Music Copyright Philippines

FILSCAP Music Copyright Infomercial now showing in SM Cinemas Nationwide

2014-01-07T08:39:00.000+08:00

Filipino Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers Inc., the country’s biggest organization that enforces the rights of music creators, in partnership with SM Cinema, recently released an infomercial on music copyright. The 45-second video that will run for one year (2013-2014) is a FILSCAP initiated effort in increasing public awareness on the value of music and garnering more recognition and support for the rights of music creators.

The release of the infomercial in cinemas is a big win for music creators worldwide as far as providing the general public with information on the indispensable and ever-present role of music in our everyday lives. It is also a call to individuals and business practitioners to comply with the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines which states the need to secure proper permission from music creators for the use of music in any personal and/or business transactions—a right that is diligently enforced by FILSCAP.

***

FILSCAP is a non-stock, non-profit association of composers, lyricists and music publishers established in 1965 to primarily administer and enforce the “authorization rights” of music creators / copyright owners with respect to the public performance and communication to the public of their musical works. It is a regular member of the Paris-based International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers (CISAC) which is the international confederation for copyright societies around the world. At present, FILSCAP has 900+ members and 40+ affiliate foreign societies, and holds the right to license the public playing or transmission of at least 90% of the popular copyrighted local and foreign musical works in the Philippines. FILSCAP’s licensees include, among others, TV stations, radio stations, concert/event producers, malls, retail stores, restaurants, bars, music lounges, cinemas, salons, spas, airlines, hotels, casinos, amusement parks and website owners/operators.

The Music Empire Strikes Back?

2010-07-04T06:00:00.005+08:00

Seeing news like this gives me a feeling of watching Music Star Wars. The beleaguered musical giants are doing their best to take out an itch they can hardly scratch: peer-to-peer software providers.

FRAMINGHAM - Eight music publishers have sued LimeWire LLC of massive copyright infringement, even as a federal court in New York is considering a request by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) to shut the file-sharing software maker down over a similar complaint.

The music publishers’s lawsuit, filed this week in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, charges LimeWire with facilitating “pervasive online infringement” of music copyrights.

Source: Music industry hits LimeWire with yet another lawsuit

The same news can be found at the Philippine Daily Inquirer: Music publishers file copyright suit against LimeWire
How can LimeWire be accused of illegally selling something when, technically, they're just the messengers? Ahem. Peer-to-peer software providers are guilty of only one thing: empowering the software users to "steal" music. Gosh, I prefer at this point not to get into the gray areas of this situation. All I can see is a great global deluge.

As I mentioned in my earlier posts, technology has put the music industry into something which I can only compare to the global flood during Noah's time. How can they define tariffs when there are no more boundaries? The entire framework for doing business in music needs to change.

I wish I know how. Meantime, we can only watch people grasping at straws. It's not an amusing sight.

Pirates About to Face Obama

2010-06-27T18:15:00.003+08:00

Obama's plan to step up anti-piracy campaign is something to take note of. Soon that will reach Philippine shores, especially when this news piece actually mentions the arrest of intellectual pirates in the Philippines.

"The Obama administration on Tuesday announced the first-ever strategic plan on intellectual property enforcement, which is intended to both boost and better coordinate efforts to stop piracy at home and abroad, online and through physical sales for American products including movies, TV shows, video games, computer software, pharmaceuticals, counterfeit goods and more."
- Obama administration steps up anti-piracy plan

That's not something to be proud of, as a Filipino. But it's something to rejoice about in the face of rampant music piracy in the Philippines that is robbing Filipino music composers of their intellectual property.

Will Noynoy Aquino run after pirates as well? With Mar Roxas as his hench man, we can hope for that.

In the meantime, let's step on the gas for our educational campaign.

Buying Music is a Moral Act

2010-04-14T03:00:00.078+08:00

I found an unexpected source in recent literature about buying music as a moral act, not just an ecomomic or social one. It's in paragraph 66 of Caritas In Veritate, the encyclical written by Pope Benedict XVI.

(If only for this reason, perhaps all musicians should consider becoming Catholics ... ^_^)

Paragraph 66 partly goes as follows (emphases mine):

Global interconnectedness has led to the emergence of a new political power, that of consumers and their associations. This is a phenomenon that needs to be further explored, as it contains positive elements to be encouraged as well as excesses to be avoided. It is good for people to realize that purchasing is always a moral — and not simply economic — act. Hence the consumer has a specific social responsibility, which goes hand-in- hand with the social responsibility of the enterprise. Consumers should be continually educated regarding their daily role, which can be exercised with respect for moral principles without diminishing the intrinsic economic rationality of the act of purchasing.

Acknowledging music copyright is everyone's responsibility. Music copyright has the same weight as a title in real estate. Trespassing this property is against the law and against the sensibilities of human nature, most especially those of the creators of music.

Implementing laws against trespassers in real estate properties are doable. When music is strictly on vinyl records, music copyright is easy to protect too. But ever since music is copied on tapes, then to discs, then to MP3s, policing music copyright is now a gargantuan task.

The nagging question would be: is it enough to legislate and regulate music copyright in today's world? can we formulate and implement laws about music copyright in the internet age wherein the power rests on the consumer with a laptop and broadband internet connection? How do you police the use of music in the age of emails, music downloads, bluetooths, CD burners, CD rippers, and the like in the homes of hundreds of millions of consumers?

Impossible. What we need these days is the heart of the music user.

I tend to believe that what the music industry is experiencing right now is some kind of a "revenge" by consumers for the overprotective way by which music copyright was handled in pre-internet days. How sweet indeed it is to find something freely in abundance when once upon a time it costs us a lot.

I also see this as an opportunity for the music industry to redefine itself, to craft new ways of promoting music and rewarding the creators.

Most importantly, I see the phenomenon as the required opening in the eyes of the public about its moral obligation towards the creators of music. For too long such obligation rested in the hands of music producers, publishers and music administrators. For too long these institutions lobbied with Congress and law enforcers for the protection of their turfs.

Yet who, in reality, accumulated most of the money?

Technology has ripped all of the fortresses of these institutions apart.

A change in terrain is clearly in order.

Music Users Asked About Garage Band Music Copyright

2010-04-07T03:00:00.080+08:00

Somebody posted in Yahoo! Answers a music copyright question concerning GarageBand in Apple computers.

