JPF Home Page Forums General Messages General Message Forum Another ASCAP Controversy

Ya' know, Cobber...

I began writing when I got fed up with all the crap I had to sing...

I thought to myself.."Jeez...I can do better than this"..

I've had those long nights drinking coffee,chewing on pencils trying to find just the right word or phrase.

I've agonized for days, weeks..hell..years trying to get it just right.

I've worked hard at being a good writer...

But....

to compare that work to the work and demands of being a professional musician...

It's laughable...

Writing is playtime in comparison...

To demand money from hardworking musicians for scratching a few lines on a piece of paper...lines that no one would ever hear were it not for the efforts of those musicians...

No...sorry, old friend....

theres no comparison..
No justice in it..

I feel the need to hang with some musicians for a while...

tell a few writers jokes...

This whole deal has renenwed my respect for the working musician..
And diminished my respect for the writers...
It appears that love of the craft motivates the musicians..

while a few pennies seems to be the writers fuel..
Sad that they don't seem to care where it comes from..

It comes from ME !

Well...to heck with it...

I'll stay home and play the songs in my house...

Better not play too loud...
Some writer will figure out I should be paying for that too !

Bob( a bit embittered) Young

Applying your theory Bob. Maybe I should refuse to pay to go and see a covers band because I know most of them couldn't string two words together effectivly, and don't know anything about deciding how to put a chord progression together, or to then come up with a melody that is going to enhance both.
I for one am glad you decided to write Bob because there isn't one of your song I don't like.
Well the sing it for woodie one doesn't really ring my bell, but thn again neither did woodie..
Is the star spangled banner (think that is the right love my country song) out that wears thin on me in that one.
Would be better without the borrowed to grab the hearts of Woodie festival goers bit me thinks.
Graham



------------------
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/2/grahamhendersonmusic.htm

Well...

should we pay to see Pavarotti....?...or Itzak Pehrlman....Yo Yo Mah...?...

they don't play any of their "own" stuff....

Cover songs is how I made my life Cobber...

I'm not ashamed.

I Think that bit you're talking about in "Lets Sing One for Woodie" is the "America is Ours" thing at the end..

that's not borrowed...

That came out of the murky underbrush in my skull...

It's supposed to represent the sound of common folk reminding the politicians and business types that America is ours, not theirs..

Oh well....

some stuff works..some stuff doesn't

bob.

I would think an of the venues Pavrotti and the like did, and their suits, would have all the bookwork done, given they are for the most part Major venues, and in a lot of cases are videod for tv show and video sale. DVD now I guess, so i think their writers would get their dues.
And recorded for the LOIve at the wherever CDs of course.
Don't think Bernie would be going short with Elton eiter.
If it was shown to me they don't pay your writers their due did in fact extend to class acts like you mention, I guess I would have to say bugger buying a ticket to them too if I decoided it was something needed doing to all the poor little out in the burb performers. Yep.
Glad I didn't now about this stuff back in the 50's 'cos I would have had to not go see Johnny Ray when he did Festival Hall in Melbourne.
Re the Woodie one Bob. Have to have a listen to it again. Sounds like I got it wrong. Both I and Jude, one of your fans down here thought it broke into one of the USA patriotic tunes on the out.
My set pretty went well. Got 12 of my songs sung. Didn't get to the collab ones unfortunatly as I filled my time allowed before I made it that far. $24 in to the APRA nest egg.
Graham




------------------
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/2/grahamhendersonmusic.htm

OK...

You can listen to it again...

but don't play it too loud..

If the neighbors hear it, that'll be a public performance and I'll have to be paid !

Bob (gonna get my cut)Young

Thanks Bob. I'll turn it up softer just in case.
Never know. While I understand it is only commercial premises have to do the pay the pro thing at the moment, if the pros are making mums and dads apply for a licience to video their kids do The Good Ship Lollipop at the school pantomine, to add to their keepsakes, they could well be looking at expanding it to the back shed ghetto blaster too.
Graham (never had 'em complain about a bob song yet) H


------------------
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/2/grahamhendersonmusic.htm

Bob, I would think your argument that performers should not pay is not based on a legal foundation but rests is the reality of the circumstance.

