Mobile/PDA About Us Advertise here


		User name	Password

		Not registered yet? Register here. Lost your password? Click here.

Browse by topic

News

BPI sues MCPS

1 July 2005 10:20 by James "Dela" Delahunty | 3 comments

The British Phonographic Industry (BPI) has announced that it is taking MCPS (the Mechanical Copyright Protection Society) to the copyright tribunal over its charging of online music subscriptions and legal downloads. The BPI claims that MCPS is charging too much for music downloads and is supported in this action by Apple's iTunes, AOL, MusicNet, Napster, Real, Sony Connect and Yahoo!. They are all annoyed because the charges set on digital downloads (or "mechanical reproduction") is much higher than charges on CDs.

The charge on downloads is about 50% - 100% higher than the charge of making physical copies of music, such as copies of music on CDs. "The licence that the Alliance is trying to impose for online music is unreasonable and unsustainable. It is charging a royalty rate on a download that is double the rate it charges for a song on a CD. It applies this excessive rate to a whole range of online music services, without taking into account their different characteristics. The Alliance's tariff threatens to seriously harm the development of the legal online and mobile music markets." said Geoff Taylor, general counsel for BPI.

According to the BPI, publishing royalties are set as 6.5% of retail prices and the rates for broadcasting radio ranges from 3% - 5.25% of net advertising revenue. However the rate on music downloads is allegedly 12% of gross retail revenues, but is temporarily set at 8% now. Adam Singer, the new group chief executive of the MCPS-PRS Alliance is unhappy with the BPI's decision.

"This is a disappointing Tribunal reference by the BPI and the digital service providers, and one that could have been avoided. Industry observers must be baffled by record companies taking the publishing divisions of their own companies through a Tribunal procedure - spending millions that neither side can afford. This Tribunal reference does tremendous damage to the Industry as a whole, not least in the eyes of Government. For a creative industry this demonstrates a complete lack of imagination." Singer said.

Source:
The Register

Permalink to this article

BPI claims file-sharing decline in UK (5 April 2006)

UK's National Consumer Council criticises BPI over lawsuits (8 October 2005)

Five people to appear in court for sharing music in UK (1 August 2005)

UK music download milestone reached (11 July 2005)

Apple giving prizes to downloaders until 500 million target is reached (8 July 2005)

New campaign urges parents to check their kids' downloads (9 June 2005)

UK court orders ISPs to hand over subscriber details of file sharers (19 April 2005)

BPI threatening British file sharers again (16 March 2005)

BPI wins court order against British P2P users (14 October 2004)

« Previous news article
IFPI loses P2P case in Taiwan

Next news article »
Sweden applied new copyright laws

Post your comment

Discuss this article!
p4_tt (Senior Member) 1 July 2005 17:40
If there ripping people off what do they blooming expect!!! [ + quote] This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 1 July 2005 17:41
Pop_Smith (Senior Member) 2 July 2005 22:02
Three and Four-letter companies suing each other :P This CAN be good. It brings me the question, why can't the R$AA sue the MPAA or vis versa? lol that would be the headline to see :) [ + quote]
lcarbutt (Senior Member) 3 July 2005 9:53
This is funny as hell. [ + quote]