APRA fees - do they have rights to fine me?

[Deactivated] on 18/12/2014 - 14:02

Hi ozbargainers

We own a hair salon. We got music in the background , TV in the waiting area for our customers. For years there is no problem. Recently Australian Performing Rights Association (APRA) forced us to sign a licence agreement saying we have to pay them licensing fees for the playing of music and TV at our shop.

Now they don't come cheap, we have multiple devices and they want us to pay $400+ annually . It is just another expense we don't need on top of all the pressure we have from economy downturn
Now we are thinking of just ignoring the invoices because they are just daylight robbery, money grabbing exercise.

Has any business owner out there been fined for not paying the fees? Please share your experience.

Entertainment

Related Stores

apraamcos.com.au
apraamcos.com.au

Comments

        • mrmarkau67 on 24/12/2014 - 00:32

          @Amar89:

          You are out by at least a factor of 10. What page are you looking at?

          Here is the link:

          http://www.apraamcos.com.au/media/3596/2013-apra-financial-r…

          On page 6 it shows:

          Revenue: $207,668K
          Royalties paid out: $174,392K

        • RI4V4N on 24/12/2014 - 07:52
          +1

          @mrmarkau67:

          I wouldnt bother talking to him, hes one of those people that thinks he has some kind of god given right to walk over everyone elses hard work, just because the people they have chosen to represent them legally dont work for free.

        • mrmarkau67 on 27/12/2014 - 11:07

          @Amar89:

          So what page did you get those facts from?

    • goraygo on 21/12/2014 - 19:52
      +1

      Also the OP mentioned some musics are foreign. So they are definitely not going to give anything to them.

      • snapper on 22/12/2014 - 00:55
        +2

        This is incorrect. Australia is a signatory to international copyright agreements, so international artists that are played/broadcast here will be paid royalties and if Australian artists are played/broadcast overseas they will be paid royalties too. That is why all countries that are signatories to the copyright agreements have organisations similar to APRA.

    • snapper on 22/12/2014 - 00:53
      +4

      This is a good question. I know that commercial radio stations are required to report what songs they play 100% of the time. Smaller and community radio stations are a smaller percentage, like one month out of the year.
      Commercial radio stations pay a percentage of what they earn from advertising to APRA. APRA then calculate what percentage should be paid to which artists based on how often they are played on air. So basically, the more played an artist is, the more royalties they will earn.
      Commercial radio stations that are music-based are obviously set up to make money from the advertising they sell, and they can charge higher amounts for advertising based on how many people listen to that station at given times (hence the importance of ratings), and obviously the radio stations get people to listen to them by playing popular music. So music is obviously an important factor in the business model. There are other types of radio stations, that focus mainly on talkback, but might occasionally play music. They still require a licence, but it is a different type and I assume pay a different percentage of their advertising revenue.
      Even live performance venues pay a licence that covers artists who perform live music in their venue. This is a different type of licence again - more of a blanket licence that covers the performance of songs in a live venue.
      This is similar to the type of licence that businesses who play music either in their waiting room, or on-hold music, or in their salon, are required to pay for. Obviously the use of music isn't the main way of drawing customers but it does contribute to the customers' experience and the atmosphere.
      I don't know how the fee paid by these smaller businesses is allocated, but that might be a good question to ask APRA? Maybe they take the ratios received from all the commercial radio stations across Australia as the benchmark and distribute all of the licence fees in the same way? The only other option would be to get small business to log every song & artist they played throughout the year - what a tedious task! And the amount of revenue going to those artists would be infinitesimal, it would be a waste of time and effort.

      As for the fee that is charged… well, why not look at it as a percentage of your gross income? That is how commercial radio stations are charged. They pay between 0.054% and 3.76% - which (on a $400 licence) would equate to a gross income of $10638 to $740740 - how does your hair salon compare? I would presume you'd be somewhere in that range.
      I'm not meaning to be rude, but try to view it in perspective. How much is the fee for playing music in your salon compared to all of your other payments?

