Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Dublin Bus Radio nonsense

2

Comments

  • #52
    knucklehead6
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,842 ✭✭✭knucklehead6


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    Dublin Bus drivers are refusing to use the Port Tunnel from next week and looking at non-collection of fares from next week because the drivers are not allowed use a radio in their cabs.

    What is the story with all of the industrial action over the pettiness of things?? Start training up bus and Luas drivers and sack the lot of the whingers. Inconveniencing thousands of people over nonsense.


    You do realise that by non collection of fares they will still be running the buses, the service will still be provided, it just won't cost the users any money. In terms of industrial action, it's actually a good one, as it impacts the company, not the public


  • #53
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    JustShon wrote: »
    Again, what happens to the route if all of the drivers who serve that route do move to a new company?

    It'll have a skeleton schedule for a while, but then hopefully will have decent drivers who abide by what they've signed up for and don't strike over the pettiest thing they can think of.


  • #54
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    knucklehead6 wrote: »
    You do realise that by non collection of fares they will still be running the buses, the service will still be provided, it just won't cost the users any money. In terms of industrial action, it's actually a good one, as it impacts the company, not the public

    Non collection of fares was made illegal a few years ago was it not. I am sure this came up during their last industrial action less than a year ago when they didn't run at all.

    I'm more annoyed at the additional 2 hours added to my commute by not using the Port Tunnel.


  • #55
    Victor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,493 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    knucklehead6 wrote: »
    You do realise that by non collection of fares they will still be running the buses, the service will still be provided, it just won't cost the users any money. In terms of industrial action, it's actually a good one, as it impacts the company, not the public
    If fares aren't collected, the company loses money, making it harder to operate services, thereby risking cuts to services.


  • #56
    RayM
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,973 ✭✭✭RayM


    Aongus Von Bismarck wrote: »
    Proper order. You are paid to work, not to listen to some crank talking to Joe Duffy.

    Reminds me of an incident a few years back where this surly IT fellow arrived down to my desk wearing headphones and listening to godawful heavy metal. Didn't even acknowledge me as he started replacing the toner cartridges in the printer. I confronted him about this and followed it up with a sternly worded letter to his line manager.

    Sounds like the sort of thing 'some crank' would do...


  • #57
    RayM
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,973 ✭✭✭RayM


    Victor wrote: »
    If fares aren't collected, the company loses money, making it harder to operate services, thereby risking cuts to services.

    Alternatively, fares are collected... because the company decides that the implementation and enforcement of such a petty little rule is not worth the hassle, and that allowing drivers such a minor pleasure isn't actually going to cause harm to anyone. That would surely be the most sensible and rational outcome.


  • #58
    ted1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,658 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    VinLieger wrote: »
    So far that hasnt been mentioned at all as a reason and if it was you can bet DB would be using it as its a fair one. The lack of a reason so far is what makes me think its petty

    The IMRO licence is the reason


  • #59
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,789 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    ted1 wrote: »
    The IMRO licence is the reason

    I doubt that is the issue here.

    If the driver has a radio in the cab, it is there for his own personal use. I don't think fees have to be paid when you listen to a personal radio. If the driver's radio was piped through the speakers on the bus, then yes there might be IMRO fees to be paid.


  • #60
    ted1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,658 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    I doubt that is the issue here.

    If the driver has a radio in the cab, it is there for his own personal use. I don't think fees have to be paid when you listen to a personal radio. If the driver's radio was piped through the speakers on the bus, then yes there might be IMRO fees to be paid.

    No, see your thinking you didn't do research .


    http://www.imro.ie/music-users/faq/

    It is irrelevant who in your organisation has access to copyright music via the TV/radio. What is relevant is that the use of music in the workplace is in public and is considered a public performance of the copyright work, because the performance / music use is taking place outside of the domestic environment.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Dyr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    The bus driver could be blaring scooter from a boom box for all I care so long as the f**ker turns up


  • #62
    Victor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,493 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Bambi wrote: »
    The bus driver could be blaring scooter from a boom box for all I care so long as the f**ker turns up
    But will he hear the bell when you want to get off?


