ATTN: DAVE the Drummer

[tonyc2002]

I can appreciate the convenience factor, i.e. paying some throbber a few quid if you can't be ****ed to scour the net to find those sets you've been dying to get to hold off, but its pretty damn cheeky to attempt to make a profit without even trying to get permission.

I would also argue that there is indeed a copyright issue as it is still recorded music that was being played to the public (PPL/PRS anyone?). But ho hum, I'm not a lawyer.

[teknorich]

But that then opens a whole other can of worms - i.e. when a DJ's promotional set is put online to download, it contains copywrited material (the tracks he mixed with) so should the artists of those tracks then be asked permission/ given royalties for the set to be made available? Should DAVE have to get permission from every artist in his mix before he can upload a promo mix? That would seem way excessive...

[tonyc2002]

But that then opens a whole other can of worms - i.e. when a DJ's promotional set is put online to download, it contains copywrited material (the tracks he mixed with) so should the artists of those tracks then be asked permission/ given royalties for the set to be made available? Should DAVE have to get permission from every artist in his mix before he can upload a promo mix? That would seem way excessive...

I think if you start charging for a DJ mix (i.e. if it was a published commercial compilation) then the artists involved would be entitled to royalties yes (or the labels would be). If the tracks are unpublished then I don't think they would get any royalties (at least not from collection agencies).

Also, if its just for promotional use (i.e. free) then technically the artist may be entitled to some form of compensation if the DJ was getting bookings, and thereby making a profit from exploiting the artists work, but has anyone ever heard of this happening!? Doubt it to be honest.

**** knows man, its a grey area really.