Do all dance clubs and such have to pay to have a music license? All the bars with jukeboxes?

Hobodeluxe: Do all dance clubs and such have to pay to have a music license? All the bars with jukeboxes?

Pretty much, yes, as I understand it. You have to have BMI and ASCAP licenses to play music from artists who are with those organizations such that the artist can collect royalties from the plays. The royalty is fairly paltry and from what I understand the licenses aren't that expensive in most cases - depends on what your business is.

A guy I knew in college had a mobile DJ business on the side playing weddings and parties and such. His BMI and ASCAP licenses cost less than $50 each, IIRC. Of course, this was 15 years ago.

yeah, if you want to use someone else's product to promote or enhance your business you need to get permission first. BMI and ASCAP have agents who go around to places and hand out c&d letters.

tnpir: Hobodeluxe: Do all dance clubs and such have to pay to have a music license? All the bars with jukeboxes?

Pretty much, yes, as I understand it. You have to have BMI and ASCAP licenses to play music from artists who are with those organizations such that the artist can collect royalties from the plays. The royalty is fairly paltry and from what I understand the licenses aren't that expensive in most cases - depends on what your business is.

A guy I knew in college had a mobile DJ business on the side playing weddings and parties and such. His BMI and ASCAP licenses cost less than $50 each, IIRC. Of course, this was 15 years ago.


It hinges on the concept of "public performance":

Sect. 110. Limitations on exclusive rights: Exemption of certain performances and displays

Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 [17 USCS Sect. 106], the following are not infringements of copyright:

...[blah blah]...

(5) communication of a transmission embodying a performance or display of a work by the public reception of the transmission on a single receiving apparatus of a kind commonly used in private homes, unless-

(A) a direct charge is made to see or hear the transmission; or

(B) the transmission thus received is further transmitted to the public;

in other words, a simple re-broadcast in a public place where you're not charging admission "for the broadcast" (new window)

Counter-example: this is why you can't charge admission to watch the Superbowl, especially if it's on a big screen. You can be crafty and "charge a cover for the food" and have it on a TV less than 55" but I wouldn't advise it.

Yo Taylor, Ima let you finish, but The Judge who sued the drycleaner for $54million had the one of the best frivilous lawsuits of all time!! OF ALL TIME!!!

So...wait, you can't turn on a radio without clearing music rights?

No, not really.

In another recent thread on this same topic, they said it was roughly $600 a year fee to each of the different licensing organizations.

My problem with it is they assume that if you have music playing that you owe them money and the money they collect is paid to the top 200 artists and not necessarily whose music is played because they don't track what was played.

GAT_00: So...wait, you can't turn on a radio without clearing music rights?

No, not really.

Well, they used to make an exception for small, home-type receivers, so if you have a radio behind the bar that's okay, but a sound system pumping music all over the place has to have a license.

GAT_00: No, not really.

Radio, yes. CD player, no.

Really, can we say it "entertained" the patrons?

Radio's cold
Soul is infected

pandabear: Radio, yes.

Nabb1: Well, they used to make an exception for small, home-type receivers, so if you have a radio behind the bar that's okay, but a sound system pumping music all over the place has to have a license.

I'm disappointed. Where's all the Taylor Swift pictures that make you want to stuff your face up her crotch?

/sadly I don't have any

Maybe Kanye should busted a cap in her ass when he had the chance...

what_now: Yo Taylor, Ima let you finish, but The Judge who sued the drycleaner for $54million had the one of the best frivilous lawsuits of all time!! OF ALL TIME!!!

And this is exactly what I came here for. Thank you, kind sir.

If you are using music in a commercial establishment, someone is getting paid. Radio, CD, jews harp...whatever.... This includes muzak crap in the jewelry store.

Hobodeluxe: Do all dance clubs and such have to pay to have a music license? All the bars with jukeboxes?

yes
jukeboxes might be covered under another license

but if you play copyrighted music to paying customers, you need to pay royalties ...

She has a legitimate case here.

Hobodeluxe: Do all dance clubs and such have to pay to have a music license? All the bars with jukeboxes?

Yes and yes.

If her songs are played on a jukebox for 50 cents a pop, she should get a cut of it.

I agree that playing a Taylor Swift song in a bar should be a criminal offense.

In two years she'll be paying them to play her music.

Yes, you need to pay a fee. If you look at the doors on a lot of places you can see a sticker indicating they've paid for the license.

lostinspace1978: If her songs are played on a jukebox for 50 cents a pop, she should get a cut of it.

She does get a cut of jukeboxes. She is probably complaining that there was a stereo or iPod playing her songs without her getting the residuals, although the article lacks specifics.

GAT_00: So...wait, you can't turn on a radio without clearing music rights?

No, not really.

That.

The venue owes her, even if they've turned on the radio. If i have friends over to my house and turn on the radio... then i owe her nothing.

I understand the legal mumbo jumbo behind this, but seriously FARK THAT! Swift kick in the ass ...*mumbles somthing not so nice*

greedy beyatches. BOOOOOO!

labman: My problem with it is they assume that if you have music playing that you owe them money and the money they collect is paid to the top 200 artists and not necessarily whose music is played because they don't track what was played.

