Thursday, November 8, 2012

What is the difference between a UPC and an ISRC code?

If you plan on making money through digital sales of individual tracks of your music, you are going to need an ISRC code. An ISRC (International Standard Recording Code) is a unique 12-character alphanumeric ‘digital fingerprint’ that stays with an individual recorded track forever, regardless of any changes in ownership of the track. ISRC’s are added to the recording during the mastering stage, or at the encoding stage by whichever digital aggregator/distributor you are using to deliver your recorded content to the retailer.

ISRC codes are used to trace sales of single tracks through digital distribution outlets like iTunes, as well as help to trace the owner of a recording who is owed royalties when their recording is used by Internet and Satellite radio.

A UPC (Universal Product Code or Barcode) represents the entire digital product, as opposed to just an individual digital track. UPC codes are typically found on the back of the sound recording’s physical packaging, and are used by brick and mortar retailers and online outlets to gather and track sales information for the entire product. Soundscan compiles UPC sales data from thousands of retail outlets in the U.S. and Canada (as well as sales from artists on tour) to compile its weekly list of music sales. These reports are an important ingredient in the weekly Billboard charts, and also factor into many A&R departments decisions to sign an artist.

You can apply for an ISRC code from the RIAA. Bar codes are a bit trickier. It is possible for you to register as a company and receive your own UPC prefix from the UCC, but it is probably not cost effective. An easier way for an independent artist to get a bar code is to work with a distributor that has already purchased a company code, and can give UPC barcodes to the albums they are distributing.

Works in the Public Domain are FREE to use

 Vanessa Kaster, Esq., LL.M.

Music and other published works that are in the Public Domain are free to use; since, they are not under copyright protection and therefore do not require any permissions from the author (or former copyright owner) to be used. Works that are in the public domain are free for the taking, sampling, using, copying, reproducing, recording and distributing.


Typically, works in the Public Domain are very old works. For example, ancient published texts like the “Bhagavad Gita” (a pre-Christian, Sanskrit text) are in the public domain…. as well as “newer-old-works” like the Shaker song “Simple Gifts” (music and lyrics written in the United States in the mid 1800’s). The original text, music and lyrics of the works are in the public domain.However, newer translations or compositions based on the original works… as well as sound recordings and arrangement elements of these newer versions are likely covered by copyright protection…. and NOT in the public domain.
What works are in the public domain? Any work or musical score that was published in the United States before 1923 is in the public domain, due to expiration of copyright. Newer works can also be dedicated to the public domain and if a work failed to meet the requirements for copyright protection it will also be in the public domain. Generally, a case by case analysis should to be done on works published in 1923 or later to determine if they are in the public domain because, it’s not always obvious. [Would you have guessed that the Happy Birthday Song is still covered by copyright protection… and not in the public domain?] 
Keep in mind that copyright duration and the timeline for works entering the public domain vary country by country. 

US Copyright Office set to RAISE FEES in early 2013

submitted by: Vanessa Kaster, Esq., LL.M.

The US Copyright Office is planning to raise the cost for filing a claim to register works for copyright registration early next year.  So, you have plenty of time (a good 9 months) to make the most of the current $35 copyright registration fee.
A $10 fee increase has been proposed for single authors filing an online registration for a single work of their own.  And a slightly higher fee increase of $30 has been proposed for works made for hire (ie companies and entities that own and register works of others including employees)
US Copyright Office Registration (*proposed new fees in 2013)
  • 1 author, 1 work (same claimant not a work made for hire, eCO filing).. now-$35/New fee* $45
  • All other claims eCO filing (including work for hire) .. now-$35/New fee* $64
  • Forms PA, SR, TX, VA, SE (paper filing) .. now-$65/New fee* $100
The US Copyright Office explains that these proposed fee increases are necessary to cover a higher percentage of registration costs, while still being in line with its mission to keep the copyright registration accessible and affordable.  To be honest, I think it makes sense.  I appreciate the cost being lower for artists, writers, musicians and creators registering their own work.
Click here for the entire chart of the US Copyright Office’s Schedule of Proposed Fees.  From now through 5:00pm EST on May 14, 2012 the US Copyright Office is accepting comments on the proposed fee schedules at http://www.copyright.gov/docs/newfees/comments/
Take advantage of the $35 registration fee while you can!  (you’ve got the rest of 2012!) 