The exchange went this way:

I'm making a film for a film festival, and I was wondering if it causes any copyright issue or something to use music in garageband. In the Apple website, it says xxx However, I don't exactly get what they mean. Does it mean that I can't use a single loop at a time, but more than one loop is fine to use?

The "Best Answer" was given by "ssj6akshat" (a top contributor)

They are saying that you can't sell their loops standalone but you can definitely sell the music you created with those loops.

I find that exchange admirable. It demonstrated a sincere inquiry into the copyright issues concerning the use of music inside the computer that the user owns; and a honest-to-goodness help from someone else whom the music user may not know since Adam.

When people are conscious about music copyright in the things that they do, they give music composers the respect that they deserve in society.

Why is that respect a big deal? It's because music composers need to be accorded the same respect as those we accord to painters and sculptors. They are creators of music. The only difference is that music is an intellectual copyright, not a tangible painting or a statue that everyone sees and say, "Oh, this is an Abueva sculpture" or something like that.

Musical creations do not reach our ears with a name tag that says, this is written by "Juan dela Cruz." In fact, music is usually attributed to the performer, more than to the composer.

The song "Urong Sulong" for instance is usually attributed to Regine Velasquez who simply sang that song. She didn't create it. The one who wrote "Urong Sulong" and who collects the music copyright for that song is Christine Bendebel, a name almost everyone outside of the music industry may not have heard of.

So, it is important that when we use music, we are conscious that someone owns that song; and that just as we are careful not to construct a fence over someone else's property; we should be as conscious about the fact that we don't tamper with someone else's music without that owner's expressed permission.

You may be amused that violators of music copyright include Christian Churches. Praise Music Publishing makes an appeal to frequent users of Christian songs in their services to pay up. If 1,000 Churches pay Php1,000 every month (a very low amount to start with) for music copyright, we're talking here of P1 million collection every month. That money goes to the creators of the music.

When we understand music copyright, we don't say, "Oh, these people are just after the money." What's the right attitude? We say, "Thank you. How much is my bill?" How do you call someone who does not ask that question after eating a great meal in a restaurant?

Philippines Still in US Watch List for Rampant Copyright Infringement?

2010-03-31T09:37:00.005+08:00

The Philippines is in the US Watch List for rampant copyright infringement, and nobody seems to talk about it. Nothing works like a freshly baked news from abroad to jolt us to that reality. If Indonesia is complaining, why isn't the Philippines doing the same?

The United States has once again put Indonesia into its Priority Watch List of countries with rampant copyright infringement, despite claims by the government in Jakarta of progress on that front.

Eleven other countries are included on the list, such as China, India, Thailand and the Philippines. (emphasis mine)

Source: http://www.thejakartapost.com

Truth is, I'm not surprised. I cannot help but hear people talk about buying cheap but good copies of music and video CDs in very accessible areas in Metro Manila, not to mention the street vendors selling those stuff to passersby (although in fairness, these vendors are nowhere to be found in many areas now, thanks to the efforts of Bayani Fernando.)

A friend of mine argued with a seminar facilitator who spoke against pirated CDs. My friend said, "Tell me why I would choose to buy a CD ten times the price of a slightly inferior version. If I lose the cheaper version, I'll just buy another one. If I lose an original copy, will the movie distributor replace that lost copy? I know how much a blank CD costs."

That in itself already sounded like a potent argument. But what really caught me was the response of the other participants in the seminar room: they all clapped and cheered! These participants were no ordinary street guys. They were professionals and businessmen.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not supporting copyright infringement. I'm only describing the state of affairs, the so-called "Point A" in the march towards the envisioned "Point B" wherein people respect and uphold copyright.

Indeed, if we want Filipinos to invest in on their talents, we Filipinos need to learn how to give commensurate value to our own talents. Doing that, however, is inseparable from the need to give commensurate value to the talents of everyone, including foreign films and music.

In the meantime, we are reaping what we have sown.

But we can sow new values and reap great rewards in the future, especially for our children.

The Anatomy of Music Piracy

2009-12-21T03:00:00.000+08:00

What's clear about music piracy is, it's stealing. The surprising question after that is, "what constitutes stealing?" Then all hell breaks loose. Their is much debate on that question as we speak.

Typing "music piracy" in Wikipedia will redirect you the "Copyright infringement." No sweat, it's the same thing. Wikipedia defines "music piracy" or "copyright infringement" as follows:

Copyright infringement (or copyright violation) is the unauthorized use of material that is covered by copyright law, in a manner that violates one of the copyright owner's exclusive rights, such as the right to reproduce or perform the copyrighted work, or to make derivative works. (Wikipedia)

Definitions in other sites do not vary as much. But in my arguments today, I''ll show that such definition is not only outdated and impractical, it also lacks in scope.

Pirated CDs

Once upon a time, the Greenhills Shopping Complex is the beehive of music pirates selling high quality pirated music and video CDs. You can hardly see them there these days. Instead, go to Saint Francis Square, right behind SM Mega Mall Building A. The beehive moved there.

Clearly, those CDs are stolen. That's because the producers say so. Those CDs are very good "photocopies" of the original. The cost of the original CD includes the cost of recording, designing the package, replicating, arranging, distributing, promoting (which is the really expensive part) and other overhead stuff.

The music pirates pay only for the cost of replicating and distributing, plus perhaps a minor overhead. They ride on the promotion done by the legitimate producers . . . and rake the profits that rightfully belong to the producer . . . and at the same sell the pirated CDs at prices way below the original.

How we wish we can be as clear as this one with respect to the other modes of piracy.

Friendly CD Copies

What about copying a music CD you purchased, keeping the original in a shelf, and playing only the copy? People do this to protect the original from scratches and be careless with the copy. When the copy gets scratched, people simply make a new copy. This is not music piracy.

But what if you make two copies and give one copy to a friend? Or make more than one extra copy and give those copies for free to friends? Technology in any computer you can buy allow anyone to do that anytime. Is this music piracy? Producers say it is.

What a very thin, almost imperceptible line of difference, isn't it? But who agrees with the producers? Who even cares about what producers think? People would argue, "How can you police that? That's happening in every home I know? Can you call the 14 million people in Manila alone, music pirates?"

Commercial Music Downloads

What's clear about music downloads is, when you sell MP3 files without the approval of the producer, you are a music pirate, in the sense that you are stealing profits that rightfully belong to the producer. That's clear enough!

