General Music Chat

I agree with Jimmy on this.


And... copyrights are only as good as the owner's willingness to pursue infringements. Superficially, it seems unnecessary for some small time cover band (or the club they play in) to be responsible for paying performance royalties. But if this were legal or even tolerated, then what stops that same band from recording the music and selling it and not paying royalties? What if the cover band was an opening act for some live television broadcast? And the station then sells DVD's of the concert? You cannot exempt someone from paying what is owed to the copyright holder, just because they only profit very little from someone else's compositions, as opposed to a name act covering someone's song on a gold record. Can a cover artist really be exempt from paying what the original author deserves, merely because he is poor, but then if he makes it, he can suddenly be charged? That's almost like saying, I should be allowed to walk into Walmart and fill a shopping cart for FREE because I am poor, and only the people with money should have to pay Walmart for their products.

Does that sound reasonable?

A small record store may sell only $1000 dollars of a mid-level band's CD in an entire year. Chump change. But multiplied over 10's of thousands of independent stores or chains nationwide, it ends up being tens of millions in sales.

The songs being covered, are famous enough to be covered. Achieving fame, does not suddenly abolish the rights of that artist. A grand per bar, per year, adds up to many many millions of dollars lost, nationwide each year. The ones being ripped off, are the authors of the works. This should be about protecting THEM, and not about trying to rip off their original music, because an artist feels they cannot afford to pay, to use their original works.

In any event... Remember.. if the VENUE has a license, then the band is not required to have one, or pay anything, for their performance of copyrighted materials. The VENUE is the one they go after, and is the logical party to go after, because they are STABLE (brick and mortar location) and because the club profits most from the live music, and because then, ANY BAND that comes through their establishment, is then COVERED to be able to perform ANY SONG in that organization's catalogue. Even paying a few grand per year, a small club is paying about $38 per weekend, if they have live music 2 nights each week.

Is that supposed to be exorbitant or something?

If anyone here, even by a fluke, had one of their songs hit big... trust me... you would start counting then, quite quickly and seriously, just how much YOUR property was worth, and you would care about whether you were being cheated out of ANY of it!

"Didn't I just catch your act at the Holiday Inn lounge, circa Timbuktu ?"



Never played a Holiday Inn, but wouldn't have a problem with it. That's what musicians do - play music for people. Then there are the internet musicians. They record their self-indulgent, unintelligible pseudo-psychedelic drek in their dark little hovels while bloviating about musical purity on forums.



Where's your next gig, Mr. ShowBiz?

I haven't read hardly any of this but gather that Cover artists will get slammed?

I haven't read hardly any of this but gather that Cover artists will get slammed?

That's pretty much the gist of it Chippy. The original article/post says it all.

Long ,Long time ago, we had a 45 out. I wouldn't say we were getting regular air play on some of the local stations [smaller] but it was enough.

ASCAP sent me a huge check, $0.02. I laugh about it still. AAAAHHH the sweet smell of success.

I'm not totally in agreement about the live communism authority. I mean, isn't it the cover bands that keep making these songs timeless? Cover bands are actually encouraging people to remember the original artists and buy(hopefully not steal) their music. What's the big deal if it's not being recorded and sold?

I think the record industry is just having a fit about going under. They were never adimate about cover bands at the clubs before...just recorded material. I've never heard a band complain about someone covering their songs live...ever. It's the big wigs that are freakin' out.

Long ,Long time ago, we had a 45 out. I wouldn't say we were getting regular air play on some of the local stations [smaller] but it was enough.

ASCAP sent me a huge check, $0.02. I laugh about it still. AAAAHHH the sweet smell of success.

Did you have to pay taxes on that?

Too funny. Actually if it wasn't true, it would be.
Dear me....

Long ,Long time ago, we had a 45 out. I wouldn't say we were getting regular air play on some of the local stations [smaller] but it was enough.
ASCAP sent me a huge check, $0.02. I laugh about it still. AAAAHHH the sweet smell of success.

Yeah and it cost twenty cents to mail it.

Makes you wonder........

:lol: Yeah and it cost twenty cents to mail it.

I haven't read hardly any of this but gather that Cover artists will get slammed?

Yup. If people are going to slam cover artists, they have a very big job ahead of them.




http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CoveredUp

Drat there goes my chance of covering 'The hills are alive with the sound of music."
Wheres Simon when you need him

Yup. If people are going to slam cover artists, they have a very big job ahead of them.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CoveredUp

What's next? Are they gonna go after the guy playing around the campfire, or bands that do private parties & weddings?

Look, there's a HUGE difference, to me, between getting air time, or SELLING a recording, & simply singing a song that you heard & ppl might like. That is a permanent record of the piece in question, even if it's just a kid with a lil palm recorder next to the radio. A live performance in a bar is far from that.

I still don't believe that composers are getting their fair share. The monies are going into the machine far more than they are making their way to the owner of the song.

As we know - the venues where music is played don't benefit from music all that much, though we'd like to think they do. Oh, there's the occasional act that really draws huge crowds, but for the most part, it's a rather costly service the venue is supplying. I don't think it fair for them to have to pay exorbitant fees because songs are sung in their establishments. They have more than enough costs to go around, & there are only so many pieces of a pie. Do they get a break if they only hire originals acts? No. They already pay for the juke box, the tv, & the radio. Why in the name of all that's holy should they ALSO have to pay for live acts?

Sorry, but even as a composer, myself, this looks more & more like gouging, to me. I don't want my hard work going to some copyright cop any more than I do any other cop.

All of these extra charges are bound to add up to the point that live music will be a thing of the past, & i'd like to see it stopped.

If a venue has to pay $1000 a year for a perfomance blanket that's still less than $3 a day. That's the cost of one drink. If they can't afford that they shouldn't be in business.

These musician's organizations go after THE VENUES, not the musicians, where live music is concerned. A club is a PUBLIC venue. As such, let's say there was a pay-per-view boxing match being shown. This drives business in, and packs the house. The club pays the pay-per-view companies, differing amounts based on how many seats the club or restaurant has. I doubt that anyone has a problem with that scenario? That a club would pay more to run a pay-per-view program, than what it would cost a single family ordering the fight from them? This is not very different. The club is, in effect, profiting from the music being performed there, just as if they were broadcasting a pay-per-view event to their clientele. Only... one product is a boxing match, while the other product is a concert of original music. Both are entertainment for the customers, to bring business in. Why shouldn't "BOTH" owners of the various content, receive licensing fees for THEIR OWN material?

And for any international people here, this is NOT new. ASCAP and BMI were hitting clubs up for licensing fees, since I was a child touring the country with my mother, back in 1977.

Radio stations pay licensing fees to broadcast songs on the air. Movies pay licensing fees to have music in them. Clubs are responsible for paying licensing fees as well, if they are providing original music as entertainment. These are ALL businesses. If you were having a wedding, you would not be responsible for licensing fees, as it is a private event. Birthdays, parties, graduations? NO FEES. It is only when the music is delivered IN A PUBLIC SETTING by FOR-PROFIT entities.

If a person or institution is profiting from YOUR ORIGINAL MUSIC, do you not then deserve a piece of the profit they made FROM YOUR ORIGINAL WORKS?


That's all that's going on.

Don't trash the organizations working on YOUR behalf. That's like retaining a lawyer, and then trashing him for doing his job!