  • #63
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    I doubt that is the issue here.

    If the driver has a radio in the cab, it is there for his own personal use. I don't think fees have to be paid when you listen to a personal radio. If the driver's radio was piped through the speakers on the bus, then yes there might be IMRO fees to be paid.

    A bus is a public vehicle. Any music played by the driver would be considered a public performance. Whether in the cab or over the speakers.


  • #64
    m5ex9oqjawdg2i
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,221 ✭✭✭✭m5ex9oqjawdg2i


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    A bus is a public vehicle. Any music played by the driver would be considered a public performance. Whether in the cab or over the speakers.

    Do you know the reason behind the radio ban? Is it royalties? If so then there's a case, if not then your point is null and void.


  • #65
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Leland Easy Roaster wrote: »
    Do you know the reason behind the radio ban? Is it royalties? If so then there's a case, if not then your point is null and void.

    The reason it was banned in the first place was royalties. There was a blind eye turned to it though. In my opinion, someone has complained to IMRO, or DB have received notice from IMRO that they will be clamping down on this. I'm sure if the drivers want sign a contract stating that they were willing to pay the tariff out of their own pockets then DB would allow radio.


  • #66
    languagenerd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,201 ✭✭✭languagenerd


    To be fair, if you look at the Port Tunnel website and/or info leaflets, the first piece of safety advice they give is "tune in to FM radio" while in the Tunnel. If bus drivers can't do that, they can legitimately claim it's a safety issue and refuse to go through the Tunnel. It might be annoying but, on paper, they are in the right.

    When companies start playing silly beggars, you'll find that employees will start doing the same thing and following rules to the letter, especially if the full application of the rules is inconvenient for everyone.

    Public transport in this city is getting seriously painful these days though!


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    m5ex9oqjawdg2i
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,221 ✭✭✭✭m5ex9oqjawdg2i


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    The reason it was banned in the first place was royalties. There was a blind eye turned to it though. In my opinion, someone has complained to IMRO, or DB have received notice from IMRO that they will be clamping down on this. I'm sure if the drivers want sign a contract stating that they were willing to pay the tariff out of their own pockets then DB would allow radio.

    If that's the case, are the drivers expecting DB to pay for the royalties? Is it that expensive?


  • #68
    biko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 81,220 ✭✭✭✭biko


    That's fascinating*






    *no, it's not


  • #69
    TallGlass
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,935 ✭✭✭TallGlass


    Victor wrote: »
    I can see a number of arguments from the Dublin Bus side:
    * Safety / distraction - talk radio is designed to wind people up.
    * Safety - the radio is often plonked on the dashboard in front of the driver, obstructing the view of the speedometer.
    * Noise - drivers need to interact with passengers at stops. This is more difficult with the extra noise.
    * Royalties



    Trains have intercoms.

    Aircraft over a certain number of passengers are required to have cabin crew.

    So do buses have intercoms.. Quite puzzling really, its a radio. How would there be royalties listening to a public radio station? The royalties are paid already. All the safety issues you mentioned, then they should be banned from cars also.

    You shouldn't be looking at your speedometer while driving anyway, cause you'd be taking hour eyes off the road.

    Extra noise? It's a HGV theres plenty of noise anyway.

    Radio designed to wind people up, what do you be doing with your radio? I have never been wound up listening to mine anyway.


  • #70
    TallGlass
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,935 ✭✭✭TallGlass


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    The reason it was banned in the first place was royalties. There was a blind eye turned to it though. In my opinion, someone has complained to IMRO, or DB have received notice from IMRO that they will be clamping down on this. I'm sure if the drivers want sign a contract stating that they were willing to pay the tariff out of their own pockets then DB would allow radio.