So, do we have a new definition of music piracy here? MP3s are digital files. They're intangible, unlike CDs. There's no way we can control the flow of MP3 files in the digital world. But it's the profit that we're talking about now. Only legitimate entities (meaning those who pay the producers royalties) can do business with those MP3s and rake profits from it.

Speaking of controlling MP3s, they are working on it. But I don't think whatever they're doing is helping at all. People do not want those controls.

What's DRM? An invisible layer of software that bodyguards a computer file and limits what you can and can't do with it. Buy a song from Apple's iTunes Media Store, for example, and you can copy the file to five computers but no more. xxx but there's something annoyingly unfair about FairPlay even in the abstract. You paid for the music. Who is Apple to tell you where you can and can't stick it? (Source: Time.com)

I suggest you read the source of the above quote. You'll get more information there that will amuse you, including the threat from Microsoft to remove the DRM in any MP3 from iTunes.

Peer-to-Peer Music Downloads

Producers are saying that when you rip music from a legitimate CD and convert them to MP3, and then forward these MP3s to friends, you are already a music pirate. That makes users of Limewire music pirates, doesn't it? Does everyone agree? Does anyone care?

Being someone who used to be in the music licensing business, I tend to agree that indeed, peer-to-peer music downloads is music piracy ... under the "old" no-internet system. In the internet world, you can still call it music piracy if you want, but at the end of the day, how do you control that?

Conversations with music composers shocked me even more. These people couldn't care less. Gary Granada, an outspoken music composer and performer, is giving away his music for free to anyone who has the time to download his songs.

Another person, Eric Cabrera, otherwise known as Cabring of Datu's Tribe, told me, "I will encourage music piracy" in the internet, because that was his way of promoting his band!

So, is non-commercial peer-to-peer music download piracy? If it helps bands promote their music and earn profits in their gigs, how can you call that piracy? Piracy is about losing money to someone else. Gary Granada and Eric Cabrera think they can make money from giving away MP3s for free.

Other Music Piracy Methods

The RIAA has four kinds of music piracy. We have somehow covered three of them, namely:

pirate recording (pirated sound but different packaging)
counterfeit recording (complete duplicate of original, both sound and packaging)
online piracy (Source: WhatIs.TechTarget.com).

The last one is bootleg recordings, or "the illegal recordings of live or broadcast music." Notice how security officers make sure concert goers do not have cameras with them? But then how can they control that these days? Ban the cell phones? I don't think so.

So, who's really losing money here?

I'm no fan of Courtney Love, but that lady clearly has superior intellect and blunt about it. She made an famous or infamous (depending on perspective) speech that blasted the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). We have a similar organization in the Philippines and it's called the Philippine Association of the Record Industry (PARI).

You can check out her whole speech here:
http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/06/14/love/

You can find the same speech at this "quote" site, and this site "quotes" the entire speech:
http://www.famousquotes.me.uk/speeches/Courtney-Love/

In summary, she was saying that producers make all the money, but music bands do not. She was speaking as an artist.

The reason why her speech resonated in me was because I saw those very same sentiments from music composers in the Philippines against the music producers.

Why are producers complaining? It's because they're losing money.

Why are music composers and artists not complaning? It's because technology now allows them a chance to make real money!

Go figure.

What Courtney Love said in her speech as an artist is something I hear music composers and performers in the Philippines are also saying...

Now artists have options. We don't have to work with major labels anymore, because the digital economy is creating new ways to distribute and market music. (Source: Salon.com)

So, as Courtney Love has implied, music pirates include producers who rake all the money, leaving none to the artists. Courtney says, "The system's set up so almost nobody gets paid" (Salon.com). I hear music composers say the same thing in the Philippines about music producers and publishers.

So, what's music piracy? I propose this definition (all emphases mine):

Music piracy is any act that deprives music copyright owners their fair share in the sale of their musical creations.

With that definition, all peer-to-peer downloads and friendly copies are off the hook (I can sense tomatoes and expletives being thrown at me now).

Those who make money from the sale of musical creations---whether online or offline--without paying royalties to copyright owners are music pirates.

But then, music producers and music publishers who don't give artists and composers their fair share of the collections are music pirates too. Courtney Love says (emphases mine),

Story after story gets told about artists -- some of them in their 60s and 70s, some of them authors of huge successful songs that we all enjoy, use and sing -- living in total poverty, never having been paid anything. Not even having access to a union or to basic health care. Artists who have generated billions of dollars for an industry die broke and un-cared for.

And they're not actors or participators. They're the rightful owners, originators and performers of original compositions.

This is piracy.

(Source: Salon.com)

Indeed, that's piracy too, big time!

Music Industry in the Philippines - Part 4: Promotion

2009-12-14T03:00:00.003+08:00

Promotion is the other area in the music industry where the record company's money gets sucked up dry. Why?

Promotion Tool #1 - Radio Stations
Promotion Tool #2 - TV Guestings
Promotion Tool #3 - Print
Promotion Tool #4 - Ring Tones

Radio Promotion

Radio alone is expensive. Trash the law on music copyright with respect to radio stations. The sad truth is, the music industry pays radio stations for playing the songs, never the other way around.

Why? Radio stations are promotional tools! They're not music users. They're promoters. If it's not on radio, people don't buy the albums. To be on radio, you pay radio stations big time.

Radio stations are still very instrumental venues for promoting the songs. How the industry is supposed to work is that when radio stations play the songs, people hear that a song is "No. 1" and then they buy the albums in the music stores. Then, the record company makes money.

Not anymore, dude!

Technology came in and people started "ripping" the songs from the CDs and store them as MP3 files. MP3 files are easily shared electronically. You can't stop that. MP3s, streaming audios, peer-to-peer music file sharing (not to mention music piracy) ganged up on the traditional system of making money in music. It's back bone is crashed. I don't see how it can ever stand up as before. No way, Jose!

CD sales have plummeted, record companies are making much less money, and there simply is a general feeling of "drought" in the music industry these days (at least as of last year when I was still around).

Frankly I ask myself how songs can be marketed under the present system. The old system does not fit the terrain anymore. A new set-up has to be in place, and then all the rules have to be revised. This actually spells e-x-c-i-t-i-n-g.

TV Guestings

TV guesting is when the performer appears on TV to promote the song. Frankly, I have no clear idea how this is arranged and how it costs. All I know is that this works best when the performer is a popular personality in the Philippines.

