November 30, 2006

Is the current sale of World’s recordings legal? A pipes|drums investigation

The first long-playing commercial recording of the World Pipe Band Championships, recorded in 1977 at Hazelhead Park in Aberdeen. Almost from the time that mobile sound equipment was invented, pipe band competitions have been recorded. There are scratchy recordings of the Bowhill Colliery Pipe Band winning the first official World Championship in 1947, and the first commercial release of the World’s was an LP in 1977. It captured the top six finishers of the day and set a course for the next 29 years of releases. In 2005, a landmark legal case, “Experience Hendrix LLC v Purple Haze Records Ltd.,” was decided in the United Kingdom. Essentially, the case went like this:

  1. “Experience Hendrix LLC” [Hendrix], the company that sprung from the famous rock star Jimi Hendrix’s estate, had concerns over the legality of a commercially available recording of a 1969 Jimi Hendrix Experience concert made in Stockholm and sold by “Purple Haze Records Ltd.” [Purple Haze]
  2. Hendrix argued that Purple Haze had made illegal recordings of the 1967 performance and therefore owed the performers money because, even if Jimi Hendrix himself had agreed to be recorded, it was clear that the two other performers, Noel Redding and Mitch Mitchell, had not consented.
  3. The court agreed with Hendrix and held that all performers in a band are treated individually and must each contractually consent prior to being recorded. Further, the court held that performers can go back in time to recover for infringing activities conducted in the past, even several decades ago.

Click here for a synopsis of the case. In effect, the judgment in favour of Experience Hendrix LLC means that recordings of performances that are reproduced and made publicly available must have a legally binding agreement signed by not just a representative of a band or group, but by every individual who performs on the recording.

According to legal experts and the Hendrix case, “consent” must refer to performance rights during a particular event, that the event will be recorded, and that the recording will be sold commercially. As long as anyone seems to remember, the Royal Scottish Pipe Band Association (RSPBA) has never sought the proper legal consent of performers to make recordings of competing bands entering the organization’s competitions. Since at least 2000, a statement, or “admonition” as one band member called it, has appeared at the bottom of a sheet mailed with the entry form for the World Championships.

Under the prize-money announcement, draw and grading information there is a statement that reads, “ALL AUDIO AND VIDEO RIGHTS ARE RETAINED BY THE RSPBA.” However, there is no mention of consent or performance rights or recording, and there is no way to know whether any of the performers see this statement. Moreover, there is no way to know what “rights” are retained, as it could refer to RSPBA-owned logos or audio announcements. In any event, there is no known evidence of any performer conveying consent to the RSPBA in any form.

House of Edgar-Shotts & Dykehead have been featured on every World's recording since 1977. [Photo: Derek Maxwell.] Click to supersize!

The RSPBA’s version of “consent,” according to our research, may not be legally binding. Even if it were, because the consent waiver is not signed and submitted by every performer, the association may be liable to provide adequate compensation to every individual piper and drummer who has made music on an LP, cassette tape, CD or DVD made from a competition or performance.

Further, the Hendrix case determined that organizations that do not obtain legally binding consent are subject to providing compensation to performers on recordings from the past. Therefore, any group that has ever produced and/or sold recordings of pipers and drummers without proper, legally binding consent may be on the hook to settle with every performer on every recording that it has ever made. In effect, the thousands of bandsmen and women who performed on any commercially available recording over the last 30-odd years could be due fair compensation if they chose to pursue the matter. pipes|drums has confirmed that the RSPBA has been made aware of this legality and the organization’s potential infraction.

The BBC, which handles the actual mobile recording facilities and makes the recordings for broadcast on its programs, could also be subject to the Hendrix case decision. The organization does not compensate bands in return for their being broadcasted on the radio or for the television special that it made from the 2006 World’s. According to sources, the BBC did send Grade 1 bands a DVD of the TV show, but North American bands were unable to view it in the UK format. (The RSPBA has not provided bands featured on the World’s CDs and DVDs with a complimentary copy.)

