[Editor Charlie sez: Food fight in the cafeteria…]
While the two applicants vying to be named the group that will build the Mechanical Licensing Collective created by the Music Modernization Act (MMA) have thus far engaged in mudslinging at their competitors, in the comments to the Copyright Office filed Monday and posted Tuesday evening, each group let loose with both barrels in appraising the other’s proposal.
Read the post on Billboard
[After Zoe Keating’s important post on how unrepresented songwriters are ill-served by the “consensus” mechanical licensing collective as proposed, SONA member Hélène Muddiman breaks ranks and makes an impassioned plea for fairness out of concern for the reportedly billion dollar black box that is becoming an increasing focus.]
Time is running out!
This is a truly momentous time in the history of music copyright.
Fellow composers and songwriters, and those who rely upon us for their living, our Digital Mechanical Royalties are about to be collected by a new Mechanical Licensing Collective (MLC). There are billions of dollars at stake already, and billions more as the future moves towards on-demand streaming platforms where mechanical royalties become big business.
It’s confusing, because not everyone may realize that there are two submissions vying for the job of the MLC, which will collect and distribute these billions of dollars.
The NMPA-led application actually calls itself ‘The MLC,’ but it is not yet the MLC. The Copyright Office is asking for comments to help it decide whether to appoint the indie-led submission instead, called the AMLC (or American Mechanical Licensing Collective).
The Copyright Office could very well choose the AMLC if creators from around the world send in their comments to influence the decision before April 22nd (please use this link: https://www.regulations.gov/comment?D=COLC-2018-0011-0001).
Read the post on Digital Music News