    Put these should be paid already as I mentioned loads of times. Show me proof that a public station that's had fee paid cannot be played in a public place. It makes no sense, the stations paid the fees to broadcast to the public in the first place. Again show me in writing where it states this.


  • #71
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    TallGlass wrote: »
    Quite puzzling really, its a radio. How would there be royalties listening to a public radio station? The royalties are paid already. All the safety issues you mentioned, then they should be banned from cars also.

    Nope, it's subject to additional royalties. In your car it doesn't classify as a public performance.
    Leland Easy Roaster wrote: »
    If that's the case, are the drivers expecting DB to pay for the royalties? Is it that expensive?

    From what I can make out it's €142.78 per vehicle for the first year.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    TallGlass wrote: »
    Again show me in writing where it states this.

    Coaches & Minibuses
    This tariff applies to performances of copyright music played by means of a television, radio/CD/digital player or a PC within the repertoire controlled by IMRO in motor coaches and minibuses.
    Source: http://www.imro.ie/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/MC-Tariff-0116-1216-DUAL.pdf


  • #73
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    IMRO = cocksuckers


  • #74
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    Drivers would be queuing up to pay their own license fees if that were the case.


  • #75
    arayess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,707 ✭✭✭arayess


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    I was stuck in the tunnel yesterday on a bus. The safety announcements were made over the tannoy. You probably could have tuned your radio into them, but the tannoy was loud enough to hear.

    so was I.
    you should have said hello.


  • #76
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    TallGlass wrote: »
    So do buses have intercoms.. Quite puzzling really, its a radio. How would there be royalties listening to a public radio station? The royalties are paid already. All the safety issues you mentioned, then they should be banned from cars also.

    You shouldn't be looking at your speedometer while driving anyway, cause you'd be taking hour eyes off the road.

    Extra noise? It's a HGV theres plenty of noise anyway.

    Radio designed to wind people up, what do you be doing with your radio? I have never been wound up listening to mine anyway.

    You are online, so how about using google instead of being spoonfed information that is easily available. IMRO have already been named numerous times, it's not difficult to find.

    And the tariff above is for a minibus or coach, I'd imagine it would be quite a bit higher for a double decker public service vehicle. A minibus or coach will generally go from A to B, a bus keeps going all day.


  • #77
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    Leland Easy Roaster wrote: »
    If that's the case, are the drivers expecting DB to pay for the royalties? Is it that expensive?

    It's based on size of where the playback is happening. The idea behind that is to estimate the amount of people present.
    bodice ripper wrote: »
    IMRO = cocksuckers

    If that's what you think, I'm not really sure you know who they are. Is your payroll team a bunch of cocksuckers as well? Would you rather not have someone to make sure you get paid?


  • #78
    hairyslug
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,595 ✭✭✭hairyslug


    Aongus Von Bismarck wrote: »
    Proper order. You are paid to work, not to listen to some crank talking to Joe Duffy.

    Reminds me of an incident a few years back where this surly IT fellow arrived down to my desk wearing headphones and listening to godawful heavy metal. Didn't even acknowledge me as he started replacing the toner cartridges in the printer. I confronted him about this and followed it up with a sternly worded letter to his line manager.

    Well aren't you just a little treasure


  • #79
    ted1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,658 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    bodice ripper wrote: »
    IMRO = cocksuckers

    Not really there just ensuring the artist gets paid for their work


  • #80
    Dirty Dingus McGee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,631 ✭✭✭Dirty Dingus McGee


    They should be allowed to listen to it in their cab but it is ridiculous the amount of bus drivers who don't seem to realise that nobody else wants to listen to the radio (or if the do they'll have their own Ipod etc) and decide to inflict the radio upon their passengers.


  • #81
    TallGlass
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,935 ✭✭✭TallGlass


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    You are online, so how about using google instead of being spoonfed information that is easily available. IMRO have already been named numerous times, it's not difficult to find.