At the very least, the Hendrix case clearly demonstrates that proper consent must be obtained to be within the law of performers’ rights. If a pipe band association decided to create a recording in the future of a live performance, and wants to be within the law, it should probably take pains to ensure that it secures consent, not just in the form of a blanket agreement for each band overall, but from every member of every band. The RSPBA and Klub Records, to be sure, are not the only organizations that have made and sold commercial recordings of competitions. The Pipers & Pipe Band Society of Ontario in the 1970s and ’80s also put out occasional LPs made from recordings of various contests. There are dozens of commercially available LPs, CDs and DVDs that have been made from solo competitions and recitals. But recordings of the World Pipe Band Championship, by an immense margin, are the most popular, numerous and biggest- selling contest recordings made since 1977.

Famous grousing

For time immemorial – or at least since the advent of commercial recordings – pipers and drummers have been somewhat divided on the issue of performers’ rights, royalties and what constitutes “fair” compensation for products that feature their music. Composers of pipe tunes and drum scores, whose intellectual property has in the past been freely reproduced, have taken strides in the last 20 years especially to secure copyright and publishing rights. Some composers diligently track and collect on every penny that’s due them, while others are sanguine, and aren’t bothered, especially since it’s considered good, profile- building exposure that will in time make them famous so that they will eventually get the recognition and money that they feel that they deserve. For them it’s all about exposure.

By many accounts, the recordings of the World Pipe Band Championships, which for the past 20 years have been contracted between the RSPBA, the BBC and Klub Records Ltd. of Glasgow, are annually among the biggest selling CDs in the Scottish folk genre. It is not known exactly how many units are sold or where the proceeds are allocated. What is known is that the performers on the recordings do not receive royalties. Many bands have the rather traditional view that “getting on the CD” is their main objective. Because piping and drumming is a hobby for the vast majority of the composers, perhaps legalities and fair compensation would lessen the enjoyment of their hobby.

And there, perhaps, is the rub. Pipe band associations and recording companies, rightly or wrongly, often have recognized and exploited pipers, drummers and pipe bands’ feeling that the return for them is not monetary but simple pleasure, exposure and profile-building. There is an underlying notion among traditionalist pipers and drummers that if a legal fuss were made, or demands for fair compensation were raised, then the recordings may not even be produced: Don’t even broach the topic and let sleeping dogs lie. Besides, some may think, rocking a political boat may somehow filter down to negative judging. Case in point: pipes|drums could find no one attached with a top pipe band who would speak without assurance of anonymity. Such is the fear of political fall-out from speaking about what would appear to be a cut-and-dried legal issue. “The only way this will actually come to anything is if someone tries to recover money,” said one Grade 1 band-member well-versed in the issue. “The problem is there is not much money to chase so it is not worth it. No value has ever been negotiated.”

Legal repercussions

Depending on what association is in question, pipe bands are mostly loathe to raise contentious issues for fear of political or judging reprisals. For many top bands in demand for commercial recordings, competitive success is more important than recording success or the compensation they may make from CDs and DVDs. But as quality CDs have become record, produce and distribute, independently made pipe band recordings have become a cottage industry. Some bands, like Simon Fraser University and the Scottish Lion-78th Fraser Highlanders, attain a large portion of their yearly revenues from the sale of their CDs.

It may not be big business in the recording industry overall, but in the pipe band world, the sale of CDs has been a financial boon. For “overseas” bands, revenue from recordings can be the difference between being able to travel to the World Pipe Band Championships and staying home. pipes|drums knows that a member of one top band, with his expertise as a lawyer, in early 2006 alerted the RSPBA to the Hendrix decision. According to sources, the correspondence was doing no more than pointing out the potential problem, and the fact that if pipers and drummers decided to launch a claim to fair compensation against associations, recording companies or even the BBC, would likely be successful. The individual was met with a stern dressing-down, and his band allegedly was threatened with disqualification.

The issue, for the summer, was squashed, and the 2006 World’s CDs and DVDs have been created, sold and enjoyed as usual. “Focusing on this as a band issue will do immeasurable damage in the long run as it would cause confusion away from the real power: collective action by individuals regardless of the band they are in,” another source said on condition of anonymity. “The way to get it really running would be to establish a union or federation of pipe band musicians, and that entity could chase down money for performers and composers. Then there would be potential for a class-action suit.” At any rate, sources contend that the RSPBA and the BBC have acknowledged in writing that they are aware of performers’ rights and the need for proper legal consent, yet have pressed ahead anyway with production efforts. Several representatives of the RSPBA were invited by pipes|drums to comment on the issue. To date they have not acknowledged the inquiry, much less made a statement.

