A New Consideration For DJ Licensing.

[Proformance]

Sir, There is already in play ... a simple to follow per jukebox fee schedule.
How could this transfer and be applicable to dj's?
It ain't rocket science.

Sir, you’re right – rocket science it isn’t.

A Jukebox and it’s copyrighted musical content is merchandise. It’s retail distribution. That’s why most states with a sales tax collect the same tax on rentals. It’s also why the rental of copyrighted works outside of a license agreement is specifically prohibited by the copyright law.

A wedding DJs original purchased music collection is personal property being used at a private event, and music obtained through a pool or subscription service is licensed to you (not sold).

Bob, pardon me for not buying into your blustery...however, it appears that your non-qualified heresay interpretations….

Record Companies throughout their history have always been motivated by copyright control & money. MDJs are simply an untapped source of revenue at present...however, our day is coming. Why haven't they nailed MDJs to the proverbial cross? Perhaps……….

Simply, perhaps, if for no other reason, …….

Dude and FlyingDan: feelings are not facts.

Yet, a JUKEBOX can be licensed...? One simple expansion to an existing license could allow MDJs a certain level of legitimacy.

I’m sorry you don’t feel legitimate. But your self esteem issues are not worthy of the Secretary of State’s office and hardly justify two acts of Congress.

Dude, I and many other DJs don’t have a problem with legitimacy, public perception, or unethical DJs. We succeeded like other self-employed or small business people, and it just so happens we did it as Disc Jockeys. That is what people respect most, not some DJ tax you’re going to pay to the government or music publishers.


I can sympathize with John’s feelings.

There are a lot of professions where congratulations and recognition are in short supply. But don’t be fooled into thinking that would all change if you suddenly became a “card carrying” member with a contrived license to DJ. It’s still all up to the individual. You still have to jump the hurdles that separate the runners from the walkers in any business.

Vanity is what you want others to think about you. Pride is what you can feel for yourself. Concentrate on the latter and be proud of what you do not what you control.

 

[Dude Walker]

But Dude thats a business license....I have one I am regestired with the Province of Nova Scotia. Why would I want a license to be a Disc Jockey? What would that achieve?

Jeff,

I’m not suggesting an additional Business License to the one that you have. Just a more clearly defined code addressing the Mobile Disc Jockey industry.

Several states have a basic business license or the equivalent.

Temp agencies fall under the heading “Professional Employer Organizations” in North Dakota.

http://www.legis.nd.gov/cencode/t43c55.pdf

I find this heading intriguing because much of the wording could apply to Mobile Disc Jockeys with modifications more suited to this industry.



Bob,

You...and thousands of others have studied copyright law.

By your own admission..

(acually, before Al Gore invented the internet.)

Curious...

If, what you are trying to allege is true...then are you stating for the record that the JLO and AMOA are operating an illegal monopoly under Copyright Code 17?

As a point of illustrative reference, I suggested an expansion of the Jukebox License, which has already negotiated, as a less burdensome way with ASCAP, BMI & SESAC of collecting royalties for the artists in their repertories.

Which is a far cry from your over-embellished statement...

No one in government is going to undertake such a massive change of US Law to fix a problem that doesn't exist.

Bob, without fail...your narcissistic and extremist behaviors come shining through.

This was a peaceful and thought provoking thread...until you came along.

“What is objectionable, what is dangerous, about extremists is not that they are extreme, but that they are intolerant. The evil is not what they say about their cause, but what they say about their opponents.” - Robert Francis Kennedy

 

[Jeff Romard]

Jeff,

I’m not suggesting an additional Business License to the one that you have. Just a more clearly defined code addressing the Mobile Disc Jockey industry.

Several states have a basic business license or the equivalent.

Temp agencies fall under the heading “Professional Employer Organizations” in North Dakota.

http://www.legis.nd.gov/cencode/t43c55.pdf

I find this heading intriguing because much of the wording could apply to Mobile Disc Jockeys with modifications more suited to this industry.

I still see it as complicating the simple and a tax grab for some level (or all levels) of government. Again what will it achieve? Mabye I can't get the big picture here but I see it as there will still be unlicensed DJs floating around and bottom feeding DJs with a license

A couple of hundred bucks for a license won't be much of a deterrant especially when it would be almost impossible to enforce

 

[Proformance]

Dude, what profit is there in an empty jukebox? The profit is driven by the inventory, that is what defines the jukebox class license.

What profit is there in a radio station that plays ONLY commercials? The programming is what makes the advertising possible. That's the basis for the broadcast class license.

Brides do not profit from playing music at their reception, and they have civil rights that jukeboxes don't. That's why private events are explicitly an excluded class.

It's not about the DJ, Dude.

Get a clue man.

Even if you had your special "I'm a DJ" music license no Bride could be compelled to hire a licensed DJ. It's an idea that serves nothing except your ego.

 

[Dude Walker]

Bob,

The private event exclusion is a point of contention. The definitions do not specifically address a definition titled "private events". Under the definitions to perform or display a work “publicly” refers to "outside of a normal circle of a family and its social acquaintances". However, what constitutes normal circle of family is not defined, making this definition ambiguos.

