online music com - APRA

CREATIVE COMMONS
Scot Morris, Director International Relations, APRA|AMCOS & Kirti Jacobs, Communications, APRA|AMCOS
Surely, no-one in the world has felt the
impact of the internet more than
songwriters. From creation and
distribution, to connection with fans –
there’s been a fast and furious explosion
of opportunity and risk which has worked
for some (think The Arctic Monkeys, Sick
Puppies, Radiohead, The Grateful Dead),
burned others and left many more
wondering in its wake.
Collecting societies the world over, like
APRA|AMCOS, have been dealing with the
issues of online music use since the early
days. Keen to assert the right of their music
creator members to be paid for the use of their
works in emerging digital media, they’ve
focused on developing and implementing new
digital licences that enable music use online,
track and monitor that use, secure payment
and seek to protect the integrity of the works.
Creative Commons stepped into this space a
few years ago, claiming to offer an “alternative”
way of licensing.
In this article we explore some of the
differences between the notion of licensing by
collecting societies like APRA|AMCOS and
those offered by Creative Commons – and what
these differences mean for music creators.
Some background on Creative Commons
The Creative Commons (CC) movement began
a few years ago in the US when Stanford
University Constitutional Law Professor,
Laurence Lessig, acted in a case challenging
the US provisions extending the duration of
copyright.
In defeat, he developed a set of standard
online “licences” that encouraged creators to
give away certain copyright rights to the world
at large. These “licences” were based on
principles of “open software licensing”, but
they applied to other materials such as music,
art and film. Academics in other jurisdictions
have sought to adapt these licences to local
laws and conditions – this is known as the
iCommons project.
Is CC an alternative to copyright?
No – nor is the movement in favour of
abolishing copyright. It claims to be an
alternative way of “licensing” the copyright in
creative works. However it is not the kind of
licensing service typically offered by APRA,
where a copyright owner is able to monitor
use, negotiate payment and conditions for use.
Under a CC Licence, creators give up
certain aspects of their hard-won exclusive
rights for free, forever.
Under copyright law, it is generally the
creator’s right to decide if, how and when their
works may be copied, adapted, distributed,
performed, broadcast or made available to the
public. The creator is also entitled to negotiate
a payment for this use. Copyright recognises
that there is a commercial value to creative
works and grants the creator the exclusive
right to exploit those works and share in the
profits third parties make from the works.
Creators, who apply a CC “licence” to their
work, give up control over some of these rights
and offer all people free and legal access to
their works so they can be used for “noncommercial”
and sometimes “commercial”
purposes. These terms are not defined in the
“licences” and are at the crux of the difficulties
and confusion created in the market place by
CC “licences”.
Once a CC “licence” is applied to your work,
it cannot be revoked. CC does not monitor or
control how your works may be used, adapted,
distributed, copied or performed.
How does a Creative Commons
Licence work?
Individual creators can attach one of various
types of CC “licence” to their work – licences
are downloaded from the CC website. It is
estimated there are currently over 200 different
versions of CC licences in circulation around
the world. The majority of musicians who use
CC licences seek to retain their “commercial
rights”. However, while there are CC licences
purporting to reserve commercial rights, CC
doesn’t assist with this nor explains how such
rights can be administered in practice.
Can I use both APRA and CC licences?
You may not be able to apply a CC licence to
your work if you have a pre-existing agreement
with a music publisher or a collecting society.
THE POSSIBLE PERILS OF ONLINE
Richard Mallett, Director Recordings & Online, APRA|AMCOS
APR AP MAY 2008
10
It won’t be news to anyone
reading this article that the
internet has opened up the
number of opportunities available
to songwriters for the dissemination
of music. However,
what appears to be news is the
number of marketing and other
companies who have cottoned
onto this concept and are
entering this space to ‘help’ to
promote artists.
Submitting your song to a
competition may get your music
heard by a wider audience or it may
not, but it is very important that you
read the terms and conditions that
you are asked to sign. You need to
make sure you are not giving away
rights that you have already
assigned, or that you don’t want to
give away. Just as you would seek
legal advice when signing a
recording or publishing contract – it
may pay you to do the same before
signing or agreeing to the terms
and conditions for an online music
competition.
APRA isn’t against such
competitions; we see that they
may present benefits. Indeed we
are currently in discussions with a
number of parties regarding the
appropriate wording for their
contracts and to allow APRA
members, who want to submit
works to a competition, to be able
to do so without breaching their
pre-assigned APRA rights. Ideally
it would be great to have the
operators come to us first, so we
can work with them prior to
launch.
In the meantime, here are a few
things to look out for.