Compensation and logistics

According to our research and discussions with legal experts, copyright law and performer’s rights legislation are designed to create an incentive for artists to continue creating and performing. They protect performers from situations in which they lose power in negotiations. The law makes it necessary to get a performer’s consent and thereby forces a negotiation between the performer and the entity making the recording.

Bands may have more to celebrate if performers' rights are addressed legally. Click to supersize!Without a negotiation, no value is assigned to the performances and the artist gets nothing. This seems to be what has happened at the World’s: no value has ever been assigned to the performances and there is no accounting of the profits made. Without knowing the amount of money achieved from the sales of the World’s CDs and DVDs, it is impossible to know what “fair” compensation would be. It has been suggested that it may not have to take the form of payment to actual performers at all. A legally-binding consent document could mean that fair proceeds go towards travel assistance for bands, or a fund for worthy piping and drumming causes, or some other beneficent foundation. It would be fairly easy for a general agreement to be made stating that fair compensation for performers’ rights might be investment in or expansion of judging at the World Pipe Band Championships.

This would allow all performers to benefit at the contest itself. Logistically, in the case of the World’s, this would require each band to submit a list signed by the performers assigning their performance rights to the RSPBA. Ultimately, two issues are at stake: 1) Whether pipers and drummers want to seek fair compensation for their commercially available performances, and 2) whether piping and drumming organizations and companies and broadcasters creating, distributing and/or selling recordings want to adhere to the law and treat the performers and, in the case of associations, their dues- paying members fairly.

“The current arrangement . . . regarding the CDs and DVDs is upsetting to the bands,” said one prominent Grade 1 band member, again speaking only on the condition of anonymity. “The bands do not want a lot of money by any means. It is just that it isn’t proper for the any group to record pipe bands, sell CDs and keep all the proceeds. The artists should be sharing to some extent. The bands, between themselves, have expressed their dissatisfaction with the current arrangement.” Time will tell how performers, associations and companies will react to the legal precedent created by Hendrix v Purple Haze, and whether the matter becomes the watershed event in the history of piping and drumming that it could and perhaps should be.



  1. I agree – an interesting article with lots of facts. However, it’s also an interesting article with lots of speculation and heresay. Comments such as and his band allegedly was threatened with disqualification” must be taken as they’re written. Note that that it was ‘alleged’ that this happened. Without facts

  2. It is disappointing to see the RSPBA giving the ‘blind eye’ treatment to such an important issue. I can safely say I am one of many pipe band members around the world questioning the RSPBA more and more. This isn’t the only issue to have received the treatment either. For years, international competitors at the World Pipe Band Championships have questioned the judging panels at the contest. Consider the p|d report regarding the statistical correlation of the RSPBA judging panels at the worlds. The judges’ placings were very different, in some cases so totally different that statistically speaking, the judges could not have been in attendance of the same contest. These and other issues are leading overseas bands to think, Maybe spending $50

  3. The RSPBA needs to be investigated on several fronts – dodgy judging, finances, refusal to pay royalties and the ridiculous prize money. It seems to me that they are accountable to no-one and just do what they like. Where does all the gate money from the Worlds/Cowal etc. go to? Why are the bands so afraid of standing up to this cabal? There had been talk of a breakaway Association, but it came to nothing. The RSPBA should be cleaned out of its present personnel and a new breed of younger, more honest staff employed. It should be made totally accountable to its members and publish its accounts. It should have a new constitution and rules. Some judges, who are biased towards and against certain Grade 1 bands, should be made to explain themselves for consistently marking up and marking down the same band year after year. Usually due to the old boys network” or long standing grudges. Judges should be younger – they are not in tune with the developments in pipe band music and mark down accordingly. Royalties should be paid to composers

  4. I’ve made this observation before, and think it might be time to do so again. The RSPBA needs to get its house in order regarding the composer and performer rights issue. No question. Having said that, and hoping that they will begin to move in that direction, let’s not ignore the many excellent things the RSPBA DOES do for piping, drumming, and bands, and not just their own member bands. Two summers in a row taking a band to Scotland to compete, and I have nothing but good to say of the RSPBA’s people on the ground.” Excellent contests