ANY public performance of copyright material where the performer and others make money from it is subject to royalties.


The fact that it has not been done in your experience does not mean it is legally right, it is just that the copyright owner has chosen not to pursue the matter, perhaps for the very reasons you cite, ie "free publicity" or perhaps because it is not worth the trouble or because no reasonable tally mechanism exists or because any attempt at enforcement would be unenforcable or face tremendously negative PR.

So though I think you are legally wrong, I also think you are likely "practically right"


Which of course means you get your way


So play on until they chase you...then hang up your shingle.

OK, John...

I'm tired of breaking the law..

Make me an honest man..

Tell me where to mail the checks and how much I should pay per song per play.

Remember, now, most songwriters do not have a PRO affiliation.
So, for instance , if my next door neighbor writes and then copyrights a song that I decide to perform, I, according to you, have to pay him.

Where does it say how much I have to pay him ?

Lemme know, John, my conscience is killing me !

Bob

Dear John, and Bob.
What Bob is doing is not illegal.
At least, the question to my pro on the subject said, anybody can sing anything in venues such as pubs and clubs.
PRO membrs are asked to fill in the playlist down here at least, so the dues can be distributed to the writer. If they are pro members, and have registered the song with their pro.
My original ask to my pro way back when I first joined re covers, and in particular parodies as i do hhave a few of these, was I could mess with the words as much as I like live, but I had to playlist the song as the original.
And I did on the only one I ever did at anything other than a private party.
Now. My second ask tells me there is no way legally or otherwise to enforce the do the playlist thing , so what Bob and othres are doing is not illegal. Down here at least.
If anybody knows of it beung against the law anywhere else, plesae show us the fact. nothing but the fact and so, maybe contribute toward all out thinking on this one.
I no longer do parodies as I decided the words were the best part of them so gave all mine their own tunes and do them a la all my own work. And get my two bucks.
Starting off as a parody is still a fun way to jump start a song though.
And I missed a point. The artist does not have to be paid for the performance for it to be eligble for royalties.
Just that it is played in a venue deamed as coming under the PRO imposed banner.
Sing for tips artists and open mike folks her at least can submit any songs they do and the writer, be it them or some one else will get their dues.
Graham

------------------
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/2/grahamhendersonmusic.htm

[This message has been edited by Graham (edited 01-04-2004).]

"Murky underbrush in my skull" - that's a classic, Bob.

-Shawn

Bob, I did not for a second mean you should do anything at all except what you're doing already...nothing.

Since it does not appear the copy right holders are doing anything to protect their ownership interests, it seems to me you can simply continue to play em as you want....which is why I said you are "legally wrong" (not to seek permission etc) but "practically (ie in practice...) right"

So I was actually helping you justify your position....

Hi John..

I'm sorry that my tone was facetious..

this whole thing is just nuts..

I understand what you're saying, and I agree..

In the real world this isn't going to be a hinderance to most guys who do what I do..

My question was...
If I were to adhere to the letter of the law..
How would I do that ?

What is the actual fee per song..how do I find that out ?
If the writer is not associated with a PRO and the law says he or she or they must be paid...how do I determine how much I owe ?
If this is, indeed, a "law", then what are the penalties for non-adherence ?

Essentially, I'm asking, what do I have to do to conduct my business in a legal manner ?

Am I supposed to contact each writer of each song to get permission to play their songs ?

I'm asking real questions that I would ask if I were inquiring about any other law that I found out I was breaking.

It goes beyond ASCAP etc...those are licensing outfits...that's not the "law".

What's the law say ?

How do I pay someone who does not belong to ASCAP or BMI or anybody else ?

I really am curious....

Bob

Actually, as I see it from what has developed here, writers and publishers are supposed to get their funds from the PRO, which apparently has not been doing a very good job of getting it into their hands in a fair and transparent way.


I don't think it is up to you at all to pay them any money directly...perhaps if the PRO wants to allocate fairly, playlists may be the way, though I have to think other ways exist.


This is why I asked about practices out there.


If an easy reporting\auditing\payment mechanism can be made to work, and the ultimate distribution was seen to be fair, I would think you would do your part to make it all happen.


But the more I learn, the more I realize people are not as smart as we like to think they are or should be. Except for me and you of course


have a good one.