Filipinos watch a lot of TV. When something is promoted on TV by a celebrity, then it must be cool! Having a copy of the album promoted on TV makes one cool! So on and so forth. I think this is how it works, or why would anyone buy the very first music album of G_____ C______? All but a handful of people who go to videoke bars can sing outrageously much better than him.

If one doesn't know nor like the persons bubbling on TV, one couldn't care less. Mute that box, Baby!

Print Promotion

I don't know much about print, except that it's expensive. Albums are promoted via print, but again, it works best when readers have at least a faint idea about who the performer is.

Ring Tones

Promoting a song via ring tones is a novel idea being implemented by the Information Gateway or IG for short. IG is actually a content provider for telephone operators. What they do is develop ring tones that can be downloaded by mobile phone users for a fee.

The downside of ring tones as a promotional tool is, it cannot cater to everyone who produces an album. It can cater to only one album at a time.

Music Industry in the Philippines - Part 3: Packaging & Replication

2009-12-07T03:00:00.068+08:00

Packaging and CD replication are done almost at the same time. By the time the CD copies roll out, the packaging materials are ready. But anyone who produces his own music and sells it straight to his or her crowd in the internet may no longer need to read this post.

Packaging is everything that has something to do with the branding of the music album. That includes selection of the album title, carrier single, theme, images and material.

Design, Titles and Credits. The packaging contains colors and images, the title of the album, the title of the carrier single (if any), the titles of the songs, the label logo, the credits, etc. The list of songs include the names of the music composers.

Other credits are also indicated in the packaging for all people who have worked behind the scenes: the executive producer, the producer, arranger, graphic artist, etc. At best, these credits occupy what would otherwise be a blank space in the packaging, so, might as well put something there to prop up egos.

The Music Label. A label is a trademark of the recording company or whoever the recording company ties up with to handle distribution. It's a graphic sign that appears on the rib of the cover as well as in the front and back covers.

Frankly, I do not see any practical purpose for these labels. Do people look for the label when looking for an album? No, they look for the name of the artist or the title of the song itself! Blame it on my naivete, I'd appreciate any sound explanation for these labels on those covers.

Bar codes. Now this one makes sense. It looks cool when your album contains a bar code. It makes you look more legitimate, something that labels are supposed to do.

But it has a more practical purpose than looking cool. Music stores appreciate bar codes. That's true at least with Odyssey Music and Astrovision, the two fierce rivals in music and video sales in the Philippines. They are both in major malls.

In the US, some labels are enticing independent producers to buy bar codes from them and, in the process, become part of their catalogue.

Check this out:
http://www.indierec.com/s-barcodes.html

Bar code vendors who pose as labels --- coz that's what they are --- make claims that, in effect, your album has a better chance of making it in the market if it contains a bar code. Will that be true in the Philippines? I don't personally think so, not yet. Still, the $20 price tag for the barcode looks very reasonable a cost for every album being produced.

Click this to see why music stores like barcodes:
http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/gadgets/high-tech-gadgets/upc.htm

Replication, as the name implies, is the reproduction of copies of the music, using the OMSR as the raw material.

CD producers, replicators and distributors are subject to the rules of the Optical Media Board (OMB), the government agency tasked to regulate the production of anything reproduced via optical devices. That covers both audio and video CDs.

Per OMB's Guidelines for Registration and Licensing (Memorandum Circular No. 2005-001), anyone involved in the production, replication and distribution of optical media must be registered with them, and that any new activity must have the permit of the OMB.

Legitimate commercial replicators these days ask from record companies the OMB permit (to be secured by the record company) before they replicate the CDs. This, I'm sure.

- - -

Whew!

Frankly, I have found writing all of the above a bit of a struggle.

In the internet world that I see, all those flashy designs on the album cover become irrelevant. All those permits from the Optical Media Board become irrelevant.

In the internet world that I see, you just go and produce the song, then either sell them online or give them away for free! Pirates are easily identified and crashed.

You may say, Marvin, you're talking Star Trek here. Well, talking Star Trek is one thing. Realizing that Facebook didn't exist just a few years ago is another.

If you don't go out and learn to sell your songs online and insist on sticking to existing rules, you may find out too late that the world that you know is already crashing down on you.

Next Post: Promotion

Music Industry in the Philippines - Part 2: Music Recording

2009-11-30T03:00:00.004+08:00

Music Recording is where the initial investment comes in. This is when someone --- either you or a record company --- gambles on your song and puts money into music recording, with the expectation of getting that money back when sales start to come in.

The most thrilling part in a music composer's life is music recording. Incidentally, music recording is also the most risky part for the record company's money.

And real success is still a long shot for a new artist today. Of the 32,000 new releases each year, only 250 sell more than 10,000 copies. And less than 30 go platinum. (Courtney Love, extracted from Salon.com)

That's 0.8% success rate, and that's in the USA, folks. I don't have as of this writing the figures for the Philippines. But do you think figures are better? I have gathered that albums of even the most popular artists seldom sell beyond 10,000 these days.

They blame piracy in the Philippines for that. I think it's more like, hey, the rules have changed and we haven't caught up with the new rules of the game yet. Or, perhaps they know that the rules have changed and industry stakeholders want to ward the change off and preserve the status quo.

If you're a music composer and have read this far, I think you have courage in you that withstands suggestions of doom. As I said, the rules have changed, and reading the full text of Courtney Love's speech nine years ago would englighten you on those changes happening in the Philippines today.

Daring music composers and performers today have the option to produce and market their own songs through the internet. Be your own music producer. Be your own music distributor. Then learn internet marketing. These are readily available and affordable tools today that Beatles and Bee Gees never enjoyed.

Internet marketing is huge and requires a series of posts. But nothing compares with getting it from real experts, for a price. I don't make a commission for this, but to prove my point, check out this link:

How to Promote Your Music Successfully on the Internet
http://www.musicbizacademy.com/bookstore/htpromotemusic.htm/top10.htm

I'll try to inject what little I know about internet marketing on the future post about Promotion.

But remember, there are no free lunches. You have to pay for the information somehow, but check out the author thoroughly. Does he really make money as he claims he does? I don't know how to verify that. But the amount of P1,250 to buy that book and trying out the concepts there is nothing compared to the risks in the most common option in music recording that people take.

What's the usual route that people take?