    And the tariff above is for a minibus or coach, I'd imagine it would be quite a bit higher for a double decker public service vehicle. A minibus or coach will generally go from A to B, a bus keeps going all day.

    I'm asking for someone to provide me where it states you cannot listen to an FM broadcast on a bus. The driver isn't broadcasting, he is listening to the broadcast, there is a difference. So then too the passengers should pay if they are listening to music on there iPods or FM radio and someone hears there music, they are breaking the law according to your logic.

    So should I have to pay money if I drive around listening to FM104 with my windows down and someone across from me hears the music I am playing?

    Stop coming up with stupid reasons to deny these guys there radio, let them have there radios is what I say. No harm at all, every single car comes with a radio shall we ban them now? Cop on.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    m5ex9oqjawdg2i
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,221 ✭✭✭✭m5ex9oqjawdg2i


    TallGlass wrote: »
    I'm asking for someone to provide me where it states you cannot listen to an FM broadcast on a bus. The driver isn't broadcasting, he is listening to the broadcast, there is a difference. So then too the passengers should pay if they are listening to music on there iPods or FM radio and someone hears there music, they are breaking the law according to your logic.

    So should I have to pay money if I drive around listening to FM104 with my windows down and someone across from me hears the music I am playing?

    Stop coming up with stupid reasons to deny these guys there radio, let them have there radios is what I say. No harm at all, every single car comes with a radio shall we ban them now? Cop on.


    I don't think weldoninhio has come up with the reasons, it's DB management you need to get onto if you're looking to rant.


  • #83
    TallGlass
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,935 ✭✭✭TallGlass


    Leland Easy Roaster wrote: »
    I don't think weldoninhio has come up with the reasons, it's DB management you need to get onto if you're looking to rant.

    Not ranting, just sticking up for the guys who want to listen to a bit of radio while driving there bus.


  • #84
    SB_Part2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,951 ✭✭✭SB_Part2


    ted1 wrote: »
    Not really there just ensuring the artist gets paid for their work

    What if they are listening to Radio 1? From what I remember it's mostly talk shows. Do IMRO still need to be paid?


  • #85
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    TallGlass wrote: »
    I'm asking for someone to provide me where it states you cannot listen to an FM broadcast on a bus. The driver isn't broadcasting, he is listening to the broadcast, there is a difference. So then too the passengers should pay if they are listening to music on there iPods or FM radio and someone hears there music, they are breaking the law according to your logic.

    So should I have to pay money if I drive around listening to FM104 with my windows down and someone across from me hears the music I am playing?

    Stop coming up with stupid reasons to deny these guys there radio, let them have there radios is what I say. No harm at all, every single car comes with a radio shall we ban them now? Cop on.

    You are over thinking this. The passengers don't work for dublin bus. The driver does. But this is an extreme moot point as Dublin Bus haven't said anything about liability for IMRO payments. So it's better off just cutting this discussion piece. You're not only arguing about something that isn't relevant, you've clearly shown you know nothing about it and you're up against people who do.


  • #86
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    Dravokivich wrote: »



    If that's what you think, I'm not really sure you know who they are. Is your payroll team a bunch of cocksuckers as well? Would you rather not have someone to make sure you get paid?

    I know who they are. I haven't had a payroll team in years, probably never will have one again. But I don't doubt that if I had, they too would be cocksuckers.


  • #87
    TallGlass
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,935 ✭✭✭TallGlass


    Dravokivich wrote: »
    You are over thinking this. The passengers don't work for dublin bus. The driver does. But this is an extreme moot point as Dublin Bus haven't said anything about liability for IMRO payments. So it's better off just cutting this discussion piece. You're not only arguing about something that isn't relevant, you've clearly shown you know nothing about it and you're up against people who do.

    What? Up against who, nobody has mentioned why DB has said they cannot continue, so I don't know where you are getting I am up against people who are in the know about it. This isn't something techincal, its a radio. Anyone with a bit of common sense would tell you to let them listen to the radio.