HOW TO CLEAR MUSIC SAMPLES

Marcus Taylor

Over the past few months, I’ve received a lot of questions on the topic of sample clearance, and while I do have some limited experience in clearing samples, I thought i’d ask my friend Juan Lopez, a legal advisor at music & media law firm Avenant Law, whether he could share his expertise on sample clearance with you. Fortunately he said yes, and without further ado, here’s his nuggets of wisdom!
The key principles of sample clearance
  • Sampling is a form of copying someone else’s music (sound recording and underlying composition)
  • UK copyright laws (Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988)dictate that for infringement to take place a substantial part of a recording must have been used. Substantiality in the UK differs from in the US (US copyright laws permits the defence of ‘fair use’ – which can be read about in more detail here).
  • Only use a sample with permission of copyright owner.
  • Copyright owner can consider licensing use and decide whether to grant the license or not and determine the fee. Copyright owner is entitled to refuse permission.
  •  You will be required to pay a fee and/or royalties and credit (mention) the original writers/ copyright owner from which the sample is taken as a condition of any licence.
  •  Music which was made or released within the last 50 years (life of copyright) will still be in copyright and can only be sampled with permission from the copyright owner of the recording.
  •  In addition, a license from the copyright owner of the underlying composition (music and words). A license for the composition will not be needed if you RE-RECORD the composition.
  •  Sampling will infringe copyright in the music and/or the sound recording, if a ‘substantial part’ of the original and used without permission. Sample considered ‘substantial’ by reference to quality rather than length.
Westbound Records and Bridgeport Music v No Limit Films (2004)
The case centred on the song 100 Miles and Runnin, which samples a three-note guitar riff from Get Off Your Ass and Jam by George Clinton and Funkadelic. The song was included in the 1998 movie I Got the Hook Up by No Limit Films In the two-second sample, the guitar pitch has been lowered, and the copied piece was “looped” and extended to 16 beats. The sample appears five times in the new song.
A US federal appeals court ruled that recording artists should licence every musical sample included in their work even minor, edited, unrecognisable snippets of music. The court posed the question “If you cannot pirate the whole sound recording, can you ‘lift’ or ‘sample’ something less than the whole?” The Court’s answer to this was NO; and the court added “Get a license or do not sample – we do not see this as stifling creativity in any significant way.”
How Not To Clear a Sample
  • You cannot clear the underlying composition in a sample by re-recording the sample. If you choose to re-create the use, you still need the publishing clearance.
  • Altering the sample (even to the point of making it unrecognisable) does not get you out of clearing it.
  • Sampling a track which already cleared its samples doesn’t get you out of clearing them.
Sample Clearance FAQ
How much of a song can I use before I need clearance?
It doesn’t matter how long the sample is. It could be two seconds and you’d still have to clear it.
How do I approach a Record label or Publisher in regards to obtain a clearance?
Give information about your planned releases e.g. label the tune will be released on and how many copies pressed. Record company or publisher may say yes, ultimate decision is sometimes up to the musicians.
Sampling from a small label artist
A small record company may want a flat fee, known as a ‘buy-out’.
If you’ve sampled a relatively unknown tune and it’s quite a short release you might end up paying just around £500 but they may build in a condition that another fee is payable if you want to press more records.
Sampling from a large label artist
A larger label or bigger artist may want a royalty – usually 1 to 3 per cent.
They’ll probably want an advance against that – which, for a major artist it may be several thousand pounds. You may be able to reduce the royalty by paying a larger advance or reduce the advance by offering a larger royalty.
What difference does it make if the of the sample is used little or a lot?
If the sample is extensive and underpins your tune to such an extent that the track won’t really work without it, you’re in a weak bargaining position. In such case, a Record company can demand a much higher royalty – as much as 50%.
How do you get clearance for published samples?
Publishing companies will typically want a royalty but not an advance. For light usage of a minor artist this can be less than 10%. For a larger artist it may be 50% or more – up to 100%.
How does sampling affect my royalties?
The royalties for samples will be deducted from your record sales share of royalties and publishing royalties. You may also have to give up some of your Performer’s Royalties to the people who performed on the record you sampled.
What if I cannot find the copyright owner?
Do not proceed with use until you have obtained clearance in writing from all copyright owners concerned and all clearance terms and conditions agreed. To proceed without all necessary clearances in place will equal breach of copyright.
Can I approach the band/writers directly?
Clearance must be sought and obtained from the copyright owners. In most cases this is the record label and publisher.
How long will it take to get an answer to my request?
Publishers will often discuss the clearance request with writers of the composition that has been used. If writers are recording, touring or working on other projects the clearance can be delayed.
If the composition that you wish to use is not U.K copyright, the publisher may need to liaise with a foreign publisher who in turn may need to liaise with the writers.
What can I do if my request is denied?
You must remove the sampled/re-created use from your work. To proceed without all necessary clearances in place may well result in action being taken against you for breach of copyright.

