Monopoly Rents: Canadian Collection Society Wants To Massively Increase Rates

from the silence-the-music dept

In the last few months, we've noticed that collections societies around the world are getting desperate for any possible way to collect more money. It's really stunning just how many of these sorts of stories we've seen, all over the globe. It's as if all the collections societies got together and said "how can we squeeze more money out of absolutely anything -- even if it kills off the golden goose," and then set about putting that plan into action. From Australia to Sweden to the UK to the US to Germany, we get story after story after story of incredibly short-sighted collections societies either (a) pushing the gov't to allow them to extort charge larger fees to venues or (b) massively expanding what they consider to be a public performance that requires a royalty. These societies are taking an incredibly short-sighted view. They're causing more and more venues to stop playing music altogether, thus harming everyone.

Mr. Tunes alerts us to the fact that this is now happening in Canada as well, where a smaller collection society, the Neighbouring Rights Collective of Canada, is demanding massive increases in fees, as well as an expansion of what's covered. Of course, SOCAN, the Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada, already collects fees in Canada, but apparently these are different fees -- and they're much higher than SOCAN's. When that fact is pointed out to the NRCC person, his response is simply that SOCAN's rates were too low. Apparently, they'd rather shut venues down rather than have them help promote music. Brilliant.

Filed Under: canada, collection society, music
Companies: neighboring rights collective

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. identicon
    RD, 23 Jul 2009 @ 7:43am


    But then again I'm a certified idiot and certainly was not pointing out that in that previous case it seemed that Techdirt was concerned more about the pictures themselves being taken and have used arguments of "If it's in public it's OK to take pictures that anyone else can take."

    No, its not about that. You are intentionally missing the point to be combative. Taking *A* picture in public is fine all around. Taking a picture of EVERY MOTORIST as they pass through an area, then storing and cross-referencing that data is alarming, or should be to any rational person. This would be bad enough if it was someone like Google, even if it wouldnt be illegal, but when the govt does it, for the reasons mentioned in my previous post (they have the AUTHORITY over the citizenry) then its a LOT more than just "taking a picture." And to even out the comparison, google took ONE pic (well, several really but from different angles, but it was at one time) of any given house and thats it. They didnt take a pic EVERY TIME someone entered or left the house, for instance, or every hour of the day, or whatever.

    If you cant see the difference there, then I welcome you to your new home in Fascist America, hope you enjoy your 100% observed, tracked and controlled stay.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: I Invented Email
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

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