    BTW, this is a discussion board and even if people where in the know it's doesn't automatically make there points valid.


  • #88
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    TallGlass wrote: »
    I'm asking for someone to provide me where it states you cannot listen to an FM broadcast on a bus. The driver isn't broadcasting, he is listening to the broadcast, there is a difference. So then too the passengers should pay if they are listening to music on there iPods or FM radio and someone hears there music, they are breaking the law according to your logic.

    So should I have to pay money if I drive around listening to FM104 with my windows down and someone across from me hears the music I am playing?

    Stop coming up with stupid reasons to deny these guys there radio, let them have there radios is what I say. No harm at all, every single car comes with a radio shall we ban them now? Cop on.

    1)It is not "my logic". It is the law, as has been explained to you numerous times now. If an office has a radio, it has to pay IMRO for this.

    2) www.imro.ie, you were already given a link to this, you seem to have missed it or just can't get it through your head.

    3) An iPod/Walkman is a PERSONAL device hence the earphones.

    4) A car is an enclosed personal space.

    It is not rocket science.


  • #89
    Jimoslimos
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,930 ✭✭✭Jimoslimos


    Regarding IMRO, could DB not argue that whilst the bus might be a public area, the enclosed driver's cab most certainly is not. Also do taxi drivers have to pay royalties to IMRO, I don't think they do.


  • #90
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Jimoslimos wrote: »
    Regarding IMRO, could DB not argue that whilst the bus might be a public area, the enclosed driver's cab most certainly is not. Also do taxi drivers have to pay royalties to IMRO, I don't think they do.

    As far as I know cars are classed as personal spaces and are exempt. I'm open to correction, but this was formerly the case. It's minibuses and higher that have a tariff.


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    ted1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,658 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    TallGlass wrote: »
    I'm asking for someone to provide me where it states you cannot listen to an FM broadcast on a bus. The driver isn't broadcasting, he is listening to the broadcast, there is a difference. So then too the passengers should pay if they are listening to music on there iPods or FM radio and someone hears there music, they are breaking the law according to your logic.

    So should I have to pay money if I drive around listening to FM104 with my windows down and someone across from me hears the music I am playing?

    Stop coming up with stupid reasons to deny these guys there radio, let them have there radios is what I say. No harm at all, every single car comes with a radio shall we ban them now? Cop on.

    I posted a link earlier ,so get off your high horse , stop talking rubbish , and enjoy eating your humble pie.


  • #92
    m5ex9oqjawdg2i
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,221 ✭✭✭✭m5ex9oqjawdg2i


    TallGlass wrote: »
    Not ranting, just sticking up for the guys who want to listen to a bit of radio while driving there bus.

    Me too, but if the company is in a spot of bother, financialy, they will want to cut costs where they can. I don't perticularly agree with it, but I also have no idea what figures it will cost them anually if they have to pay IRMO. Didn't DB cut routes lately due to cutbacks? Or was that another bus company.


  • #93
    check_six
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,245 ✭✭✭check_six


    I'd guess IMRO has not been mentioned publicly because Dublin Bus are trying to avoid a large bill from them. I've heard of places where IMRO ring up and ask the receptionist if they have a radio in their office. The receptionist says no. Then they are asked if they have speakers on their computer. They say yes. Then they are asked if they can access youtube (or just the internet in general). They say yes. Then it's: Boom! Bill in the post.


  • #94
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,789 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    check_six wrote: »
    I'd guess IMRO has not been mentioned publicly because Dublin Bus are trying to avoid a large bill from them. I've heard of places where IMRO ring up and ask the receptionist if they have a radio in their office. The receptionist says no. Then they are asked if they have speakers on their computer. They say yes. Then they are asked if they can access youtube (or just the internet in general). They say yes. Then it's: Boom! Bill in the post.

    Tell them you are listening to a party political broadcast on behalf of Fine Gael or some sort of music from a Hindu dance festival. Do IMRO have the rights to that?