Thursday, November 1, 2012

Three golden rules for effective public speaking

Jeff Weiner


By virtue of my role, I've had the opportunity to do a lot of public speaking: company all-hands (which at LinkedIn we do every other week), event keynotes, fireside chats, investor conferences, television appearances, etc. Regardless of the context, I've found that applying three simple rules can make all the difference between a memorable and effective talk and one you wish you could do all over again. The three rules are know your audience, know your material, and know your passion.  

Several years ago, before LinkedIn, I was often asked to give a particular presentation on the evolution of search and digital media. The talk was typically well received, so much so that as time went by, there was little reason to change the material. One year, after having delivered the presentation some 10-15 times, I was asked to do a final talk at an annual sales conference in which about 2,000 people would be attending. I dusted off the Powerpoint slides and presented the same delivery as always. However, this time when it was over, rather than hear enthusiastic applause, I basically heard the following: 
Surprised by the lukewarm reaction, I sought out the head of the sales team for his feedback. His response was a series of simple, but insightful questions that went something like this:
Me: That didn't go as well as I had expected. Any thoughts on what I could have done differently? 
Him: Sure. Who did you present to?
Me: Salespeople.
Him: And what do salespeople do? 
Me: Sell. 
Him: And how much of your presentation enabled them to sell more stuff?
Me: Oh.  
Simply put, audience members are investing their precious time to hear you speak so they can derive value from the talk, whether that be learning something new, being inspired, being entertained, or ideally all of the above. To do that effectively, you need to start by understanding who you're talking to and why they are there. That means customizing your material to make it as relevant as possible for them, and not just presenting what comes most easily to you, regardless of how well received it has been in the past.
Know your material 
By now, you've most likely heard the oft-repeated maxim that more people fear public speaking than fear dying. Jerry Seinfeld may have summed it up best when he joked, "In other words, at a funeral, the average person would rather be in the casket than giving the eulogy." While on the surface this may sound somewhat hyperbolic, on a metaphysical level the rationale actually makes sense.
Among the most hurtful non-physical acts you can commit toward another person is invalidating him or her. This invalidation can manifest itself explicitly, e.g. humiliating someone in front of others. Or it can happen far more subtley, e.g. not listening while someone is talking to you. The one thing that remains consistent in both scenarios is that the person doesn't feel heard. When people don't feel heard, you are essentially denying their existence. 
Translated into the context of public speaking, what people fear isn't so much the actual speaking as it is the potential for invalidation. So what do they do? They painstakingly prepare a speech or memorize their words with the mindset that if they say everything just right, people will listen and thus validate them.
What typically happens next? The speaker gets on stage, forgets a word, stumbles over a line, or hits the inevitable technology snag and becomes increasingly anxious. The audience, already possessing a limited attention span, senses the speaker is uncomfortable, and begins to tune out. One by one, people start fiddling with devices and checking watches. The speaker, seeing that he has lost the audience, breaks eye contact and an unintended stream of "um's" and "uh's" soon follows. The cycle feeds on itself until the last slide arrives and everyone -- speaker and audience -- sighs in relief. (If you ever find yourself going down this path while on stage, try making a joke; there is no faster way to connect with an audience then making them laugh.) 
One way to avoid the above scenario is recognizing that your talk is not about the words so much as it's about your command over the material and the confidence you project. Thus, when invited to speak, pick subjects that both meet your audience's needs and that you know cold. Go further by studying and preparing the talk well in advance. As a litmus test, try running through the presentation without the slides. You'll know you're ready when you don't skip a beat without them. 
Rather than try and draw a false sense of security from memorizing every word you want to say, find strength in knowing your subject material better than anyone in the audience. If you don't, trade places with them. 
Know your passion 
At the end of the day, the people in the audience are going to remember how you presented and how it made them feel far more than what you actually said.
Think about the last time you heard a great public speaker. If asked to describe the event, you would probably recall an insighful line or two and the speech's overall impact, e.g. "That was one of the most inspirational talks I've ever heard!" What you wouldn't do is provide a verbatim account of the event. 
This dynamic is more than anecdotal. According to social psychologist Albert Mehrabian, there are three primary ways we communciate through face-to-face interaction: words, voice inflection, and body language. Through years of research, Mehrabian concluded words only account for 7% of overall message delivery. 
With that in mind, how can you ensure you are communicating effectively beyond the words you speak? Above all else, be passionate. 
Your audience wants to be moved. The people watching intently want you to cut through all of the clutter of their day-to-day experiences and deliver something special. To do that, you have to believe in what you are saying with such conviction, authenticity and passion, that the crowd begins to feel what you feel. Once the audience is connecting on that level, the speaker benefits from a powerful virtuous cycle, channeling the positive energy of the crowd to help take their performance to greater heights.
By way of illustration, I'll never forget sitting near the stage at a Bruce Springsteen concert several years ago. Toward the end of the show, I happened to turn around while he performed "Born to Run" and was absolutely awed by what I saw: a sea of 40,000 diehard Bruce fans singing and swaying in perfect rhythm with The Boss. Talk about effective public speaking. 
While we can't all perform like Bruce Springsteen, no matter how many times you've been asked to present the same material, it's essential you bring your specific brand of passion to the stage. To avoid the boredom commonly experienced as a result of endless repetition, find something exciting to talk about with each subsequent event. That passion needs to be there everytime you speak, whether it's the first time you're presenting or the fiftieth. If you don't feel it, neither will your audience. 
As good as it gets
For a master class in public speaking, try watching the following TED talk by Bryan Stevenson. It is the most effective and inspirational talk I've ever seen in person. During his speech, Bryan delivered a single line that changed my worldview: "The opposite of poverty is not wealth -- the opposite of poverty is justice. He also received one of the longest and loudest standing ovations in the history of TED.
Jeff Weiner