Bob,all you need do is list the songs that you play at a venue and give it to the venue owner,who is responsible for sending it to the PROs.You pay nothing to no one,if the writer(s) of some of the songs are not affiliated with a PRO,then they will receive nothing from the PROs.Just as if I don't buy lotto tickets I stand zero chance of winning.

The songwriter(s) will be paid out of the pool of money that is collected from the venue owners as a license fee.It cost them nothing more than the fee that they have already paid.

I have a friend that wrote several songs,gave them away to others who recorded them,got airplay on them,but the writer will not get royalties of any kind because he would not bother to register them with a PRO.
If he thinks so little of his songs or is too lazy to register them,then he doesn't deserve nor should he expect to get anything.

I don't claim to be an expert on this matter but this is my understanding of how it works.

Thanks Ed...

Now, I did alot of work in private homes..
Beach parties..alot of work for private individuals...We opened businesses, played at Car lot openings lots of stuff like that.

In those cases are we breaking the law ?
Is the client supposed to do what a venue owner that pays the licensing does..or do we all just get to walk away ?

Bob

I seem to recall that Pete Townshend bemoaned a tour of the late eighties or early nineties where he had to fork over a significant amount of money (mid to high five figures, I believe) to either ASCAP or BMI for the right to play Who songs in concert! (I imagine he did not own publishing rights to all or most of his material at the time).

He also complained that he never saw much of writer's share royalties from the given organization over the years.

This thread is way too long - I think I brought this one up about two pages ago. Also - if my memory is serving correctly, the issue was not that THE WHO didn't own the rights to their songs but that they did own the rights and were represented by the PRO. It was a situation where they could see the amount being paid in (a percentage of gross ticket sales) verses the amount that was going to come back out (their share of the general pool based on then current airplay), and the numbers were large enough to make an issue of it.

And it got one post longer with your repeat too Marty.
Wouldn't surprise me Holly. Would think anything he wrote with the who and was published as a who song, he would have to pay to use on a solo tour, or album.
Ed. here it is that the writer sends their playlist direct to their pro listing all songs played along with any affiliations they know about for the individual titles.
Not via the venue owner.
Venue owner just has to pay his dues.
Bob. APRA has a long list of songs submitted on playlsts, along with the names of the writers that don't show up un any pro sheets.
It is the Undistributable funds data base.
And I guess it is getting biger now the net is a pretty easy place to find material on.
I would imagine all pros have a similar thing seeing they are supposed to work in together.
I doubt your carpark gig would count, and know the private house party doesn't.
Graham



------------------
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/2/grahamhendersonmusic.htm

This discussion has probably run it's course, but I found this article while searching the Naples, FL newspaper for any more news about my hero (I know what a geek I am) being arrested New Years Eve.

This article discusses just what we were talking about. BMI also enforces licensing, not just ASCAP. And, seems to me the whole deal really comes down to the attitude of the business towards paying the fee, not the cost of the fee itself (although it does concern me about Mom and Pop places, but I have no data on those):

http://www.naplesnews.com/npdn/news/article/0,2071,NPDN_14940_2552168,00.html

Also, I want to add a little story. I know an indie musician who has been making a living at live music for 30 years. Successfully. We'll call him Mark (not his real name). And I e-mailed him a few times to talk more about this. Out of the blue, he was watching
a video about something to do with the type music he creates, and low and behold, the main guy on the video up and plays one of Mark's songs! He was floored and pleased, but he had no idea about this, as they never obtained his permission. Now, this video was very successful overseas, selling like 400,000 copies! 100,000 copies in the US (10,000 copies in Canada) is considered platinum in video/dvd. So, I assume in several of those European countries, this video sold multi-platinum. The motherlode and the dream of many a songwriter!