They sign a contract with a record company. Landing a recording contract is traditionally the dream of every music composer and music performer. This is when the record company agrees to finance the recording of the song using high tech equipment.

As I said, a recording contract is a very risky undertaking on the part of the record company. They work on numbers. For every x albums they record, they know most will fail. But success in one or two will compensate for the loss in the rest.

So, record companies manage their risks by letting you sign contracts that stocks up more favor on their part. It's your job to look into that contract before signing them. Many music composers do not do this. Results? Catastrophic.

Just two essential reminders:

Make sure the contracts DO NOT, in any way, transfer the ownership of your music copyright to the record company. You can lose millions here by being too excited and . . . careless.
Make sure the contracts DO NOT tie you up with producer "in perpetuity" or something to that effect. Signing that kind of contract is like selling the song to them already. Don't!
Insist on an Exit Clause. Know what their responsibilities are and what are yours. Know when they can kick you out, and insist on conditions when you can kick them out. Fair deal. A contract without an Exit Clause can entomb your musical creations ... for life. You do not want that.
Do not be afraid to say No. A "No" now will save you from the "hu hu hu" later.

The record company then produces the song or album. This is when the executive producer of the record company signs checks payable to finance the various stages involved in music recording:

Professional Fee for the performer - recoupable from the Artist's Royalty of 3% from wholesale price (then I gather that, really, performers are simply given a straight non-recoupable "for hire" compensation)
Professional Fee for the back-up singers, if any - non-recoupable, straight "for hire" payment
Synchronization License Fee for the composer - usually P15,000 to P20,000 per song, non-recoupable
Advance mechanical reproduction license fee - usually P5,000/song, an industry practice which I contest
Professional Fee for the musicians - non-recoupable amount that depends on the prestige of the musicians, and the producer either pays each musician separately or collectively
Professional Fee for the producer - yes, producers get paid too, and here I'm referring to producers who do the actual work of producing the album
Professional Fee for the music arranger - non-recoupable amount to be paid to the guy who works after the performers and musicians have done their job
Rent for the musical studio
Promotion of the song - the amount for this depends on the commitment of the executive producer to the album

Just a note on the "performer." I mentioned that performers are actually paid one-time "for hire" fees, instead of recurring royalties. You have any idea how much performers cost? The more popular the performer is, the more expensive he/she is.

Why is that? In the Philippines, the choice of the performer is a "branding" choice of some sort, as if the quality of the musical composition relies solely on the performer, never mind if such popular performer is never a singer. What a joke! We have lots of jokes around. Just look around.

You can see that when you produce your own album, many of the cost items can be scratched off, especially when you also perform your own song.

The record company then has the Original Master Sound Recording (OMSR). The result of the music production process is a CD called the "original master sound recording" or OMSR which is the raw material used to reproduce the CDs that will line up the shelves in music stores later.

The record company, not you, owns the copyright over the OMSR. Make no mistake about this. You still own the music copyright for the song, which means that you are still entitled to your royalties everytime the record company makes money from the original master sound copy.

That therefore leads us to the question of what really are the uses of OMSR. The OMSR is used to:

reproduce the music albums for sale in the music stores -- this is the use I already mentioned earlier, the sale of which is also usually the gauge for the popularity of the song
produce the MTV for the song
supply music to caller ring back tunes, or CRBT, for mobile phones (remember calling someone and you heard a song instead of a ringing tone? that's CRBT)
produce MP3s that will be sold via online music stores
provide soundtrack for movies and TV programs
provide music background for song translations

There may be more uses than that listed. The point is, you as a composer and/or artist need to be aware of these uses and demand your fair share of the earnings (for Item #6, the performer is out and only the music composer can demand royalties).

The questions you must ask is, will the record company be fair to you and report to you all the deals they have done using the OMSR? Sales reports are the bases for royalty payments. What's the reputation of the record company you're dealing with?

Will dealing with them worth the risks? or would you rather learn the tricks of producing your own songs?

These are things to think about.

Next: Replication

Music Industry in the Philippines - Part 1: Musical Creation

2009-11-23T03:00:00.310+08:00

How does the music industry in the Philippines operate? Does anyone know? Probably the more correct question is, does anyone care to know?

Music composers and artists are too engrossed in their music writing and performing skills (perhaps rightly so) that they leave the rest --- their bank accounts --- to the experts.

The question is, who are the experts? and whose interests are they really protecting? I don't mean to say the experts are bad people. No. All I'm saying is trust them but . . . verify, verify, verify.

I do not claim to be an expert. I'm just someone who had the privilege of getting into and out of the music industry from both the shoes of a licensee, and then as the licensor. I think I can describe some aspects of the music industry in the Philippines with the language of a layman and devoid of details that tends to compicate what essentially is a simple 7-step process:

Step 1 - Music Composition
Step 2 - Music Recording / Music Production
Step 3 - Packaging and Replication
Step 4 - Promotion
Step 5 - Distribution
Step 6 - Derivative Products
Step 7 - Royalty Collection

What I am about to outline is a rough estimate of what a common music composer goes through in the course of getting his or her song popularized in the Philippines:

Step 1 - Music Creation

Musical creation is about writing the lyrics of the song and the melody that goes with it. This can be done by the same musical composer, or by two or more people.

The Philippine National Anthem or Lupang Hinirang was "composed in 1898 by Julian Felipe" but its lyrics were "written by José Palma in 1899 (Wikipedia).

We have a lot of good music composers in the Philippines. The song "Kung Maibabalik Ko Lang" is almost always attributed to Regine Velasquez. But she didn't write that song. She only performed that song. So, who wrote "Kung Maibabalik Ko Lang"? Her name is Christine Bendebel.

So, an essential step in musical creation is, make sure that the song is attributed to you. Why? You do not want anyone else to start claiming your song as his or her own! No. Not a chance, Pedro!

I'll try to gather some solid tips on how to do just that in the Philippines. Meantime, see if these links help somehow:

How to Copyright Music (USA)

http://www.musicbizacademy.com/internet/how2copyright.htm

Fact Sheet on Music Copyright (UK)

http://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/protect/p07_music_copyright

Next Post: Music Production

Internet Radio Stations Pay 25% to Copyright holders

2009-11-16T03:00:00.001+08:00

What does the agreement mean for big name internet radio stations? They will pay up to 25% of their revenue to copyright holders, in exchange for the right to play any music they so choose. (Source: dbtechno.com)

You wish that piece of news is from the Philippines, don't you? As a matter of fact, that piece of news comes from Boston, USA. Copyright owners there are "bitching" the radio stations as well "about not getting their royalty cuts from air time."