REPOSTED

from Jeff Weiner

CEO at Linkedin


Change Your Words, Change Your Life:


"Language shapes our behavior and each word we use is imbued with multitudes of personal meaning. The right words spoken in the right way can bring us love, money and respect, while the wrong words—or even the right words spoken in the wrong way—can lead to a country to war. We must carefully orchestrate our speech if we want to achieve our goals and bring our dreams to fruition."
—Dr. Andrew Newberg, Words Can Change Your Brain
Throughout human history, great leaders have used the power of words to transform our emotions, to enlist us in their causes, and to shape the course of destiny. From Winston Churchill’s focus on the “finest hour” to Martin Luther King, Jr.’s depiction of a “dream” we are well aware that beliefs are formed by words—and they can be changed by words. But what about the ability we each have within us to use words to ignite change, to move ourselves to action, and to improve the quality of our lives?
We all know words provide us with a vehicle for expressing and sharing our experience with others. But do you realize that the words you habitually choose also affects how you communicate with yourself and therefore what you experience?
For the past 35 years I’ve had the privilege of working with more than 50 million people and I’ve observed firsthand the power of changing just one key word in communicating with someone and noted how it instantly changes the way people feel—and how they behave. And I can tell you that simply by changing your habitual vocabulary—the words you consistently use to describe emotions—you can instantaneously change how you think, how you feel, and how you live. This is the power of what I call Transformational Vocabulary—consciously using your words to improve the quality of your life today and for the rest of your life.
According to Compton’s Encyclopedia, the English language contains some 500,000 words. Yet the average person’s working vocabulary consists of 2,000—0.5% of the entire language. And the number of words we use most frequently—the words that make up our habitual vocabulary? For most people, it averages 200-300 words. Isn’t that unbelievable? (By contrast, John Milton’s writings used about 17,000 words and William Shakespeare used 24,000 words, 5,000 of which he only used one time.)  Of those 500,000 words total, as much as 3,000 are used to describe emotions—2/3 of which are used to describe negative emotions.
With such amazing resources with which to express our feelings and ideas, why should people accept such an impoverished vocabulary? Most people are not challenged by the size of the vocabulary they understand, but rather by the words they chose to use. Our brains are working at high speeds; they’re trying to help us to process what things mean and what we should do as fast as we can. As a result, we tend to use the same words over and over again.  Many times we use short cuts, but these short cuts often shortchange us emotionally.
For more than two decades, I’ve been testing with live audiences all around the world, asking them to take on a very simple task: Make a list of the emotions you feel at least once a week.  I have people take five to ten minutes, and write down not all the emotions they feel in a rare while (i.e. once a month or year), but simply the ones they consistently feel.  Ironically, whether the audience is 2,000 people or 30,000 people, 90% of the people write down an average of a dozen words—and more than half of those represent negative feelings.  That means literally, out of the 3,000 words we have for emotions, most people feel about five or six good feelings; and the bad feelings we find over and over again.  We tend to get happy and excited, then angry, frustrated, sad, or even depressed, as an example.  Have you ever taken the time to actually become aware of the habitual words you use to describe the emotions that you feel?  Do you think it’s possible that when we feel negative sensations, that those sensations are transformed emotionally by the word labels we put upon them?
The problem is that most often we do not choose our words consciously to describe our emotions.  Any emotions we experience that are distressing, we have habitual words that we unconsciously attach to them, and the challenge of course is the words we attach to our experience become our experience. Words have a biochemical effect on the body. The minute you use a word like “devastated” you’re going to produce a very different biochemical effect than if you say, “I’m a bit disappointed.”
It’s not hard to see the impact of this when other people speak to us.  For example, if someone said to you, “I think you’re mistaken,” versus, “I think you’re wrong,” versus, “You’re lying,” would you have a different biochemical response to that simple word? The same exact process happens with the words that we use within ourselves, but unfortunately, we’re less conscious of its impact.
I first became consciously aware of the power of the words we use to label the experience of our emotions during an intense negotiation, more than a decade and a half ago. I shared information to the other side that I thought would help my two business partners and myself to cut through the positioning and show good faith. Unfortunately, rather than reciprocating with good faith, the other side ended up using that information to try to leverage us in an unjust way to close the deal that would not be to our advantage. 