  • #95
    TallGlass
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,935 ✭✭✭TallGlass


    ted1 wrote: »
    I posted a link earlier ,so get off your high horse , stop talking rubbish , and enjoy eating your humble pie.

    You posted a link to a two page document, which doesn't answer my question. Which is if your listening to a radio station which is broadcast on FM, why do you have to pay the charges again if that FM station has paided the fee for a public broadcast.

    I am not talking any rubbish what so ever, stop getting annoyed because you know I am right. What high horse? Surely if I was on the high horse I would be agreeing with you, but I am not they should have there radio.

    And by your logic again, what if the taxi is a mini bus? Should they pay, or have no radio. Cop on and get a grip of yourself, the fees are paid by the radio stations, stop trying to double charge.


  • #96
    Peppa Pig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,670 ✭✭✭Peppa Pig


    TallGlass wrote: »
    Cop on and get a grip of yourself, the fees are paid by the radio stations, stop trying to double charge.
    You're not fully right there, there are instances of double payment for radio stations. From the IMRO website, any company must be licensed for
    You need a licence from IMRO if you have a TV, radio or any music system in:
    the canteen or staff restaurant
    In private offices
    rest areas
    when using music at product demonstrations or launches
    on the factory floor
    on the office floor
    in your reception area or
    when music is contained within training videos or
    when using music in product demonstrations or launches.
    There must be a commercial benefit to an organisation. However, DB cannot be getting a commercial benefit from a driver's own radio. They would have to provide it for the driver's benefit.

    So I cannot see how it is the issue, particularly when it only costs €5 per year per employee.
    IMRO


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    TallGlass wrote: »
    You posted a link to a two page document, which doesn't answer my question. Which is if your listening to a radio station which is broadcast on FM, why do you have to pay the charges again if that FM station has paided the fee for a public broadcast.

    I am not talking any rubbish what so ever, stop getting annoyed because you know I am right. What high horse? Surely if I was on the high horse I would be agreeing with you, but I am not they should have there radio.

    And by your logic again, what if the taxi is a mini bus? Should they pay, or have no radio. Cop on and get a grip of yourself, the fees are paid by the radio stations, stop trying to double charge.

    It's been explained to you. Many times. I won't be wasting any more time on you. I'd hope others would do the same.


  • #98
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Peppa Pig wrote: »
    You're not fully right there, there are instances of double payment for radio stations. From the IMRO website, any company must be licensed for
    There must be a commercial benefit to an organisation. However, DB cannot be getting a commercial benefit from a driver's own radio. They would have to provide it for the driver's benefit.

    So I cannot see how it is the issue, particularly when it only costs €5 per year per employee.
    IMRO

    When music is played in a public place, like say a bus, it is seen as a public performance. That €5 per employee would not count in this instance.

    I would imagine it would run to thousands a day to licence every bus to play radio, whether in the drivers cabin or all over.


  • #99
    B.A._Baracus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,206 ✭✭✭✭B.A._Baracus


    Oh boy, free bus travel :pac:


  • #100
    The flying mouse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,915 ✭✭✭The flying mouse


    I remember back in the 80,s there was piped ?? music on the buses , You would listen to Rte on your way into city centre,wether you liked it or not, how times have changed.


  • #101
    Peppa Pig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,670 ✭✭✭Peppa Pig


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    When music is played in a public place, like say a bus, it is seen as a public performance.
    Yeah you're right, I didn't read enough of the website
    Under Sec 37 (2) of the Act ‘the copyright in a work is infringed by a person who without the licence of the copyright owner undertakes, or authorises another to undertake’, the public performance of the work. Therefore in effect by allowing staff use their own radio in the workplace, you are, as their employer, authorising the use of IMRO copyright music on your premises and you must hold a licence to allow you and them to do so.
    It does mention a cost of €5 per employee, though.

    IMRO Again


  • Advertisement
Advertisement