It's not just in the Philippines where music copyright holders complain against radio stations. "Music on actual radios is considered free promotion for the artist." The same argument you hear here.

Ultimately it's all about strategic partnership folks. Music copyright holders need the radio stations, and radio stations need the music. Together, both can make the music industry really vibrant.

But the deal doesn't apply to internet radio stations, especially those internet radio stations that charge their subscribers to hear music without commercials.

When will that happen in the Philippines?

I don't see it forthcoming in the near future. But if the march towards technological progress continues, in due time issues like this will be tackled here as well.

It's worth noting the events in the USA on music copyright matters. They're but previews of what will happen here in two to three years.

It will do much good to music copyright holders here to keep tab on these developments.

Money in Music Copyright - Part 3: Performance Rights

2009-11-09T03:00:00.017+08:00

Performance rights (or "performing rights") is the "right to perform music in public," as opposed to private performance, which is to be "within a normal circle of family and friends" (see Wikipedia's definition of "performing rights").

Potentially, performance rights fees can be a huge source of passive income for very good music composers (if rules are followed).

Remember Paul, our fictitious music composer? He just wrote a song that is a hit in the listening public, right? The ideal story for Paul with respect to performance rights fees will be as follows:

GMA7 and ABS-CBN outdo each other to play Paul's song! One of them really hyped Paul's song up such that the other had to back off a bit. Part of the huge performance rights fee that GMA7 and ABS-CBN pays for all the songs they broadcast will now go to Paul.

In the same breath, SM, Ayala, Robinsons and other malls in the country pays performance rights fees to play Paul's song in their establishments to please their mall goers.

In fact, anyone who plays Paul's song in public is required by law to pay performance rights fee to the music composers or publishers. These include fastfood restaurants (such as Jollibee and McDonalds, among many others), convenience stores (7-11, MiniStop, etc), hotels and stores.

Even Churches should pay performance rights fee for the songs they sing in worship (see this!).

Music performers pay performance rights fees. Remember Mr. Singer? He's the guy who sang Paul's song in the album produced by Mr. A-Producer. Even Mr. Singer will have to pay Paul a portion of his revenues from the concerts he makes as performance rights fee.

Get it?

Radio stations too are paying performance rights fees. I am aware of sentiments among radio stations against this. They say they are the ones who has made Paul's song popular! Why should they pay for a service they themselves provide? My only suggestion here is, why don't these radio stations approach Congress to amend the law?

Some people tell me, that their friends tell them, that the radio stations in the Philippines are the ones charging the music producers for the play time of the songs they promote. Then, someone told me, that her friend asked her why we Filipinos trust the radio stations when they say a song is #1.

No comment!

Now, Paul may be asking, "How on earth am I going to collect from all these music users?" Excellent question, isn't it?

Performance societies do that job. Paul has to seek membership with FILSCAP or the Filipino Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers. These are they guys who diligently collect performance rights fee from the music users I mentioned, and then distribute the collection to the music composers.

The distribution is according to a particular formula, which I am not privy to. Theoretically at least, the distribution is according to the number of times a song is played within any given period. For instance, if Paul's songs are played twice as much within the year than, say, John's songs, then Paul should get twice the share of John.

Ideally, everytime FILSCAP collects from the music users, each payment has an accompanying document that lists down the songs played by the mall, hotel, store, or restaurant during a given period. This document is the basis for distributing the money. I don't know if this is actually happening, but I pray that this is actually happening.

FILSCAP charges a certain percent of all collections for its operations. It has a staff that does all the work, and FILSCAP members must pay for the salaries of these staff. I have no idea at this time how much in terms of percentage goes to operation. Their US counterpart charges around 15%.

The responsibility on FILSCAP to collect performance rights fees is not a joke. I personally appreciate the voluminous work involved in tracking the usage of tens of thousands of songs. I pray they decide to automate, but the capital investment for this kind of endeavor can be overwhelming.

The least we can ask from FILSCAP is to be more transparent about its revenues and distribution schemes. I have seen their annual report once, and I simply thought they can do better than that.

Nonetheless, the Philippines still has FILSCAP, and FILSCAP is still the best bet that our music composers can get their rightful share of the performance rights fees that change hands every year.

Money in Music Copyright - Part 2: Mechanical Royalty

2009-11-02T19:50:00.000+08:00

The second "money" or royalty in music copyright is the mechanical royalty. Every music composer must familiarize themselves with mechanical royalty.

Mr. A-Producer will most likely produce an album of several songs, which can be as few as 5 songs, or as many as 16 songs. The next thing Mr. A-Producer does is to reproduce copies of the music CD and distribute these copies to the music stores.

For every CD sold, the composers are entitled to between 7.5% to 10% share of the wholesale price. If the CD is sold at a wholesale price of P100 (people buy it on retail at P200 or more), Paul and the other composer get between P7.50 to P10. This is the mechanical royalty, or sometimes called "mechanical reproduction license fee"; But let's stick to "mechanical royalty" in this blog.

At this point I am no longer sure what percentage for mechanical royalty is being followed in the Philippines. Most likely, it's 10%. This blog may not be able to give you the actual industry figures that is applicable to you. But I encourage you to find out what the existing figures are, and then for you to negotiate what's best for you.

If Mr. A-Producer happens to produce the music album with 10 tracks, then Paul will get 1/10th of every P10.00 that the composers earn per sale. That would mean that for every 10,000 copies sold, Paul gets a mechanical royalty of P10,000.

Not bad, eh?

What's the actual practice in the Philippines?

It is shocking to me that the industry is in the habit of charging a non-refundable "advance mechanical royalties" from music users. I have seen it from both ends of the deal. To me this practice is not fair to the music users. In the long run, it is also not fair to the composers.

The mechanical royalty, in spirit, is the royalty for every copy produced AND sold in the country. Why does the industry charge "advance" mechanical royalty? Furthermore, why is it non-refundable?

If Paul, for instance, receives an "advance mechanical royalty" of P5,000, then he practically gets an advance for 5,000 copies (say P1 per copy). But when the actual sale is only 3,000 copies (this can happen), shouldn't Paul refund the other P2,000?

