After Dark nightclub banned from playing music

After Dark in Nelson Square

After Dark in Nelson Square

First published in News
Last updated
The Bolton News: Photograph of the Author by , education reporter

A TOWN centre nightspot has been banned from playing music.

After Dark in Nelson Square was caught playing copyrighted music without a licence from music royalties collectors Phonographic Performance Ltd (PPL).

A ruling at London’s High Court has banned Vinerock Ltd, proprietors of After Dark, playing anymore recorded tracks there — or at other premises they run - until they bring their music licences up to date.

And Mr Justice Nugee, ordered the company, which was not represented in court, to pay £1,687 in legal costs.

Court action was brought after a PPL inspector visited the premises and heard tracks including "Drinking From The Bottle” by Calvin Harris and Tinie Tempah, “Love Me Again” by Joyhn Newman and “Sweet Nothing” by Calvin Harris and Florence Welch being played when no licence was in force in October last year.

PPL’s counsel Fiona Clark said that solicitors had sent letters to the premises informing the company of the nature and extent of PPL's repertoire and the fact that the playing in public of sound recordings without PPL's licence or permission constitutes infringement of its copyright, and inviting it to acquire a licence.

However, it failed to do so.

The ban applies to all forms of mechanically recorded music such as records, tapes and CDs in PPL's repertoire.

Failure to obey the order and turn any premises it runs into a music-free zone until all licence fees are brought up to date would be regarded as contempt of court, the penalties for which can be fines of up to £10,000 and up to six months prison for any individuals responsible.

Depending on the size of a venue and the audiences involved music licences can cost very little but they can also run into hundreds or even thousands of pounds.

PPL spokesperson Nazneen Nawaz said: "PPL is the UK-based music licensing company which licenses recorded music for broadcast, online and public performance use. Established in 1934, PPL carries out this role on behalf of thousands of record company and performer members.

"Public Performance licences are issued by PPL to hundreds of thousands of businesses and organisations from all sectors across the UK who play recorded music to their staff or customers and who therefore require a licence by law.

“These can range from bars, nightclubs, shops and hotels to offices, factories, gyms, schools, universities and local authorities. Tariffs vary but a licence, issued on an annual basis, can cost as little as 18 pence per day.

"This licence is required to play recorded music in any business context and covers millions of different recordings. After the deduction of PPL’s running costs, all revenue collected is distributed to members. PPL does not retain a profit for its services. In 2012 PPL collected revenue of £170.8m.

"With over 10,000 members who are record companies or other recorded music rights holders and 65,000 performer members, PPL has a large and diverse membership. Members include major record labels and globally successful performers, as well as many independent labels, sole traders and session musicians ranging from orchestral players to percussionists and singers – all of whom are entitled to be fairly paid for the use of their recordings and performances.

"PPL’s role and remit increases year on year.

“The company receives details electronically on a weekly basis for an average of 6,500 new recordings.”

No one from After Dark was available for comment.

Comments (20)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

4:00pm Mon 12 May 14

Beyond News Forum says...

Corporations suck!

When are musicians going to stop these vultures from leaching on their hard work.

Many musicians are now taking the time to give us free downloads without copyright in the hope that we turn up to a concert where the said musicians make some good money.

To the bar... the devil did it. You never signed your 666.
Corporations suck! When are musicians going to stop these vultures from leaching on their hard work. Many musicians are now taking the time to give us free downloads without copyright in the hope that we turn up to a concert where the said musicians make some good money. To the bar... the devil did it. You never signed your 666. Beyond News Forum
  • Score: -20

6:21pm Mon 12 May 14

boltonboywonder says...

The money actually goes to the performers/artists, not kept by PPL. The whole point of it is to ensure that anywhere that uses music to entertain people pays some money towards the people who made it
The money actually goes to the performers/artists, not kept by PPL. The whole point of it is to ensure that anywhere that uses music to entertain people pays some money towards the people who made it boltonboywonder
  • Score: 37

6:30pm Mon 12 May 14

boltonnut says...

What's all the song and dance about?
What's all the song and dance about? boltonnut
  • Score: -9

7:36pm Mon 12 May 14

waterbottle says...

One less nightclub to worry about
One less nightclub to worry about waterbottle
  • Score: 14

7:38pm Mon 12 May 14

merryhell1@hotmail.co.uk says...

