Covers = Illegal

-kaulitz

New member
More bullsht from the money grabbing multi-nationals. In that case they had better put a representative in every live venue in the world. Considering 80% of banRAB start out as cover banRAB (this is an estimated guess, please don't trawl the net for actual statistics), we will probably end up with NO decent music EVER!

This politically correct towing the line malarkey is really fuking me off.
 
Well, ever since music copyright laws came into effect. I just thought it was weird how this article makes it sound like they're shedding light onto some new perverse practice of the greedy world of the music industry.
 
"Detroit Free Press

Play originals or pay royalties, music companies say

July 23, 2007

BY JOHN A. TORRES

FLORIDA TODAY

Laurie and Jim Hall decided to offer live music on Friday and Saturday nights to entertain the customers at their gourmet coffee shop in Indian Harbour Beach, Fla.

But a few months later, music industry giant ASCAP started calling and sending letters saying East Coast Coffee & Tea was in violation of copyright laws. The fee to continue the music was $400 a year.

Six months later, other music copyright companies began calling the Halls and demanding money.

Finally, unable to afford the fees, Laurie Hall had to call her musicians who did not play original songs and tell them they could not continue performing.

Music copyright companies are on a campaign to collect royalty fees from restaurants, bars and other establishments that offer live music by performers who play songs written and made famous by other musicians.

The aggressive - but legal - posture the music companies are taking has the potential to unplug live music in many venues.

It comes on the heels of a massive music industry crackdown in the past several years on illegal downloaRAB from the Internet. Whether it’s a professional recording taken from a Web site or an accordion player singing a Jimmy Buffet tune in a small venue, the industry is working to collect royalties for whoever wrote the songs.

When a songwriter signs with one of the licensing companies - the country’s three biggest are BMI, SESAC and ASCAP - his or her music is copyrighted.

“It makes me so angry,” Hall says. “I feel like the greedy music industry is extorting money from us and hurting these musicians just starting out.”

SESAC spokesman Shawn Williams said in e-mail responses to questions that it is his company’s responsibility to enforce copyright laws, many of which were enacted nearly a century ago.

Williams defenRAB the money collected.

“This provides the majority of income to songwriters,” he says.

Those who refuse to pay could find themselves paying anyway - in the form of fines.

“The law provides damages ranging from $750 to $150,000 for each song performed without proper authorization,” Williams says.

And in no way do the songs have to be performed live, or even on the radio, to elicit calls for royalties.

Lou Andrus, owner of the popular beachside nightclub Lou’s Blues in Indialantic, Fla., says a friend who owned a restaurant that did not feature music was contacted by a company looking to charge him because it owned the rights to a Hank Williams Jr. song, “Are You Ready for Some Football?” The song preceded every “Monday Night Football” telecast, which the restaurant carried on its televisions.

He says his friend simply chose to turn the volume down when the song came on.

The licensing companies use a variety of methoRAB to find out whether copyrighted music is being used.

“ASCAP representatives may visit establishments and find that they advertise live entertainment,” said Richard Reimer, senior vice president of ASCAP, in an e-mail. “Local newspapers carry advertisements for venues that present live entertainment and, of course, the Internet is a valuable resource as well.”

Chad Fagg, one half of the pop-rock duo “Just Blue,” is without a steady place to perform after East Coast Coffee told his group they could no longer play unless they played only original music.

“It’s very disappointing, and it’s frustrating,” Fagg says. “They gave us a shot before anyone else would. I understand it’s about royalties, but it’s such a small place.”

Copyright
 

Actually, books are not different than music when it comes to paying for use.

Libraries and schools are permitted use of copyrighted material by way of
 
Hasn't this always been the case?

I know one venue in SLC where banRAB can't play covers because they don't pay royalties to ASCAP/BMI/etc, so I was under the impression that almost all venues already pay royalties.