      And, as others have said, if you don't like the $400 fee they have issued you - don't play music, or only play royalty-free music. See if it affects your business. I hope it wouldn't, but I suspect it would.

      Whether you agree or disagree with the fact that businesses like this are required to pay a fee such as this - it is actually the law. Australia is a signatory to international copyright agreements. And the point of these fees are supposed to be to provide income to artists who have created the music - both written the music and recorded the music (2 separate copyrights - but that story is for another time…) More constructive questions might be like the one above - how much of that ends up going to the artist?

      Sorry if I have gone on for too long! This topic is of great interest to me.

      • TheBird on 25/12/2014 - 12:41

        Just a question. Surely a Radio Station and a Hair Salon should be charged differently, right? The radio stations business is based on the exploitation of the music (mostly), where the hair salon, while still exploiting the music, the primary exploitation is of hair services.

        Just saying, the percentages shouldn't be the same. Or do you disagree with me?

        I also agree, it's an interesting topic.

  • Noblejoker on 19/12/2014 - 14:00

    I agree with the sentiment that artists deserve some payment
    However I think the cost is ridiculous
    $400 per device in a hairdressing salon is stupid
    No wonder no ones pays
    If it was $50 or even $20 everyone would pay and they would get more $$
    I am surprised you got found - they usually target larger public venues like clubs etc

  • backpaqer on 19/12/2014 - 15:54
    -5

    Get speakers that attach to glass outside the premises and run an external cable to them…the glass acts as a speaker, you can hear the music inside the salon…but you are not playing music "inside" and they cannot prove that you are playing the music as it is coming from outside. They'd need to identify who is "playing" the music…but if it is simply an FM radio running off a solar panel - as you aren't paying for batteries or power you could deny any association to the playing of the music and that you're just a simple beneficiary of someone's sick joke.

  • tonyjzx on 19/12/2014 - 17:07
    +9

    just tell then you get all your mp3s off tpb

  • Baysew on 19/12/2014 - 20:02

    How did APRA approach you in the first place, to get you to sign up ?

    • juventino on 20/12/2014 - 01:45
      +1

      someone from APRA probably got a haircut at OP's place

      • MITM on 20/12/2014 - 12:17
        +3

        OP's going to take a haircut on this one.

      • bargdebarg on 20/12/2014 - 23:40
        +2

        They're gonna get a bad haircut when they return…

  • cantstanzya on 20/12/2014 - 02:46
    +8

    Let's face it… Right or wrong, ARPA just wants more money for ARPA.
    The artist probably sees about 4 cents of that $400.

    • mrmarkau67 on 22/12/2014 - 15:31
      +1

      Apra's website says $348. How did you calculate 4 cents?

    • RI4V4N on 24/12/2014 - 07:53

      Must be a nice way to imagine in your head as some kind of logic to not pay someone for their work.

  • [Deactivated] on 20/12/2014 - 04:06
    +13

    Spotify?

    Put up a sign saying "customers are advised to shut their ears or use ear plugs supplied by the counter, music is for the personal enjoyment of the stylist"

  • burningrage on 20/12/2014 - 10:55
    +3

    Either u start playing old classical music like the Metro does or u start playing Korean music or some other foreign music…

    Just an idea

    • King Tightarse on 20/12/2014 - 11:12
      +2

      Actually that's a really good idea. K/Jpop.
      Crisis over. Might go insane doe to "cuto" overload though.

      • scrimshaw on 21/12/2014 - 11:40

        Switch to Indian Pop for that Indian barbershop ambience.

  • mrjames on 20/12/2014 - 12:22
    +2

    Tell them to get (profanity). If they threaten you with legal action then just switch to royalty free music.

  • Baysew on 20/12/2014 - 14:12

    Recently Australian Performing Rights Association (APRA) forced us to sign a licence agreement saying we have to pay them licensing fees for the playing of music and TV at our shop.

    I will ask my question again

    How did APRA approach you in the first place, to get you to sign up ?

    • [Deactivated] on 20/12/2014 - 16:04

      They rang us and said they could hear music playing in the background.