On the other hand, if the actual sale is 10,000 copies, shouldn't Paul actually get paid another P5,000 in mechanical royalty? From my sources, this isn't happening because Paul does not get a report that there has been a sale of 10,000 copies in the first place. Mr. A-Producer thinks, "Paul is insistent on his P5,000 advance mechanical royalty, then that's all that Paul shall ever get."

In retrospect, the issue boils down to trust. Almost every music composer I talked to think that producers are not reporting the correct sales figures. This is why they rather get an "advance mechanical royalty" and forget about the rest of the deal. This may sound fair to Paul, but it also creates an additional risk to the producers and music users!

The companies seriously hit by this practice are the videoke companies. Why? All you have to do is multiply the figure above by the number of songs they put in each videoke machine, which are in several thousands. That's several millions in mechanical royalty (on top of the one-time synchronization fee), and they haven't even sold a single unit yet!

To me that's ridiculous. We want to change the music industry for the better? Let's change the practice on this area.

Many music users now think that music composers and publishers in the Philippines are both unfair and greedy. Then, we actually wonder why music pirates are prevalent?

Non-observance of rules creates a dysfunctional culture in the Philippine music industry that every stakeholder must seriously reassess in the light of existing and forthcoming technologies that affect the music industry.

If there is distrust, there's no dialogue. If there's no dialogue, there's no consensus. If there's no consensus, there's no concerted effort in the face of challenges. If there's no concerted effort, then ...

My advice? Drive along EDSA and take lessons from there. When you're a big rectangular bus, move slowly but deliberately. When you're the small sedan, keep your distance from big ones and don't get mad. Talo ang pikon. The same goes true in the music industry today.

That's not a very encouraging advice, is it? Live with it. Things will get better in time.

We're Filipinos. We cross one bridge at a time.

Money in Music Copyright - Part 1: Synchronization License

2009-10-26T16:50:00.000+08:00

After reading laws on music copyright, Paul says, "Ok, now show me the money!"

Paul, our fictional music composer here, is one of a kind. "Show me the money" is a great thing to ask, but not all composers do that! I pray this blog will help music composers realize how much money they can lose when they don't ask that question.

There's another word for "money" in music copyright parlance. It's called royalties.

Because Paul has written a hit song, Paul shall see that royalties goes to his bank account in two ways: one-time and recurring.

The one-time fee each music composer MUST know about is the synchronization fee. The amount is usually subject to negotiation between Paul or his representative (the licensor) and the user (the licensee).

The recurring ones that each music composer MUST know about are mechanical reproduction fee and performance rights. Mechanical reproduction is a percent of sale, now pegged at 10% of wholesale price. Performance right is a more complicated topic. More on these in the succeeding posts.

This is how synchronization fee works . . .

When Paul submits his song, Mr. A-Producer will review the song, assess the merits and profitability of it. When Mr. A-Producer finds the numbers good, he will invest on that song.

What Mr. A-Producer will then do is engage a music performer and assemble musical instruments that will accompany the performer. There is therefore Paul's musical piece (music and lyrics) that will be recorded in sync with a selected set of musical instruments.

For that, Paul is entitled to a fee that allows Mr. A-Producer to record his song with the musical instruments. That fee is called synchronization license fee. This fee is in the vicinity of P15,000 to P20,000 per song (as of 2008) for musical albums. This is a one-time fee.

Paul may decide at another time to approach another producer (granting he's allowed to do so in his contract with Mr. A-Producer). Let's say Paul approaches Mr. B-Producer to record another rendition of the song. If Mr. B-Producer likes the song, he will also pay a synchronization license fee to Paul.

Get it?

TV, Film, radio and theater producers, who want to use Paul's song in their production will likewise pay a synchronization license fee to Paul. The amount is a matter of negotiation, depending on the extent of use within the production. But this can range between P100,000 to P500,000.

If the song is really a hit song, yeah, those figures are realistic. Is that money good? or good?

Take this trivia: the song "Happy Birthday" is copyrighted. It earns somewhere around $2 million a year.

Unbelievable? Check out these articles:

Who Owns the Song Happy Birthday?

http://www.wisegeek.com/who-owns-the-song-happy-birthday.htm

Happy Birthday, We'll Sue
http://www.snopes.com/music/songs/birthday.asp

Now you know that anyone who uses that song for commercial purposes have to pay the corresponding fees to Warner-Chappell. Nobody can just record that song and not pay synchronization license.

Wouldn't you want to be the composer of a song as popular and as timeless as Happy Birthday? Check again how Jessica Hill fought for the music copyright of her sisters Mildred and Patty Hill over that song. Would you do the same for your own songs?

Next: Mechanical Reproduction License

P.S. In the years I spent with a music licensing company in the Philippines, one of my most profound realizations is that no one in the country has taken serious effort to disseminate the definitions to Filipino composers. That mainly is the reason for a lot of confusion, unrealistic expectations and, well, corruption. Sorry to say that last one.

The Law of the Philippines Protects Music Copyright

2009-10-19T15:39:00.002+08:00

The law that protects music copyright in the Philippines is the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines, aka RA 8293. The body that implements the law is the Intellectual Property Office.

I am not a lawyer, so, all I can share here are snippets of that law that I think are relevant to music copyright.

(1) Music copyright is an intellectual property protected by law from the moment of creation:

172.1. Literary and artistic works, hereinafter referred to as "works", are original intellectual creations in the literary and artistic domain protected from the moment of their creation and shall include in particular xxx (f) musical compositions, with or without words.

This means that the moment you write a song, it's yours, and the country shall recognize it.

(2) Derivative musical works are also protected by law.

173.1. The following derivative works shall also be protected by copyright:

(a) Dramatizations, translations, adaptations, abridgments, arrangements, and other alterations of literary or artistic works xxx

This means that when you modify an existing song, that particular modification shall be attributed to you; but the right of the original owner over the original composition still stands:

173.2. xxx such new work shall not affect the force of any subsisting copyright upon the original works employed or any part thereof, or be construed to imply any right to such use of the original works, or to secure or extend copyright in such original works.

You may say, "Alright, alright, indeed I own my songs. Now what? Show me the money!"

