Search found 5 matches

by rblmusic
Sat Jun 28, 2008 10:11 am
Forum: Music Copyright
Topic: performers rights - mechanicals
Replies: 7
Views: 18601

Hi Lee-Anne. In a nutshell - every member of the band should join PPL (but don't expect any money unless you get a hit single!).

I can't see the need for MCPS as you're self-released.

Because of the way their deadlines work, there's no point joining PRS for a few months. You won't lose any money ...
by rblmusic
Fri Jun 27, 2008 6:07 pm
Forum: Music Copyright
Topic: performers rights - mechanicals
Replies: 7
Views: 18601

I keep hitting blank walls with my question about mechanicals for performers. I know it's partly satisfied by a record company's contract with an artist, but that doesn't usually have any royalties provision for session musicians etc.

Peter
by rblmusic
Fri Jun 27, 2008 6:05 pm
Forum: Music Copyright
Topic: performers rights - mechanicals
Replies: 7
Views: 18601

Re: PPL/PRS/MCPS

I know that this was an old post, but if you guys are still around I'd love to hear your experiences with these royalty collection agencies.

I am considering registering but have my doubts/concerns.

I'd appreciated any advice/experience that you can give me on sorting out the pros/cons of ...
by rblmusic
Mon Dec 17, 2007 4:32 pm
Forum: Music Copyright
Topic: performers rights - mechanicals
Replies: 7
Views: 18601

What I mean is:

for writers / composers:

performance / broadcast royalties = PRS
mechanical royalties = MCPS

for performers:

performance / broadcast royalties = PPL
mechanical royalties = ????????

Does the Copyright Act not give mechanical rights to performers?

Thanks

Peter Rowan
by rblmusic
Sun Dec 16, 2007 7:24 pm
Forum: Music Copyright
Topic: performers rights - mechanicals
Replies: 7
Views: 18601

performers rights - mechanicals

I know that performers are entitled to income via PPL for broadcasts of performances. Why is there no equivalent of MCPS for performers in respect of mechanical reproductions of their performances?