      • [Deactivated] on 20/12/2014 - 19:58
        +9

        How did they know you weren't in your office chilling?

  • timetoquit on 20/12/2014 - 15:56
    +4

    I've been ignoring these 'letters' for over 15 years… cease all communications with them.

    • [Deactivated] on 20/12/2014 - 16:06

      I'm considering to do that and see what can they actually do.
      I don't believe they will want to bother to hire a lawyer to enforce any legal proceedings on small businesses like us

      • timetoquit on 20/12/2014 - 16:12
        +2

        They won't proceed with the small fry. I have a friend who used to be in the nightclub scene, very well known establishment back then, although he had to pay the fees, when I told him about my situation (just like yours) his response was fits of laughter and said to ignore them. Went on to ask me of the names of people who spoke to me, and again in fits of laughter he said tell them from me, to f off and to leave us alone. I obviously didn't do that but I did ignore them and I haven't received any communications from them for the past 2-3 years.

      • cowiie on 20/12/2014 - 16:29

        Don't they normally send a cease and desist letter before legal proceedings occur?

        • whooah1979 on 20/12/2014 - 17:11
          +1

          the way they work reminds me of private car park operators. they contact the shops and hope the owners get scared and pay.

      • xuqi on 21/12/2014 - 00:21
        +4

        Except you've actually signed a 'contract'. Find out the implication of what you've signed up for, and then take it from there…..

        • lisss on 22/12/2014 - 02:23

          Yes, this could change everything. They might not have the power to issue fines but they can enforce a contact, through debt collectors etc.

  • GS9891 on 20/12/2014 - 19:53
    +3

    As someone who's recently taken IP law, yes, and there is a good pile of case law on this. Businesses playing music to customers like bars/etc do need to pay licence fees to either the individual rights holders or these groups that represent many like APRA (much easier).

    • ankor on 23/12/2014 - 18:12

      The question is whether APRA will enforce their rights against the OP, who from the sounds of things is very hesitant to pay any licensing fees. Litigation might not be a commercial decision for APRA, and judging from the mixed and vehement responses here, it will probably not be a popular one either.

  • cowiie on 20/12/2014 - 20:42

    Was listening to the music in coles today… They have their own radio channel called "coles radio". Probs to avoid these issues

    • bargdebarg on 20/12/2014 - 23:42
      +3

      They would have a blanket licence to cover the songs they play

  • garetz on 20/12/2014 - 22:09
    +11

    You signed a contract without legal advice ? you deserve what you get.

  • ozgriff on 20/12/2014 - 23:10
    +7

    I'd get a whole lot of Completely royalty-free music / Non-PRO music.

    Wait for them to come around next time and once again threaten to fine you/take your money. Get them to fill out their paper work stating that they will do this if you do not pay them money. Offer them a free haircut to keep them around whilst you've called the police to have them arrested for extortion/blackmail.

    I'm sure the 'offender' would have no actual idea of the music/artists they are protecting and will go completely outside of their boundaries (real or imaginary).

    btw. this is in jest and not a serious recommendation.

  • Randxyz123 on 20/12/2014 - 23:29
    +1

    You definitely should've spoken to a lawyer before signing anything….

    They rang us and said they could hear music playing in the background.

    How can they tell the difference between playing music off the radio or from a CD/a computer…?

    If it can avoid the issue can you use spotify? That is $12/month

    As you say they are probably targeting small businesses like yours.

    Can the APRA actually legally issue fines? Or are they like those private car park operators…?

    What sort of TV are you playing? Could getting foxtel and playing MTV/ channel V kill 2 birds with one stone?

  • chaubii on 20/12/2014 - 23:30
    -2

    I use to own a small retail business and had the local radio on in the background. It's bloody free to air radio. The radio station already pays everytime they play the song. They gave me that 'the music increases your atmosphere therefore your sales' crock of shit.

    I just ignored them until I got the 'pay now or we'll send you to court' letter. (profanity) APRA.

