Thursday, November 19, 2009
Legal / Business Are Performance Rights Organizations Harming Live Music?
Posted by Grant Brissey on Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 1:46 PM
[ASCAP, BMI and SESAC's] aggressiveness in getting just about any small venue to pay up fees [is] killing off open mic nights and other sorts of venues that allowed musicians to play live. Mike points us to the news that many venues are simply giving up on live music. The problem? Well, ASCAP, BMI and SESAC are all demanding huge fees. Even the restaurants that don't bring in cover bands are being told they need to pay up, just in case a musician happens to do a cover in the middle of a wholly original set. The licensing organizations don't seem to care, they just want you to pay, just in case.
It seems unlikely that these outfits could find all that much success with this campaign, but their teams of big, scary lawyers surely wield more resources than those of any given small venue. Also, what of DJs, iPods etc.? Do they not require collections from recorded music. Remember those of ASCAP stickers on jukeboxes? Has anyone experienced increased collections requests or other such hassle in Seattle? Let us know in the comments.
h/t: Techdirt
1
YES on the increased collections requests. They've become much more aggressive this year. BMI requires that you pay the huge license fee all at once and if you make a partial payment during a slow time of year they now put you into collections. Yes, you also have to pay for the iPod playing, DJs, jukeboxes, and karaoke. It doesn't matter if karaoke is free or not. You have to pay for all original, unsigned bands playing just in case they might throw a cover in there. It all adds up to thousands of dollars a year for even the smallest bar. They send people out to hassle you right when you open and don't stop until you sign the licensing agreements. Lately, when you just call to get answers about a mysteriously missing previous payment they are verbally abusive and unhelpful.
I know composers who make awesome royalties from these societies and I would really like to be supportive. I wouldn't have live music if I wasn't supportive of indie artists. But I know this: during my brief musical career I was a member of ASCAP and never received a penny from them, although I was in rotation on a few radio stations. (It wouldn't have been a lot of money, so I didn't go after them for it, since I thought the whole point was that they were supposed to be watching the airwaves on my behalf.) So I have to wonder whether any of the thousands they get from each venue annually goes to any of the little people, or just makes Taylor Swift richer?
I know composers who make awesome royalties from these societies and I would really like to be supportive. I wouldn't have live music if I wasn't supportive of indie artists. But I know this: during my brief musical career I was a member of ASCAP and never received a penny from them, although I was in rotation on a few radio stations. (It wouldn't have been a lot of money, so I didn't go after them for it, since I thought the whole point was that they were supposed to be watching the airwaves on my behalf.) So I have to wonder whether any of the thousands they get from each venue annually goes to any of the little people, or just makes Taylor Swift richer?
3
It's a double edged sword unfortunately. Performance royalties are one of the best ways to make money in the music business and I'm an ASCAP member, but I hate that they don't properly scale their dues relative to the size and purpose of the venue. A coffeehouse playing the radio shouldn't have to pay nearly as much as they do, especially compared to some place that hosts cover bands as their main draw. The PRO's recent tactic of hiring third party bounty hunters to sit in places that are behind on their dues and wait for some open miker to play Jimi Hendrix so they can sue for $10K smacks of organized crime. When I was living in Boston and Providence a few years ago, ASCAP and BMI were being really aggressive and many places, especially in Providence, were going on strike against them and making performers sign waivers saying they took full responsibility if they played a cover song. They would also only play local CDs in some of the restaurants. The only place I've played in Seattle that has a similar waiver is The Trabant.
I support PROs and think they're a necessary evil, especially these days when it is trickier to make money as a musician, but they're going way overboard and need to reevaluate their dues and their scare tactics.
I support PROs and think they're a necessary evil, especially these days when it is trickier to make money as a musician, but they're going way overboard and need to reevaluate their dues and their scare tactics.
4
PROs are definitely unnecessary evils in this world.
I'm a musician and not a business owner, but I can't help but feel for everyone who has to pay in order to play music. It's free exposure! Any money a musician should get should come from the money spent on buying his or her cds or mp3s. You can't play illegally downloaded material in a place of business, like in a coffee shop or the GAP, and I'd much rather listen to music from a CD than the radio when I enter a store. The sales of music must be incredibly low to resort to this. If every store bought the CDs of the music they play, I can't see how playing recorded music outloud would require royalties. If a coffee shop or any open mic night claimed they only play original music, I can't see why they would still be harassed.
If I had some authority knock on my door asking me if I've been illegally downloading music, I'd say no, and I wouldn't expect him to say I 'should pay just incase'. I wouldn't expect him to do anything illegal either like push his way in and check my computer.
I'm a musician and not a business owner, but I can't help but feel for everyone who has to pay in order to play music. It's free exposure! Any money a musician should get should come from the money spent on buying his or her cds or mp3s. You can't play illegally downloaded material in a place of business, like in a coffee shop or the GAP, and I'd much rather listen to music from a CD than the radio when I enter a store. The sales of music must be incredibly low to resort to this. If every store bought the CDs of the music they play, I can't see how playing recorded music outloud would require royalties. If a coffee shop or any open mic night claimed they only play original music, I can't see why they would still be harassed.
If I had some authority knock on my door asking me if I've been illegally downloading music, I'd say no, and I wouldn't expect him to say I 'should pay just incase'. I wouldn't expect him to do anything illegal either like push his way in and check my computer.
Comments (4) RSS