GEMA to introduce "laptop tax".

[russell]

Best stick to the vinyl

Seriously though, this is a ridiculous idea and I have no idea how they plan to enforce it. Could ruin the Berlin scene even more than they already risked with the opening hours tax on clubs and high tax on performers etc.

http://www.factmag.com/2012/11/30/gema- ... e-to-sets/

Earlier this year, GEMA, the body charged with collecting royalties in Germany, announced a controversial overhaul of its fee structure.

Having historically charged venues a flat rate, GEMA are introducing a system based on the size of the venue and a percentage of ticket prices. GEMA’s original proposal was for events that last more than five hours to weather a 50% surcharge, increased by an extra charge if the party tips over the eight hour mark, though recent negotiations have led to this charge being reduced. The new system is scheduled to come in to force in April 2013. The clubbing community both German and worldwide balked at the changes, with high-profile clubs like Berghain and Watergate [above] claiming that they would be forced to close (Berghain later announced that it would, in fact, be staying open).

On June 30, over 2000 German venues cut their music for five minutes by means of protest, and an online petition opposed to the move gathered over 60,000 signatures. Despite this, the Deutsches Bundestag – Germany’s Parliament – decided at the start of November that it would not intervene, suggesting that supporters of the petition “form a compromise with GEMA directly”. When FACT spoke to Nick Hoppner, manager label of Ostgut-Ton (the Berghain’s in-house label) earlier this year, he expressed the view that the clubbing community needed to change GEMA from the inside.

It now appears that GEMA are attempting to knuckle down even harder on club performances. So far this has only – to our knowledge – been reported on German language websites, but at the heart of these newly proposed set of changes is a tax (or “laptop surcharge”) on DJs playing music from laptops, to the tune of 30% for every music file under five minutes with an increase of 20% for each additional minute. What we’re unsure about is whether this only refers to files that are played, or all music on the offending laptop – we’d presume the former, but the post on Tanith implies the latter (“e.g. 10,000 mp3s on the DJ laptop would [require] 1,300 Euros”).

The proposal has reportedly been negotiated with the German Discotheques and Nightclubs unions (DDU and DDO). Dean Driscoll, of German-based promotions company Tailored Communiation, explained on Twitter this morning that these unions are “sub-branches of GEMA populated solely by GEMA members.” We subsequently spoke to Driscoll over email, who explained that although his German is basic, he ran through the Tanith article with German industry colleagues, who confirmed that this was the case. This article on the DDU website also refers to the “laptop surcharge”, though it also explains that DJs who are members of the DDU – a minority, if the union is filled with GEMA members – will be exempt from this charge.

German-based musicians have been reacting to the news this morning, though we’re yet to see it confirmed by GEMA or the DDU themselves (Tanith appear to have a copy of the proposal – above, right). We’ll update this story with more information as we have it: if there’s anything readers – particularly German-speaking readers – can add, all helpful comments are much appreciated.

[mattus123]

i dont see why they would want this

i read an article earlier about clubs trying to ban tractor users, due to performances issues or whatever

i dont see the logic behind this though.. is it to try and stop piracy?

[Mitch]

The details aren't very clear so it's hard to tell what their intentions are at this stage.. It won't do anything to stop piracy though because people will still download tracks and copy to USB for use

[dflux4]

MOAR CONTROL!!!

Na just a way to make more money

[Scottie]

only way I could see it being implemented is if all download stores had to apply the 30% if serving to a german IP, but even thats easily avoidable

[GREMM1S]

What a stupid set of legislation, i'm all for less laptops in clubs but the idea behind charging them more for supposed piracy notion is stupid, doesn't matter what you play off you can easily pirate your music.

[russell]

only way I could see it being implemented is if all download stores had to apply the 30% if serving to a german IP, but even thats easily avoidable

it's not a tax on buying music though. It's a tax on performing using digital files.

It's all just a money making bullshit scheme that's only gonna work to destroy the best scene in the world.

[overit]

The UK introduced the ProdDub license a few years ago to supplement the PPL license all DJs need here.

The produb is a flat fee you pay per number of digital files on your harddrive. IT's a one off payment for up to 5000 digital files followed by supplementary payments for every 1000 files more. You do not have to pay annually though, they cover that in the ppl license still. It's intention is to allow DJs to use the files they all use already but to make this use legal. Previously the use of digital was just not covered by PPL due to the law being old.

The fact they charge for it is typical, they have to pay admin. The fact they probably earn more than just the admin costs is hopefully to feed some income back into the composers pockets.

I don't mind the produb license, it brings the use of digital files into the licensing arena. But this doesnt detract from the fact that this German system does look a little daft. Wrong way of going about it IMHO.

[Mitch]

The reason these systems look even more stupid to Australians is we don't have anything like this that is regulated on a per DJ basis - I don't know any DJ who pays licensing fees as an individual. I know the clubs / radio stations do though

edit: the club / venue is supposed to have an ARIA licence of some sort. If they don't, I think the individual (DJ) is supposed to. Not 100% sure though

[overit]

It is the same here. Venues normally pay a license to play recorded music.

But any DJ doing mobile or functions needed a license to play.

