Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Cleveland Scene)   Cover band caused "great and incalculable damage" according to BMI   (clevescene.com ) divider line 240
    More: Fail, Medina, BMI, cover bands, performing rights, Rick Springfield, music licensing, brown eye, statutory damages  
•       •       •

16612 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Mar 2014 at 9:46 AM (1 year ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



240 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2014-03-23 08:32:52 AM  
Were they using 'Fat Strats' for a heavy sound?
 
2014-03-23 08:55:55 AM  
Do they have a sales tax license? Liquor? Business? Do they steal ESPN?

It ain't rocket science.
 
2014-03-23 08:56:22 AM  
DON'T PLAY FREE BIRD, MAN!
 
2014-03-23 08:58:48 AM  
 
2014-03-23 09:48:40 AM  
BMI is a lie!
 
2014-03-23 09:49:48 AM  
To a copyright lawyer, someone somewhere out there singing a song IS the end of their sad f*cking world.
 
2014-03-23 09:51:26 AM  

mutterfark: Were they using 'Fat Strats' for a heavy sound?


I was trying to think of a BMI joke and I think you nailed it, maybe.

/interesting to see one of Cleveland's free newspapers get a FARK link
/yes, we have free newspapers.  we rule.
/ironically, they did actually play free bird
 
2014-03-23 09:51:28 AM  
Fattie thread?
 
2014-03-23 09:52:48 AM  
31.media.tumblr.com
perfectlycursedlife.com
 
2014-03-23 09:53:23 AM  
No news here. If you have a bar that has music of any sort, you need to be a BMI member. They are seeking statutory damages, which means there's a standard amount of liability that's awarded so often, it doesn't even need to be documented in the lawsuit paperwork - they just cite the statute.
 
2014-03-23 09:53:49 AM  
I wish it actually did do great and incalculable damage.
 
2014-03-23 09:56:21 AM  

edmo: Do they have a sales tax license? Liquor? Business? Do they steal ESPN?

It ain't rocket science.


Right.  The reason the hundreds of other bands out there playing cover songs didn't raise concerns is because the establishments hosting them were playing by the rules.  Unless The bar is being sued for eleventy kajillion dollars or some other comically excessive amount, I don't see the problem with this.   As for the "great and incalculable damage", that's just legal-ese for "if we let them get away with it, everyone else will do the same."
 
2014-03-23 09:57:15 AM  

Relatively Obscure: I wish it actually did do great and incalculable damage.


Why?
 
2014-03-23 09:57:49 AM  
But not so incalculable as to be beyond the ability of lawyers to determine a hard figure.
 
2014-03-23 09:58:25 AM  
FTFA:

Venues where music is played - bars, restaurants, clubs, theaters, whatever - must pay a licensing fee to the licensing company or they risk facing federal lawsuits from those massive national organizations.

Don't all of those venues already know that and pay the fee? What makes this crappy bar in Cleveland such a special snowflake?
 
2014-03-23 10:00:34 AM  
Wow... I never even knew this was a thing. I wonder if its up to the band to notify the venue if they intend to play a cover when they normally to all original.
 
2014-03-23 10:00:39 AM  
If a baseball fan requests that 'Centerfield' be played at his funeral, will BMI sue the church for not having paid a licensing fee?

Fogerty wrote many fine songs, but if I never heard them again in my lifetime, I can't say I would miss them all that much.
 
2014-03-23 10:01:45 AM  
Don't judge a book just by the cover
Unless you cover just another
And blind acceptance is a sign
Of stupid fools who stand in line
Like EBMI, EBMI, EBMI...
 
2014-03-23 10:01:49 AM  
Was this the band?

www.naderlibrary.com

//hot-ish
 
2014-03-23 10:01:49 AM  

HotIgneous Intruder: But not so incalculable as to be beyond the ability of lawyers to determine a hard figure.


Nor the judge to award $1 in damages and tell them to GTFO.
 
2014-03-23 10:02:18 AM  
Turn down any gig in any bar in Medina, man. And Mecca, too.  It's a bummer.
 
2014-03-23 10:02:20 AM  
They should be punished for allowing those songs to be played, but not for this ridiculous reason.
 
2014-03-23 10:02:44 AM  

HotIgneous Intruder: But not so incalculable as to be beyond the ability of lawyers to determine a hard figure.


Never.
You now owe me a gazillion dollars.


/not a lawyer
//plays one on the internet
///sued slashies
 
2014-03-23 10:05:56 AM  

mbillips: Don't all of those venues already know that and pay the fee? What makes this crappy bar in Cleveland such a special snowflake?


