Quote:
Since I do not have industry blinders on, I tend to read things as they are written, and default to draw attention when it appears that the answer to a question seeking a black-and-white answer does not seem to meet the burden:
Answering that your company does licensing in the US does not in and of itself answer the inquiry specifically. I have never seen in any discussion on here that ANY manufacturer claims, with a specific standing that backs the claim, that their material is specifically licensed for commercial and/or consumer use. However, if there IS such a differentiation, then you, and others, are not making that line of demarcation very plain. I believe that, from what all I have read on here, it has always been, and still is, a point of dissention (the recent SC/PEP situation seems to come the closest so far to defogging the line a bit)...
My apologies for the lack of clarity. As it has been discussed at length on this forum in other threads, the PRO/Alphabets are paid by the venues for the performance rights of the songs in a commercial venue. Our (Party Tyme) licenses grant us the rights to sell you the content for both personal
and commercial use. These two subjects are clearly spelled out as such and we wouldn't bother otherwise.
Ok...let's take this a step further: Have you experienced with your company, or through other communications, a scenario where licensing specifically excluded commercial use? I just cannot see where that is even possible, since these PROs are the ones who handle collecting fees for such use. The consensus seems to be that the cost of acquiring material is actually HIGHER for material allegedly specified for commercial use, which goes against the majority of commercial scenarios. I just do not see where there is a legitimate justification, other than greed, for charging more for commercial use, especially if it is not in the scope of a manufacturer to regulate it as such...
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