My problem is that the artist is more likely to make more money from additional album sales that may occur due to someone hearing the music at a bar than they would getting a royalty check from ASCAP/BMI. By playing someone's music, I am advertising them - for free, but BMI/ASCAP want me to may them to be allowed to give free advertisement to the artists they represent. However, I draw the line at bands who are artist-specific cover bands. They should pay a fee if they are playing the songs for a cover charge.

pandabear: lostinspace1978: If her songs are played on a jukebox for 50 cents a pop, she should get a cut of it.

She does get a cut of jukeboxes. She is probably complaining that there was a stereo or iPod playing her songs without her getting the residuals, although the article lacks specifics.

People try to get away without paying all the time. Its easier in small, out of the way places. But BMI actually has people who work for them who's job is to find these places and shake them down.

Out of curiosity how did they narrow it down to a bar in Idaho that's not paying royalties? Surely, that can't be the only one.

Also, if I'm in a bar in Idaho and they're playing Taylor Swift to entertain me, there's not enough alcohol in the joint to numb the boredom.

So, a bar can't buy CDs and play them without obtaining a license?

She gave me the inconsequential herp.

Country music? Better get a license to cover horses who may be listening.

Tony Van Morrison: labman: My problem with it is they assume that if you have music playing that you owe them money and the money they collect is paid to the top 200 artists and not necessarily whose music is played because they don't track what was played.

My problem is that the artist is more likely to make more money from additional album sales that may occur due to someone hearing the music at a bar than they would getting a royalty check from ASCAP/BMI. By playing someone's music, I am advertising them - for free, but BMI/ASCAP want me to may them to be allowed to give free advertisement to the artists they represent. However, I draw the line at bands who are artist-specific cover bands. They should pay a fee if they are playing the songs for a cover charge.

We are assuming this tart writes her own songs though, no? Because if she doesn't she's got nothing.

Out of curiosity how did they narrow it down to a bar in Idaho that's not paying royalties? Surely, that can't be the only one.

Also, if I'm in a bar in Idaho and they're playing Taylor Swift to entertain me, there's not enough alcohol in the joint to numb the boredom.

Toby Keith ended up shutting down a bar in the town where I live in Colorado. I'm not sure if it was directly from that or not but not 6 months after he sued they were gone.

It kind of depends on the part of the country. I played in bands all over the south in the 70s, 80s and 90s and we never paid a dime in licensing fees and there were no unions to join. I hear up north, you have to do both.

labman: My problem with it is they assume that if you have music playing that you owe them money and the money they collect is paid to the top 200 artists and not necessarily whose music is played because they don't track what was played.

sure, the current cost to getting royalties to the proper bands would be insanely expensive ...

but if you were playing music from the internet, it could easily track exactly what track and when and pay the proper royalties

Nogale: So, a bar can't buy CDs and play them without obtaining a license?

NO!

Jukeboxes have their own licenses...they should be displayed somewhere...look for them.

those licenses are not cheap here in canada. I remember reading that the bill for a casino the company i then worked for to have any cover songs played or radio played for the year for the casino (which means pretty much the 2 bars and the show room) was about $20,000/year.

You know... I'd be pickled tink if some neighborhood sports bar in Idaho was playing my band's music.

Of course, this does raise the question... Why is anyone over the age of 21 listening to Taylor Swift? I can understand my kids listening to her, but they are 5 and 6.

MadSkillz: those licenses are not cheap here in canada. I remember reading that the bill for a casino the company i then worked for to have any cover songs played or radio played for the year for the casino (which means pretty much the 2 bars and the show room) was about $20,000/year.

The licenses are priced by venue capacity, IIRC. It's been a while since those music business classes.

In this case, the 'venue' may have been the entire casino and not just the showrooms.

MadSkillz: those licenses are not cheap here in canada. I remember reading that the bill for a casino the company i then worked for to have any cover songs played or radio played for the year for the casino (which means pretty much the 2 bars and the show room) was about $20,000/year.

Well that's because it was a casino and they could afford it. If it's a local bar maybe the cost would be 600 per year, night club maybe 5000 per year.

My mechanic had XM in his shop and was told to go commercial or yank it. He pulled the plug on the speakers to the waiting area and put a TV in there.

El Chode: Tony Van Morrison: labman:


We are assuming this tart writes her own songs though, no? Because if she doesn't she's got nothing.

Taylor Swift does in fact write most of, if not all of her music. She's been signed with a writing company since she was like 13 or something. So yeah...there you go.

Sounds like good business sense to me.

Was the bar advertising that Taylor Swift was in any way associated with the bar? Big sign out front saying "Taylor Swift playing here tonight"?

If not, then the MPAA can get farked.

galactus5000: Was the bar advertising that Taylor Swift was in any way associated with the bar? Big sign out front saying "Taylor Swift playing here tonight"?

If not, then the MPAA can get farked.



Copyright law does not work that way!

galactus5000: Was the bar advertising that Taylor Swift was in any way associated with the bar? Big sign out front saying "Taylor Swift playing here tonight"?

If not, then the MPAA can get farked.

They advertised "Crappy Country Pop" so everyone just assumed...

NewHairGrowth: It kind of depends on the part of the country. I played in bands all over the south in the 70s, 80s and 90s and we never paid a dime in licensing fees and there were no unions to join. I hear up north, you have to do both.

yeah well, maybe thats why you've been touring for 30 years and still posting on fark! ever think of that smartguy! and don't even get me started on unions in the south, whoooobooooyy

I'm not familiar with the law regarding public performance of copyrighted works, or why the law was made that way, but I sure do have strong opinions about this matter and intend to restate them many times over the course of this thread!