  5. I was speaking today to someone who is as entrenched in the pipe band recording industry as one can possibly be. While he’s not involved with the World’s recordings, his estimate – based on years and years of experience – was that the CDs would sell between 10,000 and 20,000 copies. So, let’s say it’s 15,000 copies. If the CDs are sold to dealers at, say, $5 a copy, then it follows that gross revenues are about $75,000. Take from that, say, a third for production and manufacturing costs, and you’re left with $50,000. Give another third to the record company, and there’s $25,000 left over. We can be conservative, and assume that’s for the Volume 1″ CD

  6. One practical comment which I can make as a 25-year intellectual property attorney in the U.S.: While consent from each individual performer may be necessary to lock up rights, there is an alternative to passing a release/consent form around the band as it approaches the line to compete. That is, you have an officer of each competing band sign the entry form and that form include a hold harmless” clause which requires the band to defend and indemnify the association against claims. The practical effect is that if an individual player goes after the association

  7. An excellent, and enlightening article. I think that the actions of the RSPBA towards the legal practitioner, and their respective band; in regards to his illumination of this issue; is completely preposterous. Their stance and attitude was bullying – plain and simple. The representatives of the RSPBA who used their leverage in this manner should be held accountable for their actions.

  8. I too wish people would have the courage to put their name to comments, but fear of political reprisal still makes it difficult, if not impossible, to get sources to speak unless their name is not used. That grip of fear is very gradually loosening. At least pipes|drums has the courage to tackle heretofore taboo issues. I thought this paragraph summed it up: Case in point: pipes|drums could find no one attached with a top pipe band who would speak without assurance of anonymity. Such is the fear of political fall-out from speaking about what would appear to be a cut-and-dried legal issue.””

  9. As someone who has performed in grade one at the world’s and whose band has been on the tape ( before CD’s), the compensation issue is of great interest. The fact that the RSPBA was made aware of this before the current CD and, apparently, made no moves to address the concerns, is troubling. Will this be the straw” that breaks the back ( or bank ) ? I will follow this story with great interest.”

  10. SFU was threatened with suspension. The message was delivered to me personally at Pitlochry because I wrote the letter to the RSPBA and contacted the BBC asking questions. One person cannot drive this issue.

  11. I should add that the motivation behind my letter to the RSPBA was not to assign blame, but to encourage sophistication regarding intellectual property rights and to recognize the importance of the performances at the World Pipe Band Championships. Without increased sophistication regarding these matters, there will always only be a handful of individuals who can devote their lives to piping, drumming or pipe bands. It is shocking to me that pipe band composers and performers are treated this way. The lead drummers (and the rest of the band other than the P/M) are not even listed on the CD liner notes. Why?

  12. Great list, just one addition: the Worlds should travel to the localities where the number of bands warrant. This would mean that, from year-to-year, the event would be held in places such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the US, etc.

  13. I agree, Iain. The RSPBA do a very commendable job of running contests, training adjudicators and many other things. When these discussions turn into bashing sessions nothing gets accomplished. On the adjudication side of things, it has to be acceptable for the for judges to differ, but there needs to be more judges on the field to accurately assess consistency. To me it seems obvious that the RSPBA could take a huge step forward by harnessing the intellectual property rights at their disposal and using the funds to add judges, events and prize money. The greater the appearance of fairness and effort to promote piping and drumming, the better off we all will be. I am sure this issue will move forward one way or another.

  14. I agree with what you are saying, Duncan, regarding the ‘RSPBA bashing,’ and how it serves as no benefit to presenting the issue of performer and composer rights. However, I do think that there are problems with the RSPBA’s judging program, most notably in terms of the transparency that exists when judges provide very disperate results. These judges should, in those instances, be forced to explain themselves – and in all fairness, they may have reasons, heard different things on their side of the circle, etc. The problem lies in some judges consistently providing out-of-sync placings, without ever being checked or challenged. It is also important to note here, that North American adjudicators still do not receive their ‘due’ from the RSPBA, in my opinion. If you look at some of the individuals admitted recently – Ken Eller and James W. Troy, you see individuals who ran successful Grade 1 bands for over 20 years; each of which was probably the top band on the continent at one time or another. Despite admitting these judges, the RSPBA relegates them to judging lower-level events, while individuals who have not played in a Grade 1 band in (some cases) 30 years or more, and some of whom have never lead a band of that calibre, are left judging the Grade 1 Qualifier and Final.

