Music rights and USFSA rules

[BlissfulSynergy]

Morgan Matthews Pennington posted an IG story a couple of days ago discussing USfed's recent webinar with athletes and coaches on music rights. Morgan said she will be writing an article about this. She was generally favorable regarding the fed's necessity to take these steps, but she is very wrong in saying they are "trying to get ahead of" the issues. Had USfed the foresight to 'get ahead of' the issues involved, they would have begun taking measures and procuring expert help years ago, without a lawsuit being the trigger for them to suddenly see the light and take action.

Morgan helpfully goes on to alert fans to the fact that videographers such as Jordan Cowan of OIP will be adversely impacted by these music rights measures. I would like to point out that fans will also suffer right along with videographers.

 

[TallyT]

...without a lawsuit being the trigger for them to suddenly see the light and take action.

And to do it just before the new season starts

 

[4everchan]

one small detail... artists can opt not to be part of the licenses agreements.. this way, they do not receive royalties.. and then, skaters would need to get their permission (and depending, pay fees) from the artists. Some artists prefer running their own show. Most wouldn't bother because truly, the planet is so big.. how can one control it all ? I just thought I'd share this with you as it would still be possible that depending on the agreements with the licensing companies, some music may still be out of reach.

 

[TontoK]

They pay the licenses

No, I get that.

I guess what I meant to say is that gymnastics videos on YouTube include music. So, my question about what that federation does was incomplete. Why is music to FX routines not banned? Whatever the puzzle is, they seem to have solved it.

 

[saine]

No, I get that.

I guess what I meant to say is that gymnastics videos on YouTube include music. So, my question about what that federation does was incomplete. Why is music to FX routines not banned? Whatever the puzzle is, they seem to have solved it.

USA Gymnastics has their own streaming service, FlipNow. So for them, at $64.99 a year it was worth it to make sure they had the synchronization licensing worked out.

 

[Mathman]

The USA Gymnastics trials were on TV tonight, and I gave it a glance while my wife was watching. The women's floor exercise is set to music, and I don't recall that being an issue for them..

I was too busy watching Simone Biles jump 12 feet in the air by actual measurement. (The men's high jump record is 8 ft 0.45 inches. Well, I guess the floor mat is springy) to notice the music.

I ljust looked it up: Taylor Swift.

 

[TontoK]

USA Gymnastics has their own streaming service, FlipNow. So for them, at $64.99 a year it was worth it to make sure they had the synchronization licensing worked out.

I really don't understand. I can go on YouTube and watch a woman's FX with music. Here's Simone Biles' Day 1 events from Olympic trials, including the FX to Taylor Swift music. Shoutout to @Mathman https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xf6Jlw8tDbw

So how can NBC stream the gymnastics music on YouTube, but not FS music, and do it completely outside a dedicated streaming service?

It doesn't take long for me to get out of my element here, but something is obviously different in how the federations (or the athletes) are handling this.

And for the record... I have no issue with artists getting paid, nor do I really understand the mechanisms by which that is achieved. I just want figure skating on YouTube and through streaming. With music.

 

[saine]

I really don't understand. I can go on YouTube and watch a woman's FX with music. Here's Simone Biles' Day 1 events from Olympic trials, including the FX to Taylor Swift music. Shoutout to @Mathman https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xf6Jlw8tDbw

So how can NBC stream the gymnastics music on YouTube, but not FS music, and do it completely outside a dedicated streaming service?

It doesn't take long for me to get out of my element here, but something is obviously different in how the federations (or the athletes) are handling this.

And for the record... I have no issue with artists getting paid, nor do I really understand the mechanisms by which that is achieved. I just want figure skating on YouTube and through streaming. With music.

There's two different music licenses at play here: performance and synchronization.

Performance covers live broadcasts, like Nationals on NBC.

Synchronization covers YouTube videos, or the USA Gymnastics streaming service.

So without that synchronization license, USFS or NBC can't keep those videos online. They'd break copyright law if they did. NBC covers the performance license for what they broadcast from USFS, but not the synchronization.

Without those licenses, USFS can't have music in their competition videos. Their blanket license doesn't cover performance or synchronization for the smaller competitions that aren't on Peacock.

USAG must have gotten the synchronization license if they have their own streaming service and put their videos on YouTube. If they didn't, that's a lawsuit waiting to happen.

 

[Blades of Passion]

The music artists and record companies put it out there, it's their creation. If someone was using my creation and I wasn't getting recognized/paid for it, you'd better bet I'd start an issue. That's how it works.

Someone's music being used inherently means it's being recognized. It's being exposed to listeners, growing awareness, which means potential income when those people seek out the artist's work.

"Starting an issue about it", and blocking the music from being heard, is unintelligent self-sabotage in any situation where there's nothing to gain from trying to block it. That's what the situation is here.

 

[2sk8]

As far as I can tell, at its most basic level, the issue isn't that musicians should not be paid for their work, it is that USFS does not want to pay for the synchronization license - only the performance license. So, in the interests of saving THAT license expenditure, they utterly undermine the primary way of developing interest in the sport - streaming WITH MUSIC.

The concept of watching figure skating without music is, sorry, patently absurd.

Artists who choose to manage their own music, do not want to grant individual licenses, etc. are somewhat secondary - they are entitled to do that, there is a risk if you use the music, and yes, a lawsuit about that led to this. BUT the fact remains streaming would be possible with the synch license for a lot, perhaps most, of the programs.

It's great that USFS is educating its membership about the issues and providing tools to see if your music choices are cleared, but - again - that doesn't change the fact that the big issue is the lack of the synch license.