To say it was upsetting at the time would be an understatement. As I left the meeting to sit down with my two other partners, I couldn’t help but notice that the three of us labeled the experience radically different.  I was frustrated and angry, but in the midst of my own emotion, I was literally jarred by the intensity of one of my partners.  He was enraged and talked about how furious he was by their response; and how he felt that they were “putting a gun to our head.” His face was beet red and he was totally out of control. I was trying to calm him down—the intensity of his emotion struck me because it seemed over the top to my anger and frustration.  By contrast, I couldn’t help but notice that my other partner seemed completely unmoved by the experience. When I asked him, “You don’t seem to be upset by this. Aren’t you angry?” He said, “Well, no, not really. I’m a little annoyed by this.” I was incredulous, “Annoyed?” I asked, “Don’t you realize what these people have done?”  He said, “Of course I do. It certainly peeves me a bit.” “Peeved?” I echoed back the word. “What do you mean, peeved?” To which he responded, “Well, it’s really just not worth being upset over and that’s how I feel.”
I was struck by how each of us used words that had such radically different levels of intensity—enraged versus angry versus and annoyed/peeved—and also how the experience of the event was radically different. How could it be that I was “angry” and “upset,” one of my partners was “furious” and“enraged,” and my other partner was “annoyed” and “a little peeved?” The word “peeved” itself “annoyed” me.  I thought, “What a ridiculous word to describe what these people had done to us.”  It seemed stupid in my mind. I thought to myself, I would never use this word to describe how I was feeling…but then again, I had never been that calm in an unjust situation. I began to wonder, “If I did, how would I feel?” Just to use the word “peeved” would probably make me laugh. It seemed so ridiculous.
Is it possible that the words we attach to our experience, actually become our experience? Do words have a biochemical effect? Over the next few weeks, I began to notice the pattern of language that different people had and how their language patterns produced a magnification of their emotion or a softening of it.
So I decided to try a 10-day challenge with myself where I would first identify the emotions that I experienced most often that were most distressing, and find a new word—a word that would soften or actually seem ridiculous to break my own pattern of thought and feeling. 
I got my first opportunity after a long series of connecting flights, all of which were late. I arrived at my hotel at two in the morning, knowing I had to be up to speak at 8 a.m. and waited at the front desk for 10 minutes while the clerk searched for my name in the computer at a pace that would make a snail impatient. I felt the frustration gathering inside me, it started to build into anger, and I finally turned to the man, as I felt my intensity grow, and said, “I know this isn’t your fault, but right now I’m exhausted and I really need to get any room you can find for me because I’m starting to feel myself getting “a little bit peeved.” Just saying the word “peeved” by itself changed the tone of my voice and made the whole situation seem silly.  The clerk looked at me perplexedly and then broke into a smile. I smiled back; my pattern was broken.  As ridiculous and overly simplistic as this sounds, the simple replacement of the word I used within my own vocabulary, broke my pattern. It was like the difference between saying you’re “mistaken” versus you’re “wrong.” The emotional volcano that had been building up inside of me instantly cooled.
Could it really be this easy? Just by changing the habitual words we use to describe the emotions within ourselves, could we change the pattern of how we felt and therefore the quality of our lives? Ten days turned into a month and I can tell you, beyond a shadow of a doubt, it was a life-transforming experience. This is not to say there aren’t times when you want to feel angry or enraged, but wouldn’t it be nice to have that be a conscious choice versus just a habitual reaction?
Here’s what I found: If you want to change your life, if you want to shape your decisions and your actions, shifting your emotional patterns are the key.  One fundamental tool that can change it faster than anything else is consciously selecting the words you’re going to use to describe how you feel.  This is how you create a level of choice instead of a habitual reaction. 
I call this Transformational Vocabulary because it gives you the power to change your experiences in life by taking the most negative feelings in your life and lowering their intensity to the point where they no longer control you.  It also can be used to take positive experiences and increase them to even greater heights of pleasure.
Intellectually this sounds just like semantics, doesn’t it? What difference does it make to play with words? But if you test it in your own life experience, you’ll know it’s true. What would your life be like if you could take all your negative emotions and lower their intensity consistently? How much greater would the quality of your life be if you could intensify every positive experience you’ve ever had? In the next blog post, I’ll offer you some specific strategies on how to “Watch your TV” (Transformational Vocabulary) and develop a new habit in less than ten days. I look forward to seeing you then.

