Enabling verifiable transparency for rights holders and rights user - Yuri Dokter, DJ Monitor, The Netherlands

1. “Live Performance Rights Monitoring”
SEEME 2014 @ Sofia
Transparency for Music Rights holders and Rights Users
Presentation Live Performance Monitoring
Panel Discussion with:
- Musicautor
-Bulgarian Hip Hop Association
- DJ Monitor
“International Best Practices & Cases”
Q&A
We monitor. We recognize. We deliver.

2. Transparency is required
 European Performance Rights Organizations (PRO/CMO) collect billions of
€uros each year from TV and radio broadcasters, venues, events, etc for the
performance of music from artists/songwriters they represent.
 Until recently there was little transparency in the remuneration; PROs relied
heavily on playlists supplied to them by the music user. This information is
overall biased and inaccurate.
 Reservations for future claims are made for years of non identified;
accumulating interest and non transparent remuneration of these reservations
for average of 4 years * € Billions!
 Since 2005 Buma/Stemra started monitoring events with DJ Monitor through
music recognition technology. A worldwide premier.
 DJ Monitor advises the European Commission & Parliament, who worked on
new directives for more transparency and accountability of PROs.
 New directives resulted in transparency for online, which only accounts for +-5%
of PRO license fees. No transparency guidelines have been made for live,
broadcast and background music in public places, which make up at least 70%-
80% of PRO license fees.

3. How does work?
Uploading music to our database
Rights owner CD
MP3
Internet Extraction
Music Recognition System
cluster
MP3
Audio finger print
Meta data
Reference
data base
Source
Audio
DJM1010hd
19” Rack
Fingerprint
Stream
Meta data
Internet Datacenter Internet Playlist
(e-mail, rss, www)

4. IP Audio Monitoring devices
Club Monitor
Ambience Monitor
Event Monitor

5. Music Usage Reporting, Song Tracking &
Uploading

6. We monitor for rightsholders and users:

7. PANEL
Moderator: Christina Dencheva
DJ Monitor: Yuri Dokter
Musicautor: Stoyan Michalev, Deputy Charmain
Musicautor & Bulgarian Hip Hop Associacion:
Vasil Nikolov, Deputy Chairman of BHHA Managing Board

8. Challenges of Live Performance Monitoring
 Fingerprinted versus Handwritten Playlists.
 Cooperation and coordination. From getting access to matching results @ PRO back-end
 PRO payment policy: pay per play (BUMA) versus top 300 most grossing concerts
(ASCAP)
 License fee differences: <1% in the USA versus 10% author+3% neightbouring rights
licenses in European countries, versus flat fee $3 per visitor in Australia.
 What are the costs?
o Min € 300 per stage monitored (min 3 stages))
o Min € 80 per club per month monitored (min cluster 10 clubs) + installation fee
 Who should pay the associated costs?
o PROs?
o Rightsholders (members)?
o Rights users (promotors)?
o DJs?
o Other models?
 Are PROs charging the correct tariff? Transparency works both ways.
o 1/3, 2/3 or more than 2/3
o Playlist+ Member Investigation = Effective research

9. Best Practices
 NL: BUMA grants 25% discount to VVEM events on license fees
 NL: VVEM research to reduce SENA license fee, based on claimed
72% members representation versus +- 29% researched members
 NL: ADE Monitoring of 123 events during 5 days kicks off Club
Monitoring and Dancefloor charts.
 Spain: Monegros & Sonár succesfully negotiate reduction in rate from
SGAE up to 1/3 of the license fee.
 Germany: Livekomm succesfully is included in decisionmaking proces
entailing club and event monitoring by GEMA in Germany
 Belgium: Tomorrowland, Laundry Industry, Summer Festival and others
negotiate license fees with SABAM in courtcase
 Belgium: Start monitoring of Belgium clubs by SABAM 2014
 Australia: Start monitoring of Australian Clubs by APRA AMCOS and
PPCA in 2010.

10. DJ MONITOR BV
TIMORPLEIN 32
1094 CC AMSTERDAM
THE NETHERLANDS
E. info@djmonitor.com
T. +31 (0) 20 8208215
W. www.djmonitor.com
T. www.twitter.com/djmonitor