On October 1st, a new law was passed in the UK where avid music fans who copy music onto multiple devices were considered to be dabbling into copyright infringement– even if the music was purchased legally. I know what you are thinking, “I purchased the music so why is it considered copyright infringement if it was not downloaded illegally?” Good question! Here is my take on it.
Let’s take iTunes for example. I recently purchased a song for $1.99, but I have multiple devices in which I play music on. I have an iPad, work iPhone, Samsung Galaxy personal device, and a MacBook Pro. I am still old fashion and prefer to make a physical copy of the song onto a CD so I can listen to in my car on the way to work. iTunes will allow you to copy a purchased song up to 5 times. This is not considered infringement in the states. You are paying for the song, so technically you have not done anything wrong or illegal. So, why is it considered infringement in other parts of the world? The real reason? Royalties.
If you are purchasing a song or an album, the artist will be receiving royalties only once which is at the beginning of the “transaction”. Across the pond, making copies of purchased music for personal use has been recently legalized; however, with the exception of compensating the artists. According to The Guardian, “The Musicians’ Union, the British Academy of Songwriters, Composers and Authors and industry body UK Music are taking legal action over the government’s new copyright legislation”. All of these composers in the music industry are lobbying to fight for their cut of the deal. In all honesty, I can’t blame them. Artists barely make money when they release an album, it’s the truth. They earn the majority of their “salary” on tour by selling out venues and fans buying their awesome merchandise. Vick Blaine, the CEO of The British Academy of Songwriters, Composers, and Authors stated on UK Music : “We have sought judicial review because of the way the government made its decision not to protect the UK’s creative industries – in stark contrast to other countries that have introduced copyright exceptions. We fully support the right of the consumer to copy legally bought music for their own personal and private use, but there must be fair compensation for the creators of the music. The exception also represents a transfer of value to the tech sector, by favouring international technology companies over our own creative industries, namely the musicians and composer communities. The new law has been sold as a measure which will bring clarity, yet if anything the inclusion of Cloud locker services will increase confusion amongst consumers.”
It is still not clear as to what the outcome will be for musicians, songwriters, and composers in the UK. I personally feel they should all be compensated for their work. Think about it this way, artists receive performance royalties when their song is played on a radio station. If these songs are registered through a performance rights organization before getting airplay or used as background music, then why can’t there be a way to register or track these songs when being transferred onto multiple personal devices?
As an artist manager, I would personally fight to get my artist compensated for their work. If my artist is not happy, I’m not happy. My goal is to do what is best for my client. If that means arguing in court on behalf of my artist’s rights, then to court I will go!
For more information on copyright infringement in the UK, check out Out-Law.