    • whooah1979 on 20/12/2014 - 23:56
      +4

      they have to actually demonstrate that the music you broadcast is owned by their clients. they also have to show how much extra revenue you receive due to you broadcasting their clients music.

      walk down pitt st in sydney and find one of the many unsigned artists trying to sell their own cds. buy one or two cds and tell them you'll broadcast their music in your shop. chances are that they will thank you for doing it.

  • bargdebarg on 20/12/2014 - 23:45
    +2

    OP you operate a business and these are the rules. Do you want to play by them or not? If not, I don't think you should be asking for advice here. Seek legal advice from someone you trust who isn't afraid to err on the side of dodgy. Personally, I would pay the fees but only after seeking legal advice.

  • Davo1111 on 21/12/2014 - 00:55

    haha why did you sign? You deserve what you get.

  • StalkingIbis on 21/12/2014 - 08:12
    +4

    everyone is talking about artists deserving to be paid….does APRA divide all the money they get from yearly fees and distribute this to the artists?

    • Pinni2000 on 21/12/2014 - 10:11

      Just on that point Calam05. When APRA are verbal vomiting about their contracts to customers I would love the chance to ask them a few questions. Such as, I listen mostly to a single type of artist or a small group of artists that suit my businesses niche appeal. What system will you be using to ensure that only these specific artists are paid their correct dues, not only as a group, but, pro rata. Some years I may play Jack Johnson on repeat and he has been responsible for 90% of my customers happiness through out the year (100% employee unhappiness) and John Butler Trio made up the other 10%. Now if 100% of my yearly fees are distributed evenly to your members, you have not only not paid an artist his legal royalties, but you have used that money to prop your business up by making a large group of artist happy without paying Jack Johnson 90% of my bill and therefore I will have to get you to sign this contract with a yearly fee of $400+ so I can pay the artist for whom royalties are most assuredly due.

      Yours Sincerely

      Irony.

    • Murrayb123 on 21/12/2014 - 10:16
      +4

      APRA will pay royalty fees to bands that are played on the radio. I would imagine the "rate" for a song played in a public place would go up marginally, the rate of pay for a radio play is still criminally low though.

      Copyright is essentially the only way musicians can make serious money out of music, commercials, ring tones etc are really the easiest/only way to serious money nowadays. On a personal note APRA helps me as a musician because if I perform original songs at a gig or whatever APRA will pay me for playing those songs, some of my friends get paid 2 or 3k a year just from APRA.

      I know everyone seems to be shitting on APRA and I see why people are upset however we are talking a figure of 75-126 dollars a year which seems reasonable to me.

      Also for those of you saying just use spotify or whatever this will incur an additional license fee. See

      http://www.apraamcos.com.au/music-customers/licence-types/re…

      To anyone wanting to get around the license by using "unsigned" artists they are probably still registered with APRA. Search out specific royalty free music.

      • whooah1979 on 21/12/2014 - 10:32
        +1

        so if op broadcasts your music exclusively in their shop for the entire year. will apra pay you your full share of the $400 minus any admin cost? or will you receive 10c to the dollar (or whatever amount) and the rest just goes into a black hole?

        • Murrayb123 on 21/12/2014 - 11:20
          +1

          I would see nothing apart from the original CD sale as there would be no way for APRA to know that OP exclusively played my music.

          I don't see this as a problem as the alternative, asking shops what music they've played and how often would be impossible for APRA to manage and regulate.

        • whooah1979 on 21/12/2014 - 11:57
          +2

          @Murrayb123:
          so you're not getting your fair share of any fees? what are the apra actually doing with the fees that they supposedly collect on your behalf? lining the pockets of their executives?

          legal racketeering comes to mind. "pay us or we'll sue".

        • Murrayb123 on 21/12/2014 - 12:41
          +4

          Sorry I'm probably not making myself clear.

          If someone goes out and buys a CD and plays it in their store there is no way for APRA to know who to give royalties to and a blanket license fee applies. This is a problem with the format chosen rather than APRA. APRA tries hard to direct royalties to the right places, they currently have arrangements with Nine, ABC, MCM, and fairfax music services so that artists get royalties from streams from those services.

