bwp-google-xml-sitemaps
domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init
action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /home/cadev/dev.celebrityaccess.net/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6119(Hypebot<\/a>) —\u00a0During January, Artist Rights Watch fielded a survey to songwriters, hoping to gauge their level of awareness surrounding the Music Licensing Collective. Here, we break down some of the results and recommendations that were gleaned from it.<\/p>\n Guest post by\u00a0Chris Castle<\/strong>\u00a0of\u00a0Music Technology Policy<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n Our sister site Artist Rights Watch fielded a Mechanical Licensing Collective Awareness Questionnaire during January targeting songwriters attending\u00a0our MLC webinar<\/a>. \u00a0(MLC Awareness Questionnaire 1\/31\/21 n=120.) \u00a0The purpose of the questionnaire was to give the panelists some idea of the awareness level of attendees about the issues we intended to discussed based on early responses to the survey. \u00a0You can read the analysis of the responses\u00a0here,<\/a>\u00a0but I\u2019m going to discuss them briefly.<\/p>\n Of the 120 people who responded, responses suggest that approximately 70% of respondents personally handled the business and administration of their song catalogs, 50% were self-administered, and 50% administered song catalogs of 100 songs or fewer. \u00a0In other words, the majority of respondents were exactly the kind of self-administered songwriters or administrators we sought to connect with and who are eligible to stand for the MLC board seats devoted to self-administered songwriters if the right insiders nominate them . \u00a0We are still analyzing the geographic data, but about 16% were from California zip codes with the rest distributed across Texas, Georgia and other fly-over states.<\/p>\n The basic questions about the MLC awareness we were trying to better understand were whether respondents even knew what we were asking about, and if so, how did they know. \u00a0This will help understand the success of the information efforts to date by the MLC, the DLC, and the Copyright Office. \u00a0We also wanted to know if respondents felt that they knew enough about the MLC to advocate for themselves with the MLC as an effectiveness metric for other educational efforts to date.<\/p>\n An encouraging 63% of respondents had heard of the MLC, but 22% had not. \u00a0Less encouraging was 6.67% who had both heard of the MLC\u00a0and<\/em>\u00a0successfully registered and 4.17% who had heard of it but had not been able to register.<\/p>\n When asked how they had heard of the MLC, respondents were asked to respond to a list of potential sources, including \u201cother\u201d. \u00a0The largest source of information was \u201cnews media\u201d at 27.35% and the next largest was \u201cother\u201d, which included a variety of sources including The Trichordist, Artist Rights Watch and MTP.<\/p>\n However, given the other answers, the education efforts of the MLC (including HFA), the DLC and the Copyright Office did not seem to be making much penetration into these respondents, although the Copyright Office led the pack, sometimes by a lot. \u00a0This is curious because it\u2019s not really the Copyright Office\u2019s job and they are not being paid millions to do it.<\/p>\n