Mark writes this guy, and the guy does acknowledge that yes, it was Mark's song and they "forgot" to get him included in the credits. He promised the record/video label would get Mark his royalites. I have no reason to doubt the sincerity of this guy, but they never did pay him, despite several attempts (which I personally blame on the record company - jee - what a surprise...hahah). My personal opinion is the record company decided they weren't gonna pay Mark, after all, what's he gonna do about it? It costs thousands (probably 10-30) to get an IP lawyer to sue, and since I've been told IP lawyers don't work on contingency (although I bet you can work something out with one somewhere), Mark would have to pay all costs up front for the lawyer. I don't know what the royalty rates are for film (actually, I believe they are negotable because those rates are not subject to compulsary law), but if this was a record, his royalty for 400,000 copies would be approx. $32,000. So, costs almost as much to sue as what the royalty was, and my opinion is the record/video company just decided he wouldn't put up the money to sue. The reason I wrote him was I had hoped he would volunteer why he didn't sue, as there are stiff penalties in the law for copyright infringement, but Mark never did volunteer that information, so I didn't pry. The only statement he had made publicly was that his small record label was in no position to take on a huge company.

Anyway, there was some justice in the story, a golden rainbow in an otherwise gloomy day if you will. He applied for and received his just money for the performance rights from the PRO's in those countries. He couldn't collect his reproduction/distribution/sync rights royalties from the record/video company, but he did get his performance rights fees. This whole story would have been a bust, as he would not have gotten a red cent if not for the PRO's. And mind you, that money is a big deal to an indie musician, who lives off of music. So, PRO's may not be perfect, but they ARE doing a big service to many people.

I would say that Mark is blue collar enough that he has "practical experience". I think he qualifies as an example of a hard working musician just the same as someone playing cover songs at weddings and clubs. Just the same as a Sara Light. Practical experience includes I would say someone who travels around the country mingling with musicians so that he/she gains wisdom and knowledge enough to pass that on to someone and help them get a Grammy nomination. Practical experience even includes me, as I have a stake in this too. I want to be able to go play live when I want to, and so I don't want to see fee's/working relationships so high/bad that they run off the business owners.

Just my thoughts....



[This message has been edited by Liszt Laughing (edited 01-08-2004).]

As long as stuff relating to the situation is coming in Liszt, no issue is dead, and your offering is appreciated.
Have not read the article inthe click link yet, but will.
Just wanted to say I found your comments both enlightening and war4ming.
Your mate has had some success in his claim thannks to both his and the PRo pursuit of the issue, and that his material has been recorded without his consent sugests to me he will, if the issue is pursued, be sucessful in getting his due for the recording factor of the issue.
As I understand it. He already has their comformation it was in fact his material they did. He has already recieved his live performance dues from them doing that, and the performance was vidiod, so logic says theren is no way anybody can deny him his entitlement to his just reproduction rights here.
I would think the fact he was not given opportubity to agree to the initial recording, and so come up with a mutually agreed figure, he would be in a pretty good position to set his own price, within the bounds of what is right and fair of course, now it is in the can and selling well as you state.
No legal wizard, but that is how it seems to me.
Best of luck to yoiur friend in the issue.
Graham

------------------
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/2/grahamhendersonmusic.htm

Just an FYI, I was talking with our friends at the Future of Music Coalition about discussion topics for their policy summit in May. I used this discussion, and the points made by both sides to suggest we might want to take the issue of venues/pro's up on the panels. I'll let everyone know if that happens.

Brian

Here's a copy of a letter I just sent to a SESAC rep. I know this thread is already several pages long, but I find myself in what appears to be a unique position (both performer/songwriter and venue representative). Feel free to email me with any positive suggestions.

On 8 Jan 2004 at 10:20, David E Polosky <polosky@juno.com> wrote:

> Music License for: Walden's Coffeehouse
>
> Mr. Jeff Wilson:
> Please contact me in order to expedite the SESAC license to cover the performance of
> copyrighted music at your establishment .
> I encourage you to go to our website for detailed information in regard to the SESAC license.
> Our web address is: www.sesac.com . You may fill out your license on-line and make your
> payment by credit card if you prefer.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Dave Polosky
> Licensing Consultant
>
> Phone: 602-788-0573
> FAX: 602-953-8205

I have some questions about PRO (performing rights organization) licensing issues that I'm hoping you can help answer.

It is my understanding that the PRO's are in the business of securing royalties for their member artists on the use of works written by said artists. However, if a venue is not featuring any works by PRO (SESAC, et al) artists in any form, why would there be a need for a license?

