ASCAP is serious

[dbsfgyd1]

Actually royalty was the wrong word. Rental agreement maybe?

I don't have issues with it.

So nobody has any problems and we don't want an open discussion?

Basically just follow their rules and no one gets hurt, got it.

In general, I don’t have an issue paying what is owed. That said, the calculation of fees, and what percentage of those fees collected end up with a rightful owners, should be more transparent. From what I’m hearing, this has more in common with a mob shakedown, than with appropriate compensation for use of intellectual property.

 

[LBS-bass]

So the answer is probably not, and that is where the Taylor swift comment comes from. The money doesn't go to the deserving artists but whoever ASCPAP/BMI thinks deserve it in most cases. That is my issue with the whole thing.

I guess you didn't see the post about my friend and his residual checks. He's hardly Taylor Swift, but he does get royalties. Another friend of mine gets royalties through ASCAP because his independently produced CD gets played on NPR between segments. I'm not sure you really get how this works for them, but that's ok. There's a reporting process and what gets reported gets paid. I've never done the reporting or joined one of these organizations, so I don't really feel qualified to tell you exactly how that works. But I won't sit here and pretend my friends aren't getting something, because I know they are.

 

[LBS-bass]

In general, I don’t have an issue paying what is owed. That said, the calculation of fees, and what percentage of those fees collected end up with a rightful owners, should be more transparent. From what I’m hearing, this has more in common with a mob shakedown, than with appropriate compensation for use of intellectual property.

There are pretty well established formulas for determining fees and they are based upon things like occupancy, the number of nights a venue has live music, etc. Those formulas are available online, so that part of the process is fairly transparent.

"Mob shakedown" seems a little melodramatic, but that's what I keep hearing. I'd like to hear your proposal for how this can be done differently. The only part of this that seems at all like a shakedown is the fact that representatives randomly visit the venues to make sure they're in compliance with the law. That's the law, as in, those things all of us get busted on if we don't follow them. But everyone wants intellectual property rights to be no man's land and for those laws to be breakable without reproach.

 

[crazyBassClown]

I guess you didn't see the post about my friend and his residual checks. He's hardly Taylor Swift, but he does get royalties. Another friend of mine gets royalties through ASCAP because his independently produced CD gets played on NPR between segments. I'm not sure you really get how this works for them, but that's ok. There's a reporting process and what gets reported gets paid. I've never done the reporting or joined one of these organizations, so I don't really feel qualified to tell you exactly how that works. But I won't sit here and pretend my friends aren't getting something, because I know they are.

Royalties for use on broadcast medium such as TV and Radio are also paid by these organisations. I have no doubt these are paid to the intended recipients with minimal problems.
This thread is specifically about fees payable by bars and similar.

Invalid Link Removed

Directly from that article

After being repeatedly rejected, ASCAP sent an investigator to the bar last November to document a sampling of the copyrighted music being played.

If they have to send an investigator to the bar to see what is being played, who are they paying the royalties to for this normally? That is the whole issue I have with this.
They are demanding the bar pay royalties that will never have a specific person to be paid to, just whoever they think it should be. ie taylor swift or whatever other big name is popular at the moment, even if all they have are cover bands playing classic rock from the 70's.

 

[JRA]

There used to be a time when we were all in the same corner, fighting for our rights as creative types and defending the rights of those among us who were creating the music we play. We had each others's backs. Now we're at each other's throats, and it makes zero sense to me. What happened?

places like this (TB) happened: we're all equal (not necessarily a bad thing) in spite of the lack of understanding of differences in our experiences (not necessarily a good thing). https://www.talkbass.com/members/cybersnyder.33169/ is a good example: he has an equal right to an opinion on a topic that mostly beckons 'experience' to be meaningful. since we both have a keypad + the TB forum to express opinions: both PsOV are the same, here. i have to accept that as the price of a ticket...

