people attempting to use a product they are not entitled to. Many people will not be breaking the rules, but sadly, plenty of people want music free.

 

[ThePublisher]

I had a letter from PRS several years after starting my business. I ignored it and a few days later they phoned. I explained I work from home on my own and they went away and I never heard from them again.

 

[cjd]

Ignoring them will make you a target, just explain your situation and they'll go away.

 

[Socio South West]

When you contact them to explain, make sure you also ask that they remove your details from their database.

 

[james_firmsites]

Ignoring them will make you a target, just explain your situation and they'll go away.

It's a fair point, would probably be easier to go to them.

 

[geoffb]

so the general consensus is to phone them and explain that I work from home, and hope that if they ever phone 'Jeremy Kyle' isn't on in the background