(3) The "money" due you can be found on Section 177, as follows:

Section 177. Copyright or Economic Rights. - Subject to the provisions of Chapter VIII, copyright or economic rights shall consist of the exclusive right to carry out, authorize or prevent the following acts:

177.1. Reproduction of the work or substantial portion of the work;

177.2. Dramatization, translation, adaptation, abridgment, arrangement or other transformation of the work;

xxx;

177.4. Rental of the original or a copy of an audiovisual or cinematographic work, a work embodied in a sound recording, a computer program, a compilation of data and other materials or a musical work in graphic form, irrespective of the ownership of the original or the copy which is the subject of the rental; (n)

xxx

177.6. Public performance of the work; and

177.7. Other communication to the public of the work. (Sec. 5, P. D. No. 49a)

That paragraph is huge, man! Every serious music composer must understand this.

If still you can't see where the money really is, wait for my next post.

Even Churches in the Philippines Speak of Music Copyright

2009-10-13T02:04:00.002+08:00

Praise Music Publishing calls on Christian Churches to pay music royalties too. Praise describes itself in its website as follows (emphases mine):

Praise Music Publishing and CopyCare Philippines are Divisions of Praise Incorporated set up in 1996 to begin the groundwork for Music Publishing and Licensing in the Philippine territory. Our administered catalogues include among others “God Is Good”, “There Is None Like You”, “I Will Be Here”, “Shout To The Lord”, “The Warrior Is A Child”, and many thousands more. These copyrights are regularly sung in worship services and other church-related events.

Those songs are indeed popular songs. And churches should pay royalties?

I know you cannot believe it.

But it's true!

Look at this banner right below the website header of Praise Music...

The site even has a "Frequently Asked Questions" page, which contain very relevant information about music copyright. These questions are applicable to all songs, whether religious or otherwise.

Reading that page is highly recommended.

Isn't it a slap when Christians sing the songs created by people without paying these people their respective royalties? If such things happen in Churches, how much more in the general public?

If a song is not classified under "Public Domain" then that song is someone's property, and therefore must be respected.

A friend of mine complained, "How can this be? Everybody sings that song! How can someone charge us money for that song?"

You may feel that too, and that's natural. That also is an indication that the concept of "intellectual property" has not yet fully sunk into our general consciousness.

This blog is an attempt to disseminate information about "intellectual property" in the hope of one day seeing a society that sees and respects rules pertaining to musical creations.

Music is Alive and Well in the Philippines

2009-10-06T01:13:00.000+08:00

I believe music is music is alive and well in the Philippines. The video below is that of Wendell Garcia and Karel Honasan, jamming together during the Tiendesitas Music and Arts Festival on May 17, 2009.

A day before this jamming session, during the very same Tiendesitas Music and Arts Festival, Chikoy Pura gave a songwriting workshop.

Who is Chikoy Pura? He is known, among others, for his song "Reklamo Nang Reklamo"

Aren't Filipino musicians cool? No doubt they are. Many of them are sought after bands here and abroad.

Yet, one wonders, who's getting all the money?

Music Copyright Marries Creativity and Money

2009-09-28T12:29:00.002+08:00

What's the big deal about music copyright anyway? Music copyright is a marriage between creativity and money.

A painter paints pictures on canvas. But musicians paint their pictures on silence. ~Leopold Stokowski

The ideal story works this way.

John writes a song. He's so passionate about the song that he then makes a rough recording of the song in a home studio (talk about a room full of eggtrays, a microphone and a computer with recording software). Then he approaches Mr. Producer to listen to it.

Mr. Producer likes the song. He's so excited about it that he employs Mr. Singer, (a popular music performer), a band, and a high tech music studio to arrange and record the song. He made John's song part of an 8-track music album.

Mr. producer then promotes then aggressively promotes the album. Later the CDs containing the tracks are distributed to music stores nationwide.

The people like the song! People who hear the songs on radio and TV begin looking for the CDs in the music stores, including those in the internet. They don't want illegal copies. They want the original ones, regardless of rock bottom prices of counterfeit copies!

Mr. Producer pays the royalties! Six months later Mr. Producer tells John, "Hey, we sold 200,000 copies of the CD with your song on it! Here's the check for P200,000 and a computation of how we arrived at that amount."

Can you imagine John's face at this point?

Mr. Producer keeps on paying the royalties. Because of the popularity of John's song, the CDs continue to sell and John keeps on receiving checks from Mr. Producer.

Can you see John continuously writing more great songs---with glee---at this point?

Yet the story doesn't end there.

Music users pay royalties. John then gets inquiries from TV and film producers as well. Later, these TV, film and radio producers pay John generous amounts for allowing them to use John's song in a film, as well as in their TV and radio program.
Even Mr. Singer, the artist whom the Producer has employed to sing John's song, begins paying John a share of the proceeds in the concerts he organizes.

Establishment pay for the rights to play the music. Later, the Filipino Society of Composers, Artists and Performers (FILSCAP), of which John has registered as a member, also begins handing him checks as payment from establishments who use John's songs in their stores, hotels, restaurants, malls, etc.

Whew! This story is every music composer's dream.

And this can become true in the Philippines, only when every player in the story follows the rules.

Music Copyright in the Philippines

2009-09-26T14:52:00.003+08:00

Music copyright in the Philippines occupied lots of my working hours for nearly six years. I used to work in a licensing company that serves independent composers. It has been months since I left it, but the stigma of the things I saw and discovered lingered.

Music copyright is MONEY. It affects the things people have on their tables. Not only is it money, it is a virtual real estate, or something that earns money for the music composer not just once, but over and over again, for as long as his or her musical creations are being used.

Independent composers are the "small guys" in the music copyright terrain in the Philippines. Those who are not aware of music copyright rules fall victim to contracts that serve the interests of music publishers but sabotage the interests of music composers.

A popular singer-composer learned too late that he was no longer the owner of the song that earned millions here and abroad. Accordingly, he sold the song for a few thousands, based on the contract he signed. He lost his music copyright. He lost the millions.

Another popular singer-composer who wrote 4,000 songs died a poor man. Had he been in Japan, he would have died a very, very, very rich man. What happened to his music copyright? Where did his millions go?

A single song composed by a good music writer in the USA that goes to the charts will make that composer absolutely wealthy. That's because music copyright is well respected in that country.

Do we observe music copyright in the Philippines?

Our next recourse is education. When people know the music copyright rules, he or she will know when and when not to sign on top of the dotted line.

We pray that in due time, enough people will know the music copyright rules . . . and observe them.