It is true that Walden's provides a place for live music to be performed. There is no charge to the public for this music, and the performers are not paid to play. Further, Walden's has made a point of being the one place local songwriters can perform their own original works. It is, in fact, the main thing that sets Walden's apart from every other venue in town.

Walden's happens to be located in a casino town (Reno, Nevada, USA). There are lots of stages in this town that feature "cover material". Most of these venues won't give an aspiring songwriter or original band a chance to share their talents with an audience. From what I've seen & heard this is the state of live music in most cities, truly a dire prospect for amateur songwriters who just want to share their creation with those seeking something new & entertaining.

I have been performing music publicly since childhood, and I've been writing my own material nearly as long. At one time I did work with "cover bands" as a professional performer. Eventually I got tired of the grind and decided I was done performing other people's songs. This effectively ended my performance career, being that venues featuring original material are few and far between. Then the owner of Walden's opened the door for me and other amateur songwriters, thus providing a place for us to meet and share our creations with each other. This little coffeehouse has become a haven for the creative community in our region, indeed, a unique little bastion of originality and creative energy.

So, my question is, if a venue like Walden's is providing a place for original music to be heard, and the musicians are playing their own music for the love of doing so (no money changing hands), why exactly would Walden's need to pay licensing fees to your organization or, indeed, to any other PRO?

Sincerely,

Todd C. South
Entertainment & Internet - Walden's Coffeehouse
http://www.waldenscoffeehouse.com

Singer/Songwriter, Burning Peace
http://www.burningpeace.com ICQ 1943809

My thoughts on that one are.
By being licienced with a pro, you, in the situation you state here, have the ability to provide an accredited venue where begining writer can have their work done public, and so are eligible to apply for full PRO membrship.
That would help no end of writers out there I am sure.
And quite frankly, the more just starting out writers there are in pros the better their chances of being heard and maybe geting a bettre deal.
As a side issue. I read the article stated in the previos post and have since e-mailed the journo with my thoughts on what he could persue in a follow up article.
Also told him what is cooking here, as I thought it may be of interest.
And Hey. I guess you are the coffee house bloke I found and like over on SongRamp too
Graham

------------------
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/2/grahamhendersonmusic.htm

As far as I know I haven't done anything on SongRamp.

So here's a related issue: what about house concerts? Anyone?

Wrong Coffee House bloke them.
House parties to the best of my knowledge do not come under the title of venue for the purposes of copright in any way. Just commercial premises and a few public places.
Graham


------------------
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/2/grahamhendersonmusic.htm

An idealist's view on the copyright.
Yes, it is important for artists to get paid for our work. Yes, we all saw the Mozart movie. When we die our copyrights go to people who are NOT artists and to corporations who are NOT even people. As a musician you can belong to a union that puts most of it's effort supporting symphony orchestras that perform classical music created before the copyright laws were written. Where is the new classical music going to come from if the symphony musicians will have to take a pay cut to pay royalities, etc. Why not stick to the free stuff? In drama, the legend of Shakespeare lives on (due to the "open source" of the Shakespeare Code). The American Shakespeare is .. what's that guy's name?
Mark Twain had money troubles his whole life, but thanks to the new copyright protection at the beginning of the 20th century his relatives did well, and of course they keep the "embarassing" literature he wrote out of public view to keep the checks coming.

As an artist when you enforce your ownership of an idea you may at the same time be silencing yourself and your idea.

As a society, when we "own" ideas we have only a culture of ideas that can make money.

There are of course heroic exceptions,
but this ain't the sixties anymore.

What we need is an "open source" movement in the arts where artists donate a small part of their work which is of some cultural value (or not for that matter) to an open license so it can be used for free. Maybe we will find a new Mozart or a new Shakespeare and perhaps some of what we create will be used after our death and we may take our place with all those who wrote, sang, acted, and thought without the constraints of the owned idea.

David

------------------
Riletto

NOT being a money maker for the industry, I've never had anything but problems with ASCAP and to a lesser extent BMI (member).

This whole world of copywrites is a joke... but they/it CAN make life miserable.

I always root against ASCAP. I don't worry about creative people needing to be protected (for a FEE) in making money. If they're really creative, they'll make the bucks!