Get some live music on!!!!
Get some live music on!!!! merryhell1@hotmail.co.uk
  • Score: 19

8:01pm Mon 12 May 14

normid norm says...

Another To Let board going up in Bolton, half the town is To Let.
Another To Let board going up in Bolton, half the town is To Let. normid norm
  • Score: 18

8:24pm Mon 12 May 14

Comment777 says...

normid norm wrote:
Another To Let board going up in Bolton, half the town is To Let.
and the rest is a TO i LET...
[quote][p][bold]normid norm[/bold] wrote: Another To Let board going up in Bolton, half the town is To Let.[/p][/quote]and the rest is a TO i LET... Comment777
  • Score: 19

8:36pm Mon 12 May 14

MissDemocracy says...

AfterDark will be open as normal. Check their facebook page.
AfterDark will be open as normal. Check their facebook page. MissDemocracy
  • Score: -6

10:12pm Mon 12 May 14

melloj says...

Beyond News Forum wrote:
Corporations suck!

When are musicians going to stop these vultures from leaching on their hard work.

Many musicians are now taking the time to give us free downloads without copyright in the hope that we turn up to a concert where the said musicians make some good money.

To the bar... the devil did it. You never signed your 666.
At first I thought you were talking about After Dark. It's the Night clubs that don;t pay a licence that are leaching of artists. PPL collect royalties on their behalf. Read the article again.
[quote][p][bold]Beyond News Forum[/bold] wrote: Corporations suck! When are musicians going to stop these vultures from leaching on their hard work. Many musicians are now taking the time to give us free downloads without copyright in the hope that we turn up to a concert where the said musicians make some good money. To the bar... the devil did it. You never signed your 666.[/p][/quote]At first I thought you were talking about After Dark. It's the Night clubs that don;t pay a licence that are leaching of artists. PPL collect royalties on their behalf. Read the article again. melloj
  • Score: 10

11:35pm Mon 12 May 14

farnworth's mafia says...

robbin b4stads
robbin b4stads farnworth's mafia
  • Score: -3

7:22am Tue 13 May 14

Rememberscarborough says...

Never trust any organisation that starts quoting "prices per day" because you know they're trying to smooth talk you out of your cash. Had to ditch the radio in a small shop where I used to work because they wanted over £300 per year to play it for a couple of members of staff.
Never trust any organisation that starts quoting "prices per day" because you know they're trying to smooth talk you out of your cash. Had to ditch the radio in a small shop where I used to work because they wanted over £300 per year to play it for a couple of members of staff. Rememberscarborough
  • Score: 4

10:04am Tue 13 May 14

PDY says...

If you play the music that you have bought on CD and play it through the sound system off your I-Pod, are you still liable to pay??
If you play the music that you have bought on CD and play it through the sound system off your I-Pod, are you still liable to pay?? PDY
  • Score: -2

10:18am Tue 13 May 14

HOOSIER says...

PDY wrote:
If you play the music that you have bought on CD and play it through the sound system off your I-Pod, are you still liable to pay??
http://www.ppluk.com
/I-Play-Music/Busine
sses/Why-do-I-need-a
-licence/
[quote][p][bold]PDY[/bold] wrote: If you play the music that you have bought on CD and play it through the sound system off your I-Pod, are you still liable to pay??[/p][/quote]http://www.ppluk.com /I-Play-Music/Busine sses/Why-do-I-need-a -licence/ HOOSIER
  • Score: 1

10:25am Tue 13 May 14

The Righteous One says...

PDY wrote:
If you play the music that you have bought on CD and play it through the sound system off your I-Pod, are you still liable to pay??
Simple answer - yes!
[quote][p][bold]PDY[/bold] wrote: If you play the music that you have bought on CD and play it through the sound system off your I-Pod, are you still liable to pay??[/p][/quote]Simple answer - yes! The Righteous One
  • Score: 5

10:27am Tue 13 May 14

HOOSIER says...