If the client were playing the music for their own event, not hired out, this approach may have some merit.



However, the client has entered into a financial transaction for a second party to provide the performed works. This is where the Copyrioght Code severally lacks clarity.

MDJs use music as a tool for financial gain.

MDJs solicit their service based upon the premise that they will play music.

MDJs supply the music, in most cases, that will be played.

It's not about the DJ, Dude.

Get a clue man.

How obtuse can you be?

If the MDJ wasn't making his/her services & music available for hire...then you'd be correct. MDJs inderectly rent their music to client within the guise of service.

Even if you had your special "I'm a DJ" music license no Bride could be compelled to hire a licensed DJ. It's an idea that serves nothing except your ego.

I cannot help that your myopic view cannot see some of the simplest things.

If all small businesses...including MDJs were required to obtain a "Business Licence"...unlicensed businesses could be reported and/or fined. At which time the choose to comply or resist. Further non-compliance could result an order for cessation of business activity.

 

[John Allo]

Here we go again with the 2 leading threadjackers on this board, Bob and Dude. Guys, does every thread you post in have to resort to being the newest chapter of the online war you're fighting with each other?

My Lord, it's getting to the point where if one sees either of your names on a post, they don't bother reading it, or if one sees either of your names in a thread, the other can't be far behind and then the thread degenerates into another "neener neener, I'm smarter than you are."

Both of you....enough already!

 

[Proformance]

Okay John,

This was your question about licensing, so I'll put the same question about the two forms of license too you:

Music:
Why are private events explicitly an excluded class under the perfomring royalties section of Title 17; and why after 3 hearings before Congress during this era of the DJ do you suppose this provision has never been revisited by either the music industry or legislators?

DJ trade:
How does a government issued trade license for mobile DJs working private events affect the civil liberties of anyone with a musical device capable of being heard by a group of people?



If you truly believe that "DJing" is defined by what some people translate into a career then why not do that which is actually possible and that which the law already provides for: issue your interested candidates a professional union card ?

 

[Proformance]

If all small businesses...including MDJs were required to obtain a "Business Licence"...unlicensed businesses could be reported and/or fined. At which time the choose to comply or resist. Further non-compliance could result an order for cessation of business activity.

LOL Reminds me a lot of the Soviet Union.

State licenses are issued to businesses that pose a direct public health or safety risk, or fiduciary responsibilities of agency.

You are seeking regulation solely for your own personal benefit, and that is not what licensing in a free society is all about.

 

[John Allo]

Bob:

As someone who will never again perform as a MDJ, I don't have to care at all. But I have lots of friends in the industry, and I made a nice living for a long time as a MDJ, so I do care about the future of it.

Do I advocate this idea? Perhaps. Do I oppose this idea? Possibly. As I said earlier, both sides make strong arguments and it's quite reasonable to take one side one day and the other side the next. The arguments are that close to each other.

The discussion of the idea, in abstract form, is what I intended. Getting down to the specifics, such as Title 17, are beyond me. The title of the thread is " A New Consideration For DJ Licensing" not " A New Demand For DJ Licensing."

In order to spark discussion, one has to start somewhere. I chose the side I did to engage this board in a rational look at the idea. You and Dude come in the thread and it degenerates into the latest chapter of the pissing match between you guys.

Mods, please lock this thread. I believe it's run its course and only has the potential to degenerate further into chaos.

Thanks to those who engaged in a civil debate, a fresh look at a controversial subject. Bob, if you believe in no licensing, that's fine. If the idea ever gets seriously proposed, or even becomes law, one can expect you to be on the front lines of opposition. Passion is a good trait to posess, but too much passion results in obsession, and, purely as a third party observer, you and Dude are obsessed with each other to the point where your ideas begin to lose their effectiveness.

Happy July 1. The year is half over.

 

[SoftJock Rick]

...you and Dude are obsessed with each other to the point where your ideas begin to lose their effectiveness.

Every once and awhile, John and I agree

I don't think John's idea, was to see who was better at facts, but what everyone's take was on the subject (IMHO)...

 

[Dude Walker]

John,

Out of respect for you...and your wishes for to create dialogue with others for fostering thoughts regarding this important matter, I will bow out of this thread.

 

[Proformance]

But I have lots of friends in the industry, and I made a nice living for a long time as a MDJ, so I do care about the future of it.

That's exactly why specifics matter John. This state license idea is really just protectionism at an imaterial level. It has been repeatedly tossed up by disappointed DJs for more than 20 years.

You already have the license you are looking for in the form of national DJ associations, and they are ineffective to say the least. The reason should be obvious.

The potential for success of any association or certification does not rest with the DJs who support it. It lies in a relevant resource need of the consumers hiring the DJs - and here; a relevant need does not exist.

Consumers continue as always to prefer their own non-standardized criteria when selecting a DJ to serve their interests. You cannot "educate" people into supporting something they do not want or need.

This is what defines the real world of DJs, not the safety of virtual reality and cyber dreams posed in DJ chat rooms.

 

[Fred Wright]

Closed as per the author's request.