          However…

          If I wanted to get in contact with a particular hair salon (or a particular hair salon wanted to get in touch with me) for them to play my music from a CD (or cassette) I can actually license my music to them directly. If I am so inclined I can opt out all my music from APRA and come up with a licensing agreement between myself and any party I want to. If I was the hair salon I might get in touch with a couple of local bands I like and ask them to license their music directly.

          I have no doubt APRA make a very healthy profit but the fees you pay also go towards musicians when they play live gigs with their own original music, supporting the arts industry, providing awesome free advice to musicians and providing easy ways and systems of using and arranging other peoples music, even from other countries.

          Personally I am largely in favour of using something like creative commons licensing as I strongly disagree with "traditional" copyright however you have to understand that the problem isn't APRA it's with our existing copyright legislation.

      • Pinni2000 on 21/12/2014 - 10:49

        I understand your point Murray and I agree with artists being paid. But if they take my money for yearly fees and divide those yearly fee based subscriptions up between all the artists it is not royalties. I didn't play 99.99% of the artists who received a percentage of my yearly fee. Not only that, but the person who should have got the majority of my yearlies would have seen next to nothing, if anything at all. I am firmly of the belief that taking 'royalties' as a yearly fee without knowing the number of plays for each artist is hardly just for the person paying the fees or the artist whom should be receiving them. If they want to take a yearly fee, that is great, now how will you be recording what songs were listened to.

        As for radio in a public space the radio station has payed a royalty for the 'broadcast' of that specific track to the public, who may well be in my shop. The royalty for that individual play has been payed for. Royalties have not been avoided by broadcasting it around the country to the entire population. My customers just happen to be part of that population and they are able to hear that very same broadcast for which the royalty has been payed. Now, I as member of the public would also like to hear that broadcast but cannot in my place of work in case someone else of the public (That can also legally hear that broadcast for free) hears that royalty paid broadcast inside my place of work. Logic which should be the base for all laws has been thrown out the window in this instance.

        Without radio and a free place for an artists audience, or new fans specifically, to listen to their new music (radio) the artist will not have an audience to pay royalties by buying their music. I know a number of businesses that have taken the step of no longer allowing staff to play music at work, which also means the customers are not listening to it in the time period they are within the premises which is time they are not hearing the artist who is being played to promote their songs.

        As for my point in the last post. Technically Apra are leaning on the fact we are not paying royalties to the artist we are playing. But, neither are they. Jack Johnson (just using him as an example not my preference) was due 90% of my royalties paid. He did not receive it. I paid the royalties, but Apra failed to pay Jack Johnson his royalties which he is very legally due and in my opinion owed.

        • Murrayb123 on 21/12/2014 - 11:32
          +1

          Yes I definitely understand your point Pinni. The biggest problem I also see with APRA is the way that the majority of your license fee will go to people you don't listen to in the cafe etc.

          As mentioned above I can't really think of a way around this. Registering the songs you play at your cafe/whatever would be a huge hassle and impossible for any agency to regulate/manage.

          Also understand that the gripe you have about having to pay to "broadcast" isn't so much to do with APRA as it is the copyright act and the way our copyright system runs along with other countries who have reciprocal arrangements to collect royalties. Personally I think the whole "broadcast" license is dumb but don't forget that most other countries have these arrangements so if their countries musicians are featured on the radio those musicians get paid. Any alteration to this would require HUGE legislative change and risk damaging our relationship with countries such as the U.S, U.K etc

        • snapper on 22/12/2014 - 01:02

          Well said Murrayb123.
          Pinni2000, have a read of my comment above. The main commercial radio stations log all of their playlists all of the time but for smaller businesses to do the same would be a waste of time and effort, and the revenue raised for particular artists would most likely be insignificant.

        • mrmarkau67 on 22/12/2014 - 15:55

          That's a bit like saying you won't put any money in the tip jar because you are worried that the waiters might not share the tips fairly.

  • [Deactivated] on 21/12/2014 - 10:52

    What about DAB radio? Subject to the same rules?