Peace,
Slick

David,

Interesting post. I am all for open source as long as participation is voluntary on the behalf of the creator, not imposed on them by yet a different entity just trying to make money.

I find it ironic that "File Sharing" thieves think they are sticking it to the money grubbers when all they are doing is paying someone else (who didn't even create the music) to help them steal (i.e. the various file sharing companies/sites/software developers) who all have their own money making scheme connected to this free file sharing stuff. Whether it's ads on file sharing sites, sales of software used to steal, payola given by those who use the services as a back door promotions method or any of the other many ways (like data harvesting, which is a gigantic money maker for them) all these "free" music file sharers are simply making money for their partners in crimes, often much more than the artists who created the work would have made if they had actually paid for the music. That's a lost concept on most. Even those who control the net portals (i.e. internet bandwidth providers) and profiting from the illegal file sharing through their usage fees. Everyone is making a buck off the artists except for the artists/creators. At least in the traditional system, SOME of the money makes its way back to the creators (or at least the creators had the ability to decide how it would be distributed).

Brian

Slick,

Have you ever gotten a check from BMI? I know very very few indie artists who ever have. On the the other hand, I know a ton of indie writers (mostly singer songwriters) who have gotten checks from ASCAP through their special program. Some on this site have gotten checks each year from ASCAP. I wish BMI and SESAC would offer comparable programs. There's very little to separate the 3 PRO's and I've heard great and terrible stories about all of them. However, ASCAP at least has 1 clear way for smaller artists/writers to get a little money for the performances of the songs they have written.

Brian

[This message has been edited by Brian Austin Whitney (edited 05-01-2005).]

Bri... I know in my heart (and head) you're RIGHT!... but have such a bad taste in my mouth from decades of being shoved around by BIG music and all of their associates. I'm a 'free-grazer' as they say... I let others use MY stuff, and...!
Maybe some day the world will figure out how to do all this stuff and make it fair... you gotta admit that after 25-30 years, anybody should be able to press a tune! It just ain't right, the way it sorts out nowadays.

:-)
Slick

I was listening to my Queen-KISS-Springsteen a-cappella medley from August 2001. Performed and recorded at a (now defunct) coffee house named The Prodigal Son of Hyannis, MA. They too insisted on originals only for ASCAP, BMI & others would sue if known about. Neither the owners were aware of what I was to perform and I wasn't aware of the house rule at the time.

I think it is unfair that when an open mic night is there and there is no financial profit (other than coffee and small food sales is made) that a lawsuit of such could occur except for the following situations.

1. When the establishment is recording the performer with or without that performers consent.

2. When the establishment goes out and sells that material, both cover and original without any word to the peformer.

I know, I've been there, done that, as a performer.

I always wondered what it meant to be told "you can't perform, you're too high up" and the fact that others spoke of an owners DAT system upstairs.

Hyannis is an expensive town to own a business, renting the building or in this case, owning a building and dollar per cup coffee sales don't cut the mustard.

The Prodigal Son was recently sold and now the establishment is known as the Island Merchant, 10 Ocean Street, Hyannis, MA.

[This message has been edited by WilliamKMahler (edited 05-01-2005).]

Well Brian, I myself got two checks from BMI. It was a bit of a hassle, but I got them. However, due to all the headaches in getting stuff done with BMI, I made the jump to SESAC.

Now, I'm told by SESAC that I should be getting my first check in June. I'm pretty excited about it.

Jody

Brian,

I have been with BMI for 10 years and have had basically no problems collecting my checks... They occasionally screw up with paying the proper amounts that coincide with the TV broadcast cue sheet codes but that's it from my experiance with them.. I have found that when my checks have been incorrect, writer relations reps return my calls promptly and they straighten it out in a timely manner...

That's my story - I'm a BMI guy

Best,
russ

www.russbonagura.com

280 posts ago: "If a business has live music to bring people in, and can't afford to pay $1.91 per day of live music in their venue for the rights to play it/have it performed then their problems run far deeper than ASCAP."

While I still think there are major problems with the distribution schemes and with the way the PRO's educate their customers, I'm in agreement with the above.

A benefit night once a year with the proceeds paying the license fees would ensure the music plays on ...


------------------
Marty my new home

If you look at the glass and see it as half full, drink up!