Precis of the below: just because a cover of a track is meant to be given away free doesn't mean that the owner of the track covered would allow it: the person who covered the track has not acquired rights over the thing covered.
The thing is: draw a distinction between the actual music content (i.e. "Monty on the Run"), and the aural realisation of it ("Boz's Monty on the Run Super Duper High Score Cover"). That means for radio broadcast you're actually dealing with two licences: in the UK, that means PRS (for the music behind the track), and PPL (for the actual track itself). If you're offering things for download it gets even more complicated, since you're also looking at needing permission from MCPS for the "mechanical reproduction" aspect. You can have permission from the artist, but still not have permission from the publisher.
<<<
I would have thought that music provided to the masses for free, with the intent to get it spread, also for free, wouldn't need licenses to broadcast, be it over the internet or over the airwaves. I haven't read up on copyright law and stuff like that, but logically, this would be the case. Not that law is always logical, but anyway. =)
>>>
Well, there's another component to that argument: one is never entitled to give someone else's intellectual property away for free without permission: primarily because the owners of the IP are charging for it. And that person would be creating unfair competition for them by giving it away. And because they're usually entitled to have a say in just how it gets exploited. Free ringtones, for example: it creates a direct competition with the people who have bothered to get a licence (and thus charge). That's why people distributing ringtones on the net (anyone!) needs to get a ringtone licence from their local copyright agency and contribute 10p per download, even if they're giving them away.
Of course, in real life record labels fight like rabid dogs to get their stuff played on the radio, because they don't lose out by it: they gain exposure and listeners. But performance income is a major part of the income from any publisher, radio stations being a large part of that.
But, in your case, no one is complaining. And it's only when complaints are made that these things start becoming problems.
Basically, I wouldn't bother. All they'll do is charge you an annual fee for providing a free service. OK, so a lot of that money would go towards Rob and the like, but most would end up in someone else's pot (for various reasons). If you did get a licence, you'd also be entitled to play pretty much anything, though.
It would be STIM/NCB providing you with the licence in Sweden, BTW.
Chris
@TAS: I saw what you did... hehe