    What defines "commercial use" anyway?

    • scrimshaw on 21/12/2014 - 11:44

      If you're making money selling good or services and the music you are broad casting in store would be counted as commercial use.

      I'd suggest looking at Store Play or Marketing Melodies. They supply music to businesses
      http://storeplay.com.au/

      If you don't want to pay anything there is a large collection of royalty free music on Soundcloud and Bandcamp

      • [Deactivated] on 21/12/2014 - 15:00

        I get the whole idea behind it. I just find it strange that radio which is free to air requires a fee. I thought they were after listener-ship which would increase their ad revenues?

        What if you handed out portable radio players to people waiting for their hair to be cut. I think that is even more of a "commercial use" because its not incidental listening, you are actually actively facilitating the reception of the radio station. However, enforcing that would kind of step across the privacy lines.
        Also, each portable radio station does not require a licence if I am not wrong.

        I don't disagree that the rules exists, its just that there are so many ifs and buts that it really makes no sense in enforcement.

        • scrimshaw on 21/12/2014 - 19:20

          Well, this is APRA's explanation

          http://www.apraamcos.com.au/about-us/faqs/music-customers/

          Radio and TV stations pay a licence fee to broadcast music, why do I have to pay another fee?

          The Copyright Act provides composers, songwriters and music publishers with a number of separate rights under the Copyright Act. A radio station’s broadcast of music uses one of those rights and the station will take out our licence for this specific use. The performance of that same music in a business or shop uses a different public performance right requiring a separate licence from us.

          A helpful analogy is to compare this to buying a ticket to watch a film at the movies versus hiring a film from the video store to watch it at home on DVD. Both actions are separate transactions that take place in different business contexts and so require the payment of a separate fee.

          I've only read it once, but what I get what they're saying is that the owner of the music (be it Lady Gaga or Bieber) controls the right to make public performances of that song and playing a record in your store is considered a public performance. And according to them, the playback of music (even on free radio) counts as a 'public performance'.

        • [Deactivated] on 21/12/2014 - 22:05

          @scrimshaw:
          I see, makes sense. By that same logic though, handing our personal radio players with earphones will render the performance "non-public" and thus should not require the licence? Like the hotel room example on the website you quoted.

          Not attacking your logic or explanation. After all its not your rules and the excerpt is pretty clearcut. Just that when applying it to certain situations it becomes grayer than gray with to laws about something available so freely (even on phones). I guess I feel free to air radio is really grasping at straws in order to get small businesses to pay up.

          To make ownership even more vague, what if a random person buys a bunch of radio players and leaves it in the shop and they are basically free to use for anybody who wants to.

        • Logical on 23/12/2014 - 08:47

          what a stupid analogy, you can't be at the movies and be watching a rental film at the same time. Radio playback is in real time, so a licence by radio station to play in real time means that you are entitled to listen to it in real time. If you however recorded it and played back with 1 day buffer, then I understand.

  • 11112007 on 21/12/2014 - 11:47
    +1

    $400…. My organization pays around $25,000 a year and another $25,000 to PPCA!

    • whooah1979 on 21/12/2014 - 12:00

      it sounds big. westfield?

      • 11112007 on 22/12/2014 - 06:57

        Bigger than Westfield :)

        • imcold on 22/12/2014 - 20:49

          airport

        • ankor on 24/12/2014 - 19:57

          CIA black site holding all the terrorists?

  • hyperfuzz on 21/12/2014 - 12:00
    +6

    +1 for APRA. the royalties i receive as a musicians for my radio play, performances etc. really do help

    • whooah1979 on 21/12/2014 - 12:05

      do you care to elaborate on how much you get per play? are you certain that you're getting the correct amount?

      • hyperfuzz on 21/12/2014 - 13:39
        +3

        it really depends on how the songwriting is divvied up - i'd have to go into my last return to see the specifics. i'm not sure if it changes depending on whether it's played on community radio or commercial… i don't listen to much radio so i wouldn't know if we were getting played more than the handful of times we do nowdays, but i highly, highly doubt we would be being shortchanged or under reported for spins.