Sorry That link doesnt work if you got to ppluk.com it has frequently asked questions.
Sorry That link doesnt work if you got to ppluk.com it has frequently asked questions. HOOSIER
  • Score: 1

11:56am Tue 13 May 14

Beyond News Forum says...

boltonboywonder wrote:
The money actually goes to the performers/artists, not kept by PPL. The whole point of it is to ensure that anywhere that uses music to entertain people pays some money towards the people who made it
Some... a very small percentage. Tell me have you been involved in the music industry? Then you will know full well that the monies are a windfall for capitalists and not the artists. In real terms the artists would be a LOT more wealthy than they are without all the red-tape and greedy agents.

Many acts and artists are going there own way, creating their own studios. many 'manufactured bands' are owned pure and simple.

Yes thumbs down my comments on this but it is the truth.

Sour Records - Early 1990's ;)
[quote][p][bold]boltonboywonder[/bold] wrote: The money actually goes to the performers/artists, not kept by PPL. The whole point of it is to ensure that anywhere that uses music to entertain people pays some money towards the people who made it[/p][/quote]Some... a very small percentage. Tell me have you been involved in the music industry? Then you will know full well that the monies are a windfall for capitalists and not the artists. In real terms the artists would be a LOT more wealthy than they are without all the red-tape and greedy agents. Many acts and artists are going there own way, creating their own studios. many 'manufactured bands' are owned pure and simple. Yes thumbs down my comments on this but it is the truth. Sour Records - Early 1990's ;) Beyond News Forum
  • Score: 8

1:36pm Tue 13 May 14

Jim271 says...

There's nothing worse than being forced to listen to the rubbish they call music while you are trying to have a decent conversation.

Most of it sounds like C3PO making love to R2D2 these days.
There's nothing worse than being forced to listen to the rubbish they call music while you are trying to have a decent conversation. Most of it sounds like C3PO making love to R2D2 these days. Jim271
  • Score: 1

2:10pm Tue 13 May 14

HOOSIER says...

Ppl pays the agents and prs pays the performer/composers. And if you need one you most likely need both
Ppl pays the agents and prs pays the performer/composers. And if you need one you most likely need both HOOSIER
  • Score: -1

5:05pm Tue 13 May 14

Percy Thrower says...

HOOSIER wrote:
Ppl pays the agents and prs pays the performer/composers. And if you need one you most likely need both
They pay musicians a very small percentage, so small it falls well below the minimum wage.
[quote][p][bold]HOOSIER[/bold] wrote: Ppl pays the agents and prs pays the performer/composers. And if you need one you most likely need both[/p][/quote]They pay musicians a very small percentage, so small it falls well below the minimum wage. Percy Thrower
  • Score: -2

9:54pm Tue 13 May 14

boltonboywonder says...

Beyond News Forum wrote:
boltonboywonder wrote:
The money actually goes to the performers/artists, not kept by PPL. The whole point of it is to ensure that anywhere that uses music to entertain people pays some money towards the people who made it
Some... a very small percentage. Tell me have you been involved in the music industry? Then you will know full well that the monies are a windfall for capitalists and not the artists. In real terms the artists would be a LOT more wealthy than they are without all the red-tape and greedy agents.

Many acts and artists are going there own way, creating their own studios. many 'manufactured bands' are owned pure and simple.

Yes thumbs down my comments on this but it is the truth.

Sour Records - Early 1990's ;)
No, I completely agree that artists don't get enough, it's been said for years, but it doesn't detract from the point that venues should pay - they make a fortune from the fact that they are entertaining punters with artists' music. Without it they wouldn't have a business, it's insulting that they think they shouldn't have to pay
[quote][p][bold]Beyond News Forum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boltonboywonder[/bold] wrote: The money actually goes to the performers/artists, not kept by PPL. The whole point of it is to ensure that anywhere that uses music to entertain people pays some money towards the people who made it[/p][/quote]Some... a very small percentage. Tell me have you been involved in the music industry? Then you will know full well that the monies are a windfall for capitalists and not the artists. In real terms the artists would be a LOT more wealthy than they are without all the red-tape and greedy agents. Many acts and artists are going there own way, creating their own studios. many 'manufactured bands' are owned pure and simple. Yes thumbs down my comments on this but it is the truth. Sour Records - Early 1990's ;)[/p][/quote]No, I completely agree that artists don't get enough, it's been said for years, but it doesn't detract from the point that venues should pay - they make a fortune from the fact that they are entertaining punters with artists' music. Without it they wouldn't have a business, it's insulting that they think they shouldn't have to pay boltonboywonder
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree