Shepard Fairey Case Gets More Complex: Mannie... >>
<< A Closer Look At How Amanda Palmer Connected...
 tdicon 

Too Much Free Time

by Mike Masnick

Fri, Jul 10th 2009 10:57am


Filed Under:
deep purple, fines, music, performance rights, russia

Companies:
ngo



From Russia, With Stupidity: Band Must Pay Fines To Itself

from the in-russia-songs-copyright-you dept

Reader Wesha sends in the news that the band Deep Purple has been fined for performing its own songs in Russia without first getting a license from the Russian Authors' Society (NGO). And it wasn't a small fine either, approximately $1,000 per song. Oh, but wait, it gets better. According to one news organization, the money will be passed along to the victim, a band called... Deep Purple. Yes, that's right. Apparently, the band needs to pay a fine for performing the songs without properly licensing them from itself... so now it'll pay the fine and the fine will be given to the band (minus a commission to the Russian Authors' Society, of course.) Common sense just died.
63 Comments | Leave a Comment

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    Ima Fish (profile), 10 Jul 2009 @ 11:02am

    ""

    My guess is that a     portion of the money will be passed along to Deep Purple. A very small portion.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Ima Fish (profile), 10 Jul 2009 @ 11:03am

    "the money will be passed along to the victim"

    My guess is that a portion of the money will be passed along to Deep Purple. A very small portion.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Ima Fish (profile), 10 Jul 2009 @ 11:04am

      Re:

      Yeah, I'm a retard.

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Dark Helmet (profile), 10 Jul 2009 @ 11:11am

        Re: Re:

        "Yeah, I'm a retard."

        Wait, I've never been able to say this before:

        I completely 100% agree with the above statement.

        [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Ima Fish (profile), 10 Jul 2009 @ 11:29am

          Re: Re: Re:

          "Wait, I've never been able to say this before..."

          You've never agreed with someone 100% before?!

          2+2=4 is too hard to completely accept? The earth is round, not flat, not enough evidence? Sex is fun, never tried it yet?

          [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            Dark Helmet (profile), 10 Jul 2009 @ 11:34am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            "2+2=4 is too hard to completely accept?"

            I'd like to see the RIAA's take on that math, since one infringement of one song = $80k

            "The earth is round, not flat, not enough evidence?"

            Are you talking about the Earth in it's totality, because certainly certain segments are flat.

            "Sex is fun, never tried it yet?"

            Yes, tried it, not excessively but enough to know that the blanket claim that sex is fun is not always true. If you haven't had enough sex to know that some sex is so bad that it isn't fun, have more and you'll come to know the truth.

            *Self admitted arguholic*

            [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              Ima Fish (profile), 10 Jul 2009 @ 11:39am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              Wow, I actually believe you. This was the first time you believed something 100% So, are you a philosophy major, or is picking a major too much commitment for you?

              [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 10 Jul 2009 @ 3:33pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Remember that 1+1=3... for very large values of 1. It's true, and I can prove it!

            [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2009 @ 4:11pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            But the earth ISN'T round. It's egg-shaped

            [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Ryan, 10 Jul 2009 @ 11:30am

          Re: Re: Re:

          You 100% agree with the statement that you've never been able to say this before?

          [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            Ima Fish (profile), 10 Jul 2009 @ 11:41am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Ok, now you're just making my brain hurt. Go back to something I can understand, like defending the wealthy.

            [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              Dark Helmet (profile), 10 Jul 2009 @ 11:46am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              "Ok, now you're just making my brain hurt. Go back to something I can understand, like defending the wealthy."

              I 99% agree with the above statement...

              [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Ryan, 10 Jul 2009 @ 12:40pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              FYI, I finally replied in that post's comments. I agree with making everybody play by the same rules, I just disagree with blaming individual players for actions made in a faulty system. And I definitely disgree with putting a firm limit on what is "excessive" wealth and what isn't, which seems totally subjective, unfair, self-defeating, and unnecessary to me.

              [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Derek Kerton (profile), 10 Jul 2009 @ 11:32am

    Original Band

    I wonder. Is the current incarnation of Deep Purple the original band, with original writers and musicians, or is it basically a cover band, or a cover band with one of the original bandmates?

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Derek Kerton (profile), 10 Jul 2009 @ 11:47am

      Re: Original Band

      Did my homework, answered my own question:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Purple

      The band has had many incarnations. The drummer is the only original bandmate.

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        VanCardboardbox, 10 Jul 2009 @ 12:32pm

        Re: Re: Original Band

        Well, Ian Gillan and Ian Paice can pretty much be regarded as original members since they were in the band from 1969 on and appear in every important DP recording except Kentucky Woman, a Neil Diamond cover, their first single in 1968. I'd bet they played no material from that first record at their Russian shows.

        Of the principal writers, however, only Gillan remains, as Ritchie Blackmore and Jon Lord are no longer performing with the Purple. So Gillan will have to pay so that Gillan can get paid. The crazy remains.

        [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 10 Jul 2009 @ 12:34pm

        Re: Re: Original Band

        So, I guess with that information on hand, the question is which set of band members are on record to be paid by the NGO.

        [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Gord Wait, 11 Jul 2009 @ 11:58pm

        Re: Re: Original Band

        Actually, three of the current members were the "Machine Head" lineup, IE Smoke on the Water, arguably the most identifiable version of Deep Purple.
        Unfortunately John Lord is unable to play the hammond much, due to arthritis, else it would be four of them.

        [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Another AC, 10 Jul 2009 @ 11:32am

    This make perfect sense

    I really don't know why you could disagree, how else do you expect NGO to pay their bills.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Eric (profile), 10 Jul 2009 @ 11:37am

    In Russia, songs license you.

    Dr E

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Ima Fish, 10 Jul 2009 @ 11:48am

    move on

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Dark Helmet, 10 Jul 2009 @ 11:49am

    you too

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    David (profile), 10 Jul 2009 @ 11:50am

    Well this could actually be a good experiment

    It will let the band see how much of the money paid in license fees actually get to them... :=/

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Poster, 10 Jul 2009 @ 11:56am

    Dear God, it's like a black hole of stupidity.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      DJ (profile), 10 Jul 2009 @ 12:55pm

      Re:

      It's not a black hole of stupidity. If it were, you wouldn't know it.

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Ryan, 10 Jul 2009 @ 1:12pm

        Re: Re:

        I am surmising that a Black Hole of Stupidity refers to a black hole that prevents any intelligence or reason from escaping the event horizon, leaving only a giant hole of stupidity in the fabric of space-time.

        [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Sea Man, 10 Jul 2009 @ 12:09pm

    I can't believe no one has yet said...

    In soviet Russia, fines pay you!

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    No Imagination (profile), 10 Jul 2009 @ 12:09pm

    I didnt read all the comments, but am I too late..?

    "In Soviet Russia..."

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Osno (profile), 10 Jul 2009 @ 12:11pm

    Sorry to break it to you, Mike, but common sense died a long time ago. I think it was right after the Napster trial.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    DanC (profile), 10 Jul 2009 @ 12:36pm

    The promoter, not Deep Purple?

    According to this article, it's not the band itself but the concert promoter who failed to pay the proper public performance licenses.

    The whole matter still seems incredibly ridiculous, however.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    william, 10 Jul 2009 @ 12:45pm

    not uncommon?

    awhile ago I send in the story about the Taiwanese collection agency MUST... apparently they requires the Artist to apply to them for permits when they are planning to have concerts too.

    I just don't understand how such silly and illogical situation can arise.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 10 Jul 2009 @ 1:00pm

    What is so amazing that a politically backward country such as Russia is tied up with the same stupidity that occurs in 21th century societies. From what I can see, there isn't much difference between Russia and most African countries when it comes corruption.

    It would be news worthy if they didn't have the same stupidity.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Overcast (profile), 10 Jul 2009 @ 1:27pm

    Ohhh, they beat other agencies to this - I bet the RIAA and others are jealous!

    You think they'll try to copyright this idea and sue?

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 10 Jul 2009 @ 1:56pm

    They asked for it...

    Well, Deep Purple is an RIAA affiliated band and the record industry has been pressuring Russia to crack down on licensing, so here you go. Sometimes, what goes around comes around.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Maclizard (profile), 10 Jul 2009 @ 3:31pm

    Lets be serious

    Common sense just died.

    Come now, common sense has been dead for years now. You might not remember though; much like Farra Fauset's death being over-shadowed by that of the king of pop, the death common sense was pushed aside by the death of privacy.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Jon, 10 Jul 2009 @ 4:24pm

    And in other news RIAA lawyers collectively facepalmed themselves and said why didn't we think of that?

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Mr Big Content, 10 Jul 2009 @ 4:43pm

    Makes Sense To Me

    Remember, Russia isn't a Commie country any more. Now that they have all the benefits of Western-style freedoms, along with that goes Western-style responsibilities, which means they have to respect property rights, just like we do in the West. Even property that's "all in the mind" (intellectual property) needs to be respected, albeit in a mindful way. One thing's for sure, it DEFFINNATELY beats the old Commie hidebound bureaucratic way of doing things. Isn't Capitalism awesome?

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 10 Jul 2009 @ 4:48pm

    All I know about this is that once upon a time one could go to a bar in the US and there was live musicians playing. Now you go to a bar and there is a TV playing.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    jong, 10 Jul 2009 @ 7:22pm

    It's only ridiculous because it's ridiculous that this far from Deep Purple band is touring as Deep Purple.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Mr Dave, 11 Jul 2009 @ 4:34am

    Just like the UK

    Here in the UK, an organization called PRS (prsformusic.com) would go after the venue owner for the fees, but the PRS rep would tell the venue owner that they should collect the fees from the band, so it's still the band that pays for the right to play their own songs. I believe they take about £14 per performance (per song?) and give less than £1 of that back.

    There's no way out of it either, other than releasing all the songs into the public domain, the law says the PRS may collect for any performance of copyrighted music!