        • BuyoTheCat on 22/12/2014 - 15:09

          How to APRA keep track of how much to pay the artists?

        • hyperfuzz on 23/12/2014 - 15:01

          @photonaturally: not sure how they keep tally but you get a full breakdown of all the figures per song when you get the royalties.

  • Azn310 on 21/12/2014 - 12:29

    I guess this is one of the reasons why big stores keep repeating their own songs .. 'woolworths the fresh food peopleee~' every minute of every day

    OP try downloading youtube cover songs instead? Also there are artists that offer free instrumental songs on the web to combat these acts

    • Dr Techno on 21/12/2014 - 12:43
      +3

      SuppppercheaapppAuttoo plus much much more…

      Security check to section B :)

    • Davo1111 on 21/12/2014 - 13:25

      Woolworths and coles already have an arrangement with ARPA or equivelent.

    • juventino on 21/12/2014 - 16:51
      -1

      APRA should be paying me advertising or promotion fee for bringing awareness to those artists whose songs I play.

      Just saying.

      • hyperfuzz on 23/12/2014 - 15:01

        uh… no

        • juventino on 23/12/2014 - 15:29
          -1

          All right. How about free of charge and a thank you. Struggling muso should be grateful that I help them spreading their stuff in 'public performance'

          sarcasm off

  • Ughhh on 21/12/2014 - 13:38
    +1

    Title is a bit misleading as OP wasn't issued a fine… licensing fee isn't a fine.

    • tomsco on 21/12/2014 - 14:19
      +2

      Comment is misinformed. OP asked if he could get fined for not paying the licensing fee.

  • arcticmonkey on 21/12/2014 - 14:38
    -6

    $400 is such a small cost. Just pay up. These artists work very hard for their money and at least they will get something from APRA.

    Funding for music and the arts has been killed under the Liberal government (both state and federal) and you are benefiting from these artists. As one artist said, every bit helps so you should do the right thing and pay the small amount (which must be only about 5-6 female haircuts).

    • regenade on 23/12/2014 - 09:41
      -1

      Govt stops funding means tomorrow I can open up a new organization named RAPE (Same words as APRA) and ethort businesses like this and pay 80% of the $100 million i extort to labels and artists. I still make $20 million but tell its non profit as its paid to my 100 employees and 100 contractors as admin fees. Good business idea, yes, legal, yes but ethical no.

  • TRANCE on 21/12/2014 - 15:22

    Maybe just play free podcasts from the net, maybe some trance music ;P

  • lplau on 21/12/2014 - 15:46

    They probably cannot fine you but they can most likely bring you to court for breaching copyright laws. If they bring you to court over copyright laws then you will most likely lose ALOT more money than just paying the $400 for "membership".

    You are already lucky that you got away with not paying it all these years. lol.

  • Daedalus on 21/12/2014 - 17:19

    Not legal advice but if apra was to sue you wouldn't they only be able to claim the $400 per year fee, maybe with a reasonable amount of interest?

    if that is the case then don't pay. you can either get away with it, or in future they find out and threaten to sue you, in which case you can negotiate a settlement which may be a discount to the $400 per year times number of years anyway?

  • edrooney on 21/12/2014 - 18:12
    +2

    Instead of trying to find a way around it, why not just pay the $1.10 a day.

    These artists deserve to be paid, just as you do for cutting customers hair.

    • regenade on 23/12/2014 - 09:39

      But why to ARPA, everyone would be happy to pay to the Govt as part of Business/ABN/council/licensing fees and not to a commercial entity. I dont want somebody to become rich by making money this way

      Tomorrow I can patent scissors and a speific hair dressin style and demand $2 for every haircut that is done this way. This is the new smart way to make money.

      • mrmarkau67 on 24/12/2014 - 01:00

        APRA isn't a commercial body. Its a Not for Profit, its owned by the artists, and it distributes most 87% of the money to creators.