The only way round it was if you only did private parties (weddings/no entry fee etc) and only played in licensed venues. Admittedly this is most DJs, couple this free-ride that most DJs get with how many new DJs there are every day at the moment and I think it obvious why the licensing authorities have decided to look over their legislation again.

As I play all over the place and teach in some very strange areas I got licensed.

Thing is: the venue doesnt care if a DJ brings CD or digital. So why should they be hit with the extra fee for our choice of format?

If there were no licenses at all the composers would not earn enough, especially with record sales down so much.

I'm not decided how I feel about it all yet, but I am staying legal for now, it's my business and all the costs are tax-deductable anyway.

I reckon this issue is far from finished though...

[Kodiak]

I'd like to hear from some of our more successful producers what they think of this income they are receiving from these schemes? They are receiving it right... RIGHT?

[overit]

^not if they haven't actually released music to a paying public and signed up and registered with whichever organisatin collects and distributes royalties in Australia.

success in listeners and FB "likes" does not equal money in the bank.

[GREMM1S]

Ah ok so legally in Australia if the venue has the license the dj doesn't need one?

I always thought both parties did.

[legunner]

Ah ok so legally in Australia if the venue has the license the dj doesn't need one?

Pretty sure that is correct

[overit]

dunno if this is still up to date:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=247

[mattus123]

success in listeners and FB "likes" does not equal money in the bank.

i think i have to disagree on this one

no, it doesnt mean money in the bank from royalties

but the more of a following the artists have, the more they get paid per gig

In response to the OP and after reading the other posts

i really dont understand why its singling out laptops, i play with CDs... every song on there could be pirated for all anyone else knows, same with USBs

Seems like they are trying to hit 2 birds with one stone and try get rid of laptop DJs while also doing something about piracy

[GREMM1S]

Maybe laptop djs are more likely to pirate, as in controller sync djs, not samplers and ones using laucnh pads, but the guys who have been djing for 2 weeks on their numark controller.

[eggssell]

Maybe laptop djs are more likely to pirate, as in controller sync djs, not samplers and ones using laucnh pads, but the guys who have been djing for 2 weeks on their numark controller.

your kidding rght?

CD's brought about the pirate DJ's as people would burn a CD and then share amongst the masses. it then became rip a CD, load on the internet for the masses

EDIT: not to mention even when the likes of beatport and juno came about. it hasnt stopped people from sharing the file they bought and then burning onto a CD. i have heard of people sharing entire hard drives of songs.

[GREMM1S]

Maybe laptop djs are more likely to pirate, as in controller sync djs, not samplers and ones using laucnh pads, but the guys who have been djing for 2 weeks on their numark controller.

your kidding rght?

CD's brought about the pirate DJ's as people would burn a CD and then share amongst the masses. it then became rip a CD, load on the internet for the masses

EDIT: not to mention even when the likes of beatport and juno came about. it hasnt stopped people from sharing the file they bought and then burning onto a CD. i have heard of people sharing entire hard drives of songs.

Yeah i realise this, and as myself and others have already mentioned yes other mediums pirate, but one consideration is how much easier and larger piracy would more than likely be on a laptop.

Big CD wallet are 200 or something? so 200 cds with 10 tracks on them each 2000 tracks.

On a laptop you have the potential for alot more pirated music, it's not fair legislation but it does make some sense.

[eggssell]

yeh but thats 200 CD's being used for that night. the dude could still have terrabytes at home of pirated music which he burns as he needs. which is the preferred way right when using CDs

[eggssell]

because in the end regardless of medium, the amount of music used is the amount of music you can fit in a set.

and thats the amount of royalties not being collected

[GREMM1S]

Is it working on the amount of music played or actually owned/with the dj at the venue.

Because if its aimed at the amount of music on a djs person, 9/10 times the guy with a laptop will have more than cd/usb.

They really should just have it time based or one fee, as any dj still has alot of music

[russell]

Is it working on the amount of music played or actually owned/with the dj at the venue.

there is still a bit of confusion over that.

[overit]

again, i can only tell you what the uk does. Here venues pay different tariffs depending on how many customers they have, i.e. how big their room is and how many nights a week they are open.

DJs who do events in unlicensed venues (eg my teaching sessions at wherever I end up) pay for a license after negotiation with the governing body (PPL in this country). I calculated how many sessions I do per year and the average number of kids at each then included how many songs I played (as I'm teaching we use the same songs lots of time to get the info across). They had never done licenses for someone doing it like this but we came to an agreement.

Then they added the produb license - which assumes you are already paying (as venue or DJ) for how many listeners you are playing to, and so only tries to cover you for how many of those tracks are digital copies as these weren't included in the legal definitions previously.

Fark nose if GEMA is trying to do it similar.

But at the end of the day - I agree with royalty distribution, for what it's worth these days, and the people I have spoken to in the offices at PPL have always been really cool, really into music, and really willing to find a middle ground for each individual license I have needed. Not at all like a govt dept or corporation.

[russell]

The thing with GEMA is that they are going to be taking a fee from the venue already. They want to tax the artist on top of that.

Of course the artist will pass that tax bill on to the promoter which means it may become too expensive for a night to keep running.