 

[TallyT]

Someone's music being used inherently means it's being recognized. It's being exposed to listeners, growing awareness, which means potential income when those people seek out the artist's work.

There are plenty of musicians, artists and creators of all kinds who can tell us aaaaaaall about what they think of the idea of being 'paid with exposure' (anyone who doubts, I believe there's a another site forum that covers it) and if they let one big and way richer than them organisation have free reign, how do they stop others like the million and ten 'influencers' who use the same argument, or even the listeners you mention from simply downloading for free as well? 'Potential' does not pay the bills, even the streaming services like Spotify pay a pittance.

Why should they keep putting up with being cheated on their legally due income by USFS? Their music is the equivalent of you or I working 9-5 in an office etc - would we be happy if the boss said "we'll put your picture on the corporate advertising instead of paying you"?

And again, if USFS can't afford to pay what is legally owed, what the hell are they doing with their money anyway?

 

[Blades of Passion]

They gain nothing by blocking the music from being used. Nobody is going to buy something if they don't know about it in the first place. Free download is a whole other subject and not relevant here, there are other sounds happening in a skating video, the music can't be downloaded on its own like that. If some other online source was just putting it out there for free, yeah, then it would make sense to take action.

 

[Arigato]

Someone's music being used inherently means it's being recognized. It's being exposed to listeners, growing awareness, which means potential income when those people seek out the artist's work.

In 2018, "That's What I Like" by Bruno Mars won Song of the Year, Best R&B Performance and Best R&B Song at the 2018 Grammy Awards.
The song has 2.2 Billion views on YouTube. Do you really think one of the most well-known musicians in the world really needed a figure skater to get his song "recognized"? No. It's the other way around. The skater used Bruno's well-known song to get his program recognized and an entire audience loving him as he skated.

It worked.

 

[Blades of Passion]

If an artist is that successful, they shouldn't be worrying at all about a figure skater using their music. It's capitalism at its worst that the people who are already the most wealthy have the most power to squeeze extra pennies out of everything and block valuable contributions to society.

 

[saine]

They gain nothing by blocking the music from being used. Nobody is going to buy something if they don't know about it in the first place. Free download is a whole other subject and not relevant here, there are other sounds happening in a skating video, the music can't be downloaded on its own like that. If some other online source was just putting it out there for free, yeah, then it would make sense to take action.

They still require a license to synchronize the music, free or not. If they aren't, then they're breaking the law. Even if there are other sounds happening in the skating video, the music needs to be licensed properly. It's the law, not a matter of an artist blocking it.

It isn't even a matter of making it available for fans to view. Videographers make money by selling copies of competition performances to skaters. If that music is not licensed properly for that purpose, then that puts the videographers in a position where they're profiting off breaking copyright law.

 

[TallyT]

They gain nothing by blocking the music from being used.

They gain the right to insist on being paid for their work and their legal property, to tell others 'pay me, stop stealing what's mine.' Yes, the user can choose to go elsewhere or without, but some users (like the gymnastic authorities mentioned above, like the Canadian fed @4everchan explained about) will do the right thing and pay up. Every two-bit radio station, every small local advertising agency in the world understands and allows for all such payments. The synchro licence may be a different one, but as stated above, it's the law, a valid part of copyright law.

I'm sorry for the skaters affected, but the musicians are not the ones to blame here.

...the people who are already the most wealthy have the most power to squeeze extra pennies out of everything and block valuable contributions to society.

I'm not so much talking about the very top of the trees people like Bruno Mars, Elton John or Joe Hisaichi (who is I believe both expensive and very very picky about his rights) but the vast majority of jobbing composers and performers who the USFS have clearly been 'squeezing extra pennies out of' and stiffing out of their income (which unlike 'potential' can be used to pay bills) for years now. Oh, and being honest here, how much 'exposure' is worth forgoing even a small amount of actual cash in the hand now? Which current or recent American skaters get so many views and so much interest that the musicians can be reasonably compensated by 'potential'?

I ask again, would you be willing to give up your salary and work for nothing but 'valuable contributions to society'?

 

[4everchan]

@TallyT you beat me to it. Thanks.

 

[4everchan]

No, I get that.

I guess what I meant to say is that gymnastics videos on YouTube include music. So, my question about what that federation does was incomplete. Why is music to FX routines not banned? Whatever the puzzle is, they seem to have solved it.

As @saine said : gym most likely paid all licenses which brings us back to my first post about paying those

 

[4everchan]

Someone's music being used inherently means it's being recognized. It's being exposed to listeners, growing awareness, which means potential income when those people seek out the artist's work.

"Starting an issue about it", and blocking the music from being heard, is unintelligent self-sabotage in any situation where there's nothing to gain from trying to block it. That's what the situation is here.

As a performing artist, I don't need recognition. I get it all the time. I need to get paid for what I create.

If a new restaurant opens up, would they give meals for free just to get exposure? They would not because if they can nix their margin, they would want to cover their costs: rent, food, HR...

I'm still waiting for Hermès to.give me free cologne as I have been wearing it for years and it gets a lot of exposure.


Not happening and yet, I do get out there.. I really dislike the fact that it seems okay to pay everyone but never the musicians.

Seriously....

 

[Blades of Passion]

how much 'exposure' is worth forgoing even a small amount of actual cash in the hand now? Which current or recent American skaters get so many views and so much interest that the musicians can be reasonably compensated by 'potential'?

There ISN'T any "cash in hand". I am talking about copywrite holders blocking music on a youtube skating video. They get nothing out of it. All it does is hurt themselves, and the audience.