  • crudman on 21/12/2014 - 20:39
    +6

    All the advice so far is POOR.

    Most are saying you need to pay etc BUT ARPA has called your number and heard music. They have made ASSUMPTIONS.

    1. that you don't already have a licence through ANOTHER body or the ARTIST themself
    2. the 30 or so seconds of music I.E. ONE SONG that they heard AND recognised is under their authority to licence
    3. the music was not from outside your premise
    4. the music was in a public area

    You have been tricked.

    Royalty free music is the best choice, however if you want more modern stuff, you should should play digital radio (not mainstream like Kiis FM). Free plug for the radio company and they won't really care. If they do then they will call then you stop, simple as that.

    • [Deactivated] on 22/12/2014 - 08:35
      +1

      When you are busy and someone rings up and asks this kind of out of nowhere question you got split second to think.

      It goes like this. "My name is blah blah. I represent apra. Now we can conducting licence check. Can I confirm with you that you are playing music in your shop today because I can hear it. Now if you don't already own a licence you may be in breach of the law, but I could send you some paperwork to sign up for it. " it is a spur of moment answer whether you say yes or no. I suspect when you are busy you don't get to sit down and think maybe in hindsight I should have said I only play royalty free music? I felt like being ambushed.

  • mangoss on 21/12/2014 - 21:54
    +4

    Hi OP.

    Some impartial advice….

    If you don't agree, what APRA may do is send in 'mystery shoppers' as fake customers who will record your store playing the music without paying licensing fees, and they will attempt to penalise you.

    I know this because I was previously approached to conduct this 'research' into various licence premises in the eastern suburbs of Sydney on behalf of APRA as a mystery shopper years ago. I declined. I was provided with a detailed scenario and instructions on what to do, how long to stay, how to record what songs were playing, etc. This program is run by regularly (monthly, targeted venues from the advice I was given).

    I'm really surprised that they are now targeting such a small business - it seems punitive, and quite difficult for them to manage given how many very small businesses are out there that it would be difficult to effectively target and manage. I would have thought they would reap in greater fines / penalties and royalties from large venues that are music based. I guess they are now targeting smaller businesses known to play music all day during work hours…

    I would seek legal advice as to your options, but be advised if you don't sign, mystery shoppers reporting your actions are a possibility.

    Hope this helps :) Good luck

    • ozgriff on 21/12/2014 - 22:34

      Person walks down a small community shopping district for half a day, how many shops could they walk into? I'd guess quite a number, and I'd say most of those would be playing some kind of music.

      If that were all true, ow many would sign that contract (for a myriad of reasons) and start paying those 'small' fees year after year. Seems like a day well spent for APRA.

      I remember hearing a story (not sure if true but could be) that Disney used to walk into Childcare facilities and see Disney graphics and start proceedings if additional fees weren't paid. Same kinda story and remember every business counts a single dollar as revenue!

      • snapper on 22/12/2014 - 01:11
        +2

        Slightly on a tangent but we have a lot to thank (or hate) the Disney corporation for the current copyright laws… look into it if you are interested.

        • mrmarkau67 on 24/12/2014 - 00:51

          And Sonny Bono.

          Its especially ironic since Disney makes millions from fairytales that had slipped into the public domain.

      • mangoss on 22/12/2014 - 14:04

        I think you'll find that like Disney and APRA, this is more widespread than we realise… there's a tonne of money to be made in copyright infringements / royalties, and given the popularity of file sharing / torrents these days, corporate entities are looking for other ways they can recoup their lost 'bucks'.

        • ozgriff on 22/12/2014 - 20:52
          +2

          This is very true.

          I believe Getty images are also prominent in this. I'm not sure if they use an image matching software - but if you have one of their images on your website and no real way to link it back to paying the appropriate royalties. They allegedly will send the website owner a letter to pay a fee which they calculate as the 'fair' usage.

          Anyway, back to the OP :-)

    • snapper on 22/12/2014 - 01:12
      +3

      … and a slightly different way of looking at it, imagine how small the fees would be if all of those businesses paid the required fee to APRA?

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join