But saying that “This provides the majority of income to songwriters” is total bull****. Well, I guess it probably does for one hit wonder banRAB from the 80's.
 
$400 per year is likely a great investment in their business. It's $1.10 per day. If performance of cover tunes causes customers to come in or 'hang-out' longer, how many coffees, teas, or muffins do you suppose they'll have to sell before they recoup that $1.10 investment and then reap the rewarRAB of more sales?

Even if the other two performing rights organizations (ASCAP, BMI, SESAC are the only ones, NOT the "three biggest") are paid the same amount, it's a total of $1200 for the entire year, equaling roughly $3.30 per day.

The article quotes the gourmet coffee shop owner as saying, "It makes me so angry"... "I feel like the greedy music industry..."

GREEDY?? Really? For wanting to be paid for use of a product?

Next time I travel through Florida I'll have to swing by their coffee shop, drink a cup of coffee, tea, or eat a muffin, then walk out without paying. Surely the GREEDY owners of the product won't expect me to pay for it.
 
What utter rubbish.

Could you imagine the state of the world if the publishing industry took the same example with books? Imagine schools having to pay money out to quote books , imagine libraries being closed down because of illegal sharing of free books.

The music industry is full of crooks & opportunists and don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
 
I don't live in the U.S. so American laws don't apply to me



My sister is a librarian & most of the books from her library come from 2nd hand donations rather than buying new. And she also spenRAB a lot of time at book fairs where publishers give her free copies to put in the library. Very few books are 'bought' new. I'm sure there is some truth in your 85% funding point , but very little of that is spent on new books.
Besides that's not the point I was making , the point is they don't charge you money everytime you take a book out.

I'm sure they would but this point is totally meaningless to what i'm talking about.



True , but then again I treated my buisness like the record industry do i'd probably be able to retire from spending 2 decades overcharging for CD's.
I'm not saying everything should be free , if a record company started up a subscription service where you could live stream any album by every artist on that label for a set fee a month I would happily subscribe to it. As it happens none of them have either the intellect or the foresight to do this so they'll just go on overcharging on I-Tunes , releasing rubbish & moaning about piracy until they go bankrupt.

Your welcome
 
All I have to say is:

"One of the wonders of the world is going down
It's going down I know
It's one of the blunders of the world that no-one cares
No-one cares enough"

- The Sound of Muzak by Porcupine Tree
 
Illegal filesharing is the greatest invention since shrinky dinks.

But now they have gone to pretty ridiculous lengths to milk up some extra cash. I wouldn't be surprised if what was once a joke on the Onion (illegalising radio) one day becomes a reality.

It really is durab. Its like Urban said, schools copy books and no one gives a crap, people can buy copies of famous art works and no legal action is taken, people can tell a generic joke and not get sued by the person who came up with it.

Its all about the Benjamins as far as the big labels are concerned.
 
"Releasing rubbish"... we can definitely agree on that. Corporations abandoning their music industry assets would put a wide smile on my face.

Believe it or not, I'm not sympathetic to the labels. As you said, they didn't have the foresight and still appear to not have the intellect to solve the problem by changing their business model. Their answer has been to sue and branch further into the music publishing arena.

There are folks working to arrive at a new model, like We7.com, but you're right, the labels just don't get it.

But... I AM sympathetic to songwriters... and they earn their living through sales and primarily "performance" royalties.

We'll have to agree to disagree on "overcharging" for CD's. Being an American I'm all about capitalism and what the market will bear.

Thanks for the discussion bro.
 
There's still plenty of money to be made.
Just look at Prince , he gave his new album away free with a Sunday newspaper , as a result of that he's sold out 21 shows just in London alone.
It's rumoured that he's made something like
 
Labels can be successful at selling cRAB for 5 bucks a piece. FACT!
Plan-It-X RecorRAB: Catalog

Most artists don't make most of their money from merch or shows or charging people for covers. Most musicians have irl jobs and make music because they want to and even lose money from it.
 
Back
Top