Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Liz Berg <lizb AT wfmu.org>]

For clarity, it seems as though the CC 2.5 licenses (by-nc and by-nc-nd) 
address the issue of performance and mechanical royalties in more explicit 
terms than the equivalent 3.0 licenses.

> From what I gather, an artist who uses a CC 2.5 by-nc license cannot 
collect royalties from a performance rights society, music rights agency, 
or SoundExchange unless their work was used for a commercial purpose. But 
please correct me if I'm wrong about that.

The 3.0 license, on the other hand appears to be more vague about this 
issue, breaking it down under more general terms: non-waivable and 
waivable compulsory license schemes, plus voluntary license schemes. In 
this 3.0 license, it appears as though there is one case where an artist 
may still collect royalties on a non-commercial use of their work: if they 
are bound by a non-waivable compulsory license scheme.

What are some examples of a non-waivable compulsory license scheme? And 
where do SoundExchange, performance rights organizations, and music rights 
agencies fall under these 3.0 classifications?

If I set up a non-commercial web stream that exclusively plays CC 3.0 
music, will I owe royalties to SoundExchange? How about if that stream 
exclusively plays CC 2.5 music?

Any help or insight would be much appreciated, thanks!

-Liz