  15. Leading a successful grade 1 band, I agree, would allow one to be defined as a judge with the calibre to judge grade 1. However, it should not be assumed that a judge that has not led a successful grade 1 does not have the ability or is not of the right calibre to judge grade 1. I can think of several judges who had the ability to lead grade 1 bands had they chosen to but for varying reasons they chose not to. A person’s judging ability should be based on a lot more than when and where they played in the past. For example – look at the ensemble judging role; I’d be confident that, for example, Gavin Reid (Director of the BBC Scottish Symphony Orchestra) could cometently carry out this role but he’s never played for a pipe band in his life! My point – you can ‘know your stuff’ without having to prove it by leading a top pipe band.

  16. Personally I find that band produced CD’s are much more interesting than the World’s CD. I stopped buying World’s CDs many years ago generally because they are so repetitive. I am quite sure that band produced CD’s make sure all performers, composers and publishers are properly acknowledged for their efforts. I would not be surprised that RSPBA, BBC, and Klub records are looking into all of these things and that they are probably best advised not to make any public statement on their activities. As an association the RSPBA is respocible to its members. But I would bet that most people making Anti RSPBA comments are not members of that association or if they are, are not active in its workings. While readers of this publication may feel slighted that they have not commented to this publication on the subject, I really do not see why they should be expected to. If they have an internal problem, let them work it out. It seems to me that we North Americans are quick to critize the RSPBA for sticking their noese into our business, such as band grading, but have no problem sticking our noses into theirs. I would think that exactly what should be done about the problem of performer, composer, and publisher rights as far as the World’s CD goes, is a big can of worms that needs to be opened with caution. I do not believe most of the posters here have any idea as to the inner workings of the RSPBA. To assume nothing is being done or the problem is being ignored, is out of ignorance. The only one’s who know is the RSPBA. And they are not saying. If you have strong feelings about this, don’t buy the CD and discourage others. I have not checked, but Is the World’s CD available from Tartantown? I will never play on a World’s CD but There are other games that have recordings done, and have the recordings for sale. The fall out effect of this could effect these services as well. I am not saying ignore the problem, only let it be handled by the people involved.

  17. I’ve been thinking about this and wondered if there is a precedent elsewhere that can be considered. How much would a composer expect to get from one tune being on a CD? Is it 10p? Is it 1p? I don’t know. However, when you consider the number of individual tunes on a worlds CD, then split out royalties, do we reach a point when it becomes commercially unviable to produce the CD? Are there any other groups people can think of quickly that would make a CD of their world championships (say) and have as varied a number of tunes/composers, and manage to get round this? If a pop group produces an album it may have 12 tracks on it – so they can play one or two covers. A band may have 12 tunes in both a medley and an MSR – then the same for the other 5/6 bands on ther recording. I want to put a different slant on this, and welcome any counter arguments and examples. Enjoy!

  18. The way to do this practically is to put all the profits that would go to the performers back into a fund used to benefit the performers (judges, prize money, etc.) and to pay the composers individually. Societies will collect for composers, but the recording entity must give sufficient information to the society. It really is not much of a logistical challenge.

  19. I would first like to commend Duncan Millar as well as P/D for tackling this very tough subject. Of course, no one outside the RSPBA knows the inner workings of same. However, I would like to point out that George Ussher, Kevin Reilly and Ian Embelton are decent, honorable people. I write this from firsthand experience having worked closely with them in years past in my capacity as chair of ANAPBA. I think matters such as this are best resolved beyond the public eye. The RSPBA is simply protecting their primarily financial interests with their position. No good is accomplished by calling people liars. Maybe those of us who are in North America can express their feelings to their Association/Society representatives who will be attending the upcoming ANAPBA meeting in January? I will assume there will once again be an official RSPBA representative in attendance. Dunan Millar is correct that this is not an issue one person can go alone. By expressing your opinion to your reps we can all hope that the reps will be able to speak candidly as well as face to face with the RSPBA.



Forgotten Password?