OTOH: i'm consistently entertained by 'conversations' with folks whose experiences are meager when compared to the audacity of their statements...fun(ny) stuff! it gives a whole new meaning to "agree to disagree."

No, that actually was said, a couple of pages back. See belowVVV

you're right. i suppose my point was pointless.

 

[JimChjones]

From looking at that link, unles you report the usage of your music, you won't get the royalties in a live venue. I

There are also requirements for licensed venues to report set lists.

This has probably stopped being useful. You've had reports that the rights societies do distribute royalties to the small guys as well as the big names, but if you want to continue believing its all rigged conspiracy then that's your privilege. Next week I'm expecting a payment from a rights society for secondary rights on a book I have in print. That rights society seems to treat my low selling specialist volume with the same consideration as JK Rowling's millions - indeed i was staggered by how much they'd got for me last time.

 

[MultiScaleMale]

If I were to open a bar, it would be a sports bar.

 

[GretschWretch]

That's quite a leap to blame the weekend warriors for the problem.

The system is the problem. ASCAP and BMI both take advantage of a bad law passed by Congress that allows fees to be based on the maximum capacity of the venue as defined by the local fire marshal, which is defined as how many people can be jammed in there as if it were a public storm shelter. The benchmark is not normal business capacity. And I have noticed in this thread that the venues offered a samples mostly are bars and clubs.
I live near two coffee houses whose annual offerings of live music would not average even two performances a month and whose seating capacity is very small. Both got bullied by the licensing agencies into not offering music at all because they could not get a deal on the annual fees that was not excessively burdensome.

I have told this story before, but in my hometown I knew the septuagenarian owners of a used bookstore who behind the counter at the front of their store had a small CD player they had bought with their own money to play at low volumes (to keep themselves entertained through the long business day) CDs they had bought with their own money, yet were serially bullied by the local ASCAP/BMI stooge because *some* customer *some*where in their long narrow store filled with bookcases *might* hear snippets from the CD player. They had bought the CDs, which means THEY ALREADY HAD PAID THE DAMN FEES!!!!! And they were NOT making any money off the music.

This is a rigged system. It is a corrupt system, and it either needs to be fixed or stamped out of existence and something more equitable put in its place. It is this last instance of the booksellers that has given me a smoldering hatred and contempt for the licensing agencies and their spies.

 

[crazyBassClown]

There are also requirements for licensed venues to report set lists.

Really?
I've never once been asked to provide a setlist at the end of a performance, never seen the bar staff writing down what we play.
I'm happy for any of the other cover band guys to tell me otherwise though.

gets royalties through ASCAP because his independently produced CD gets played

There are pretty well established formulas for determining fees and they are based upon things like occupancy, the number of nights a venue has live music, etc. Those formulas are available online, so that part of the process is fairly transparent.

If I created 100 cover bands across the US doing nothing but tribute shows to your independently produced artist friend and got them to play in bars every night of the week, they wouldn't see a single cent of royalty money from that because the associations don't care what music is played, and don't check.
They care that they get paid, so make the rules about that completely clear.

 

[Music Attorney]

We should all be FOR ASCAP and BMI raising money to pay artists and songwriters for the use of their intellectual property and copyrighted songs.

Cheap@$$ bar owners need to pay up!

Given the number of pages in this thread, it's possible this has already been addressed and I'm sorry for any duplicity, but I don't want to go through all the posts firsts and then answer some. TIA for understanding.

ASCAP and BMI and SESAC pay publishers and songwriters. Not artists when they are wearing their artist hat. If the artist is a songwriter, then yes.

Invalid Link Removed

 

[Music Attorney]

This runs counter to everything I've ever heard on here from people who know what they're talking about. If ASCAP is gonna start going after bands, that's a whole new tactic. Hard to see how that is cost effective for them.

The issue is the legal reality versus the practical reality. Copyright law provides the songwriter/publisher with exclusive performance rights. I'm not aware of why a band wouldn't be on the hook for performing a song without permission. That's the legal reality.

