PRS - Taking the P*ss??

Referring to the article on today’s BBC News Website http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7458671.stm

Someone has a nice little earner there huh!!  I wish I thought of the idea first....

 Its a tricky bag this one.

On the one hand I say - "you dont like paying for music ? - work in silence !"

On the other - PRS (& MCPS) distribution can be sooooo uneven that it all ends up in Robbie Williams's pocket anyway (after they've taken their cut)

I know quite a few people who have to pay these license fees, and our only gripe is, that it so rarely ends up in the right pocket. Other than that, I've got no issue with collection agencies actively guarding musician's (fast disappearing) rights.

 Every time you take music for free you are literally stealing food from the hands of the musician that made it. Whether that be via downloads for personal listening or crying out of paying license fees.
 

Yeah I understand where you are coming from but where I don't get it is if the radio stations are already paying their PRS licence fee, why should an office have to pay a fee again for listening to that radio station - we have the music so low in the background you can barely hear it as any louder it's unprofessional

If we were a nightclub or bar where we benefited from their gain of course 100% they should pay!

Maybe we should all bring our "personal stereo's" in and listen to our own radio station - but we would never hear the phones ring!

 Yeah, the PRS do take the pi$$! They can see an easy way to line their pockets and they're going all out for it. So, if my music's on myspace, should myspace be paying me every time my music is played?

Re. the radio playing in the background - we already pay for that with our TV licenses, irrespective of where we are, we have payed our bit to have the privilege of listening to the radio. If we went to work just so we could listen to the radio, maybe our company should pay extra. Maybe shops who use music to create the 'vibe' they want to impress upon shoppers should pay extra as it is enhancing their image..

 I used to DJ in a pub and this little old man (i.e. 65 if not older) from the PRS came into the pub one day and ordered half a pint of beer and took a seat. I was astounded when this bloke appeared to know every track I played, from 60's through to drum and bass. Every track that came on, he'd listen for a minute, nod his head and quickly jot down the song and the artist. RESPECT to the old dude for knowing his stuff!

"So, if my music's on myspace, should myspace be paying me every time my music is played?"

In fact under the  MCPS / myspace agreement - in THEORY they should (or rather MCPS-PRS should) - the problem is - everytime one of your tracks is streamed, the 4pence or whatever, goes along with all the other million 4pences which should belong to you and other independent/unknown artists - into the pockets of Robbie Williams et al.

This is the same problem with unfairly taxing small business. The general license fee - does not get shared out proportionately amongst the 'small business musicians' which MCPS-PRS cry out that they are protecting.

 As a working composer MCPS/PRS is a mixed blessing - and they often cross the line. However I'm not sure there is an better solution that I know of.
 

If someone really claims to be artisically inclined then surely he will be listening to carefully selected music on disc or whatever format is to hand. Royalties? We Molestranglers never pay for anything, if we can avoid it.

Personally right now I'm basking in the glories of Gesualdo (and not only lovely music, but a double murderer too)!.