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    AlfeG, 11 Jul 2009 @ 2:24pm

    It's deep puprple submit to court

    You are not right.

    It's Band of Deep Purple was get to the court for the russian concert hall, that need to pay all royalties for the Deep Purple. It's a little stupid but it's the DeepPurple issue not russians(because DP not own there songs, single members of band own all rights for the songs).
    Please learn all documents before complain.

    You can find information in the russian habrahabr.ru: http://habrahabr.ru/blogs/copyright/63217/ (yep it's russian)

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    petr999 (profile), 12 Jul 2009 @ 7:27am

    dp pays R. Gov. as as a legal play

    So, Deep Purple pays itself as a legal consequence of fair play of authors'rights and human rights, right?
    In deed, Deep Purple pays to Authors' society its commission , right.
    Deep Purple, beloved by president Medvedev, who picked a shot of himself among them behind the scenes at a concert, Deep Purple pays royalty to legacy organization controlled, licensed and so on by... Russian Government. right?
    And here the Prime Minister Vladimir Putin comes out. Just what's about him?
    Being altogether all over Medvedev's election campaign, they were split on that Deep Purple's concert. No, Putin picked no shots with these celebs for his sweet memory giving food for kremlinologists' considerations. As well, no jeans wear on him in public noticed.
    Although there are much more powers whom these both officials are tend to serve as a face of intentions, powers those are about to be the people of Russian Federation, right? Since the officials are simply the faces of the Forcing Rule, I'm about to consider their acts as a messages.
    So again, Putin had not visited Deep Purple's concert with Medvedev, just like speaking to us "it's not his favor".
    Now, Government, headed by Putin, faced by Authors' Society, charges Deep Purple, just like speaking to us "it is not a favor".
    Looks like little somebody, now Government-related, did it to them again. :-)
    So I have 2 questions: 1. Why was it needed to send such a message again. 2. Why here is a tech, not political, dirt :-)

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    johnney, 12 Jul 2009 @ 10:20am

    Old news. there was one other article about a hair salon I think, I can't remember where, playing some ipod music or other, and the 'music police' came in and fined them for publicly broadcasting an artist without having a license. Absurd if only because playing a portable radio in public is totally legal most anywhere.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Hephaestus (profile), 12 Jul 2009 @ 8:23pm

    I Love this .....

    Yet another band to pick up .... lol

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    JILL, 13 Jul 2009 @ 2:39am

    DEEP PURPLE

    RUSSIA NEVER FINED THE BEATLES FOR PLAYING THEIR OWN MUSIC ABOUT RUSSIA,IN RUSSIA

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    0ffh, 13 Jul 2009 @ 5:26am

    Same happens here in Germany if a Band plays its own songs without first telling GEMA (NGO) that it will perform a gig! Or if it performs a gig of songs which are of no concern to GEMA (because the writers of the songs have no agreement with GEMA) without telling the GEMA first there will be a gig and list all the songs to prove they are all non-GEMA! Not funny!

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    sebastian velasquez, 21 Jul 2009 @ 7:00am

    Common Sense

    Actually, common sense died when the Russian Goverment Agency fined the band and not the producer of the concert. It is he, the producer who in fact should pay for this licence for which deep blue would be paid too afterwards by the group's own society...which should have a reciprocity contract with the russian agency....so in fact...it is the concert's producer whi should have paid the fine...

    sebastian velasquez
    Copyright Lawyer

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    ttownbeast, 19 Aug 2009 @ 5:22pm

    sounds like...

    To me this just sounds like racketeering after all the RSA receives a cut for doing nothing really except making threats.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    gut, 3 Nov 2009 @ 3:18pm

    stupid stupid stupid

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Shepard Fairey Case Gets More Complex: Mannie... >>
<< A Closer Look At How Amanda Palmer Connected...
 tdicon 
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: I Invented Email
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories

Thursday

18:27 E And J Gallo Sends Cease And Desist Trademark Notice To E And B Beer (5)
15:26 West Virginia Tries To Improve Broadband Competition, Incumbent ISPs Immediately Sue (9)
13:22 Court Blocks Wisconsin Augmented Reality Permit Law From Being Enforced (16)
11:55 Olive Garden Apologizes To Allofgarden.com, Blames IP Enforcement Bot For Legal Threat (20)
10:45 Exaggerated Claims And Out Of Context Tweets Used By Political Hopeful To Slap Restraining Order On Critic (22)
10:40 Daily Deal: The Deep Learning and AI Bundle (0)
09:25 Judge Tosses Vexatious Litigant Brett Kimberlin's Lawsuit Against Conservative Blogger (35)
06:28 Over 190 Engineers & Tech Experts Tell The FCC It's Dead Wrong On Net Neutrality (58)
03:23 Sex History Educational Site Wants To Know If It's Going To Be Bricked Up Behind UK's Porn Wall (25)

Wednesday

18:44 Titleist Tees Up Lawsuit Against Parody Clothier Because Golf Doesn't Have A Sense Of Humor (24)
More arrow
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.