Five top tips to starting a successful business


1. Listen more than you talk
We have two ears and one mouth, using them in proportion is not a bad idea! To be a good leader you have to be a great listener. Brilliant ideas can spring from the most unlikely places, so you should always keep your ears open for some shrewd advice. This can mean following online comments as closely as board meeting notes, or asking the frontline staff for their opinions as often as the CEOs. Get out there, listen to people, draw people out and learn from them.
 2. Keep it simple
You have to do something radically different to stand out in business. But nobody ever said different has to be complex. There are thousands of simple business solutions to problems out there, just waiting to be solved by the next big thing in business. Maintain a focus upon innovation, but don’t try to reinvent the wheel. A simple change for the better is far more effective than five complicated changes for the worse.
 3. Take pride in your work
I enjoyed my favorite night of the year, the Virgin Stars of the Year Awards, where we celebrated some of those people who have gone the extra mile for us around the Virgin world. With so many different companies, nationalities and personalities represented under one roof, it was interesting to see what qualities they all have in common. One was pride in their work, and in the company they represent. Remember your staff are your biggest brand advocates, and focusing on helping them take pride will shine through in how they treat your customers.
 4. Have fun, success will follow
If you aren’t having fun, you are doing it wrong. If you feel like getting up in the morning to work on your business is a chore, then it's time to try something else. If you are having a good time, there is a far greater chance a positive, innovative atmosphere will be nurtured and your business will fluorish. A smile and a joke can go a long way, so be quick to see the lighter side of life.
 5. Rip it up and start again
If you are an entrepreneur and your first venture isn’t a success, welcome to the club! Every successful businessperson has experienced a few failures along the way – the important thing is how you learn from them. Don’t allow yourself to get disheartened by a setback or two, instead dust yourself off and work out what went wrong. Then you can find the positives, analyse where you can improve, rip it up and start again.