The practical realities include, to your point, it's not cost effective to sue bands and it's not good PR for a songwriter organization to sue musicians. There are a host of other reasons, but most of the time bands are very unlikely to be sued

 

[Music Attorney]

Soooooooo.....
If a venue had bands that only played original material,and no other material was played where the public could hear it ,then licensing would not apply ?

I just wonder how much is being fed to artists, and how much is being fed to lawyers and executives.

The exclusive performance right still exists it's just that the people in control of the right to perform the songs are in a position to grant the venue the permission it needs on whatever terms are agreed (including free).

Not sure what you mean, but performance royalties are not fed to artists in their capacity as an artist, they are paid to publishers/songwriters (which may be the same person as the artist, but they are wearing a different hat). Lawyers are not fed performance royalties unless you mean the percentage that some lawyers (5%), managers (15-20%), Agents (10%), Biz Mgrs (5%) receive from their songwriter clients. But if that's what you are referring to, then they get a piece of what their client earns so they are in the same boat when it comes calculations, payouts, etc.

 

[Music Attorney]

This is the problem - ASCAP / BMI really funnel all of that money to labels and large publishers. They are not sending small-frys any of that club licensing money.

No they don't and yes they do.

 

[Music Attorney]

I’m thinking about my bands, that play 50-50 covers and originals, release albums, and whose members pay memberships fees to one or the other of those organizations. No one has seen one red cent, and I know for a fact that, at the very least, we play our originals in bars that pay those fees.

There are a number of collection and administrative hoops that come into play in order to answer your question, but assuming you have done all the right things to claim money owed to you, there is still the issue of whether the PROs will allocate some portion of the venue's license fee for the performance of your originals. Unless your songs have some traction, it's unlikely you'll see anything.

 

[Music Attorney]

Periodically they choose to make an example of someone to scare everyone else. I'm sure it's effective.

Yep. Just like any good prosecutor does.

 

[Music Attorney]

None of the money actually goes to the owners of the songs actually played. They don't even care what is played. They just take whatever they can get and dish it out to their friends with some BS scheme they have come up with to justify it. The whole thing is a massive scam job.

You have no clue what you're talking about. Are the PROs perfect? Of course not. Are there things about their systems that raise an eyebrow or two? Sure. The job they do is so massive and intensive there are going to be mistakes, favoritism, and other less flattering descriptions. But you're way off base.

 

[Spectrum]

If I were to open a bar, it would be a sports bar.

Exactly. As if paying for live bands isn't enough of a problem, now you have to worry about some lawyer shaking you down. The heck with live music. Nobody wants to hear it anyway. Most people would rather watch football and be able to hear each other talk.

 

[Music Attorney]

The problem is only a select few recording artists receive any of that money. By and large the system is antiquated, established by consent decree and serves only top top tier musicians. The rest of us suck eggs.

The entire royalty system bad as it was got hijacked, and now it's even worse than anybody could have imagined. A few decades ago certain factions in the biz succeeded in altering the way royalties were paid to make many formerly chargeable works into "works for hire" where no royalties are paid. This totally devastated songwriters. It took a grass roots movement, a considerable sum of money and an army of lawyers to fix it. So who will put together the army of lawyers and pay for them now?

Wow. I'm not even sure where to begin since I'm not sure which "factions" you're referring to, in what way they succeeded, and ................. you know what, never mind.

 

[Music Attorney]

Back when songwriters (some of them) used to receive royalties from record sales of their tunes, they would file an application for a "reward". When that was granted (if it was granted), they would start receiving their checks.

You should really consider not posting.

 

[Music Attorney]

We need to remember there's a major campaign worldwide against IP rights by the mega advertising corps and their useful idiots. Bad as the abuses of the record corps could be, the megacorps like Google Facebook etc are a hundred times worse.They want everyone to create the content for free for them so they can pay their execs megabucks for attaching adverts to it.

You can include Apple in that bunch. Apple is about Apple. Not music.