When I DJ’d at nightclubs back in college, 90% of my records were supplied (free) through my local record distrubutor/promotor — who were using the “night club” as a way to introduce music to new listeners and expand record sales. This process worked for everyone. The record company supplied music to the Entertaiment Venue who paid the ASCAP/BMI fees. The Venue drew customers by playing music that drew and audience and that audience bought drinks at the establishment and a portion went on to purchase the music they heard. The artist received money from the recording label, the venue, and record purchases from the audience.

The big difference now is “streaming DJs” also pay for all the music they stream.

The DJ pays for the music, pays to stream it, pays royalties on top of that.

Everyone seems to “win” in this business model expect the DJ. Seems that we should revisit the legality of “payola”. You want me to play it so you sell it? Pay me instead Mr Record Promoter instead.

However, If I choose to play music that I purchased for the listening enjoyment of my friends in my home, virtual home etc., that is entertainment, not profiteering.

Running a stream into a private SL residence should in no way require the need to pay licensing fees and royalties — and the respective legislation needs to address this concern and where the line of distinction between business and personal entertainment exists.