Sign in to follow this  
garfield

Justice Dep't Reviewing Music Licensing Decrees

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, combia1 said:

Pretty sure this is only talking about the blanket license fees that venues like bars, restaurants, and other organizations pay to play music in their venues. When you go to sporting event and they are playing music on the PA system, or you go to a bar and their is music playing, or you go to the mall and hear music, or pretty much any public or private space and you hear music, then that venue has paid an annual fee (blanket license) to play that music. This is totally different than the Permission to Arrange and the Sync License copyright issues that DCI, BOA, and WGI have to contend with.

Every football stadium in the country is a public space, even if leased by DCI to produce a show. 

A school district required to pay performance fees will be demanded from the lessee, and would change the venue-leasing dynamic.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, tesmusic said:

Yes. Totally separate sides of the law.

 

26 minutes ago, tesmusic said:

Yes. Totally separate sides of the law.

Unless you’re a lawyer representing ASCAP or BMI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I am for these three things:

1) For a time set by congress, ownership of a creatve work, including performance rights, shall be exclusive (Copyright). Other than item 3, this is the only place Government should have a role in the situation.

2) Free Market Commerce. By the way, those barking about Monopoly take note. The creative artists are not forced into handing over their print and arranging rights to various Publishers, nor thier performance rights over to ASCAP/BMI.

3) With the exception of arbitrating disputes, the Govenment should stay completely out of Free Market Commerce decisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, garfield said:

Every football stadium in the country is a public space, even if leased by DCI to produce a show. 

A school district required to pay performance fees will be demanded from the lessee, and would change the venue-leasing dynamic.  

 

schools are now being contacted about this when trying to host band shows

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

schools are now being contacted about this when trying to host band shows

So there are additional copyright fees for the venue provider as well as the group having to pay for performance rights? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, BigW said:

So there are additional copyright fees for the venue provider as well as the group having to pay for performance rights? 

For example: the members of a rock band playing covers at a bar are not responsible to pay a performance fee, it is the owner of the bar who is responsable to pay that performance fee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just throwing this out there:  How much of this is money (probably, quite a bit) and how much is political? In the past few years, some musical groups have objected to the fact that political groups have paid the performance fees and are legally using that band's/singer's music at rallies and such?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, CrownBariDad said:

Just throwing this out there:  How much of this is money (probably, quite a bit) and how much is political? In the past few years, some musical groups have objected to the fact that political groups have paid the performance fees and are legally using that band's/singer's music at rallies and such?

I'm going to politely ask that the mods lock this thread at any evidence that it heads down a political path.  Whatever is the instigation of this new action (money), it's impact, if any, on the activity is the point of my post.

I see a venue-responsibility to pay licensing fees as a significant new cost to the activity even if arrangements can be made to collect it via the corps.  School venues have strong lawyers who are very sensitive to who uses their facilities.

A black eye for the activity a year ago, and now new costs and legal oversight to assure compliance with payment requirements...  The activity doesn't need another reason for school admins to say "No" to over-excited band directors hoping to host a show.

Thanks, BTW.

Edited by garfield
The system didn't like a word that rhymes with catch and means to "grab away"?
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Garfield - Again, I'm a total doofus on these sort of legal matters, but I'm not following. Are you saying both the venue and the performers would be required to pay up? A double dip?

If that's the case, would rehearsal venues also be obligated? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, OldSnareDrummer said:

Garfield - Again, I'm a total doofus on these sort of legal matters, but I'm not following. Are you saying both the venue and the performers would be required to pay up? A double dip?

If that's the case, would rehearsal venues also be obligated? 

I'm surely no lawyer and I'm not practicing law myself, but the article is written by and for those professionals and this paragraph is the one that bugs me, personally:

"ASCAP and BMI collect music copyrights from composers and songwriters and collectively license public performance rights to broadcasters, concert halls, bars, restaurants and streaming services. They license performance rights to about 90 percent of music in the U.S.". (emphasis mine)

While that may sound innocuous because it seems directed at venues that don't provide LIVE entertainment (except, oops, "concert halls"), when I asked a (non-licensing specialist) lawyer, this ruling is directed at the venue itself, not the performers.  On just a cursory (and non-official) review of some of the fine print in their standard venue contract, I was not able to find anything that suggested that this "venue fee" (my term) would be superseded by any other performance or rights fees associated with that piece of music.  Tresona could license to bands, but ASCAP licenses the venue as I see it.

So, yea, in my non-legal cursory reading, it appears that the composers are determined to not only double-dip, but dip as many times as they can get paid from any entity that uses, displays, or performs their creations.  Performance venues, among others, included.

(Call your lawyer, seek professional advice, do not rely on anonymous postings on a drum corps site as legal guidance or direction.  OK?)

 

Edited by garfield

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.