This is not uncommon when someone completely alien to the industry decides to open their own restaurant. These also tend to be the same types of owners that steal tips from their servers.
 
2014-03-23 10:06:04 AM  

ThatGuyFromTheInternet: Don't judge a book just by the cover
Unless you cover just another
And blind acceptance is a sign
Of stupid fools who stand in line
Like EBMI, EBMI, EBMI...


I think this is the joke Mister Peejay was looking for.
 
2014-03-23 10:06:24 AM  

BitwiseShift: Turn down any gig in any bar in Medina, man. And Mecca, too.  It's a bummer.


The Shareef don't like it
 
2014-03-23 10:06:44 AM  
Incalculable dammage?

Okay, the defendants now owe you $0.00 USD now and forever and all those you may sue in the future can look to this judgement and owe you the same.

Ta da.
 
2014-03-23 10:07:24 AM  

mbillips: FTFA:

Venues where music is played - bars, restaurants, clubs, theaters, whatever - must pay a licensing fee to the licensing company or they risk facing federal lawsuits from those massive national organizations.

Don't all of those venues already know that and pay the fee? What makes this crappy bar in Cleveland such a special snowflake?


They didn't pay the fee I guess.
 
2014-03-23 10:07:40 AM  
Does BMI have a network of undercover moles in every bar? How do they know this happened? Any proof?
 
2014-03-23 10:08:15 AM  

Great_Milenko: Relatively Obscure: I wish it actually did do great and incalculable damage.

Why?


Because at least these lawsuits would have farking merit. As is, it's bullshiat. It's not like people are refusing to see those bands because they saw a cover band. The songs listed are mainly by non-touring or broken up bands, so you can never hear it live again. The idea that you have to pay money to play a cover song in a farking bar is retarded.
 
2014-03-23 10:08:16 AM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: DON'T PLAY FREE BIRD, MAN!


Thats odd . Freebird hasn't been cover band material for at least 20 years now .
 
2014-03-23 10:10:13 AM  

ryano913: Does BMI have a network of undercover moles in every bar? How do they know this happened? Any proof?


call the bar and ask what's playing.
 
2014-03-23 10:10:21 AM  
Sounds like the folks running the bar took a risk and lost. I'm not going to feel sorry for them, regardless of how I feel about "big music".
 
2014-03-23 10:10:33 AM  
rilm.files.wordpress.com

The bullshiat continues.
 
2014-03-23 10:11:07 AM  

Ennuipoet: Was it these guys?


I love those guys. I mean they got up there and did it LIVE!
 
2014-03-23 10:11:35 AM  

ryano913: Does BMI have a network of undercover moles in every bar? How do they know this happened? Any proof?


That's exactly what they do. I know someone who does this--go to the bar for an evening and then file a report on what music was played. The reason this bar got caught is just that they got unlucky enough for BMI to send someone there. I don't know what the basis is for deciding where to send these folks.
 
2014-03-23 10:11:49 AM  
Anyone who owns a business should know you need a license just to perform live music.  And another if you are going to be playing copyrighted songs.  One of the reasons why my bar doesn't have bands anymore.  Costs too much and rarely recuperate costs.  And too risky to get caught without licenses, especially lately in Northeast Ohio where they are trying to shut down every local music venue by exorbitant fees.
 
2014-03-23 10:12:48 AM  

Great_Milenko: Right. The reason the hundreds of other bands out there playing cover songs didn't raise concerns is because the establishments hosting them were playing by the rules. Unless The bar is being sued for eleventy kajillion dollars or some other comically excessive amount, I don't see the problem with this. As for the "great and incalculable damage", that's just legal-ese for "if we let them get away with it, everyone else will do the same."


yeah.  Next... those kids playing "Stairway To Heaven" covers in their basement.
 
2014-03-23 10:13:26 AM  

TheOther: The Shareef don't like it


He thinks it's not Kosher.
 
2014-03-23 10:14:04 AM  

MFAWG: Ennuipoet: Was it these guys?

I love those guys. I mean they got up there and did it LIVE!


What's scary is the stage size for such a crappy cover band doing The Final Countdown, makes me wonder was it part of some sort of festival or were these rich kids who are so convinced of their own talent that they decided to be ostentatious?!
 
2014-03-23 10:14:14 AM  

ryano913: Does BMI have a network of undercover moles in every bar? How do they know this happened? Any proof?


Sort of. In more metropolitan areas they have moles. In the smaller areas they're more complaint-based. Usually, it's competition that sells a rival out to BMI for bands or jukebox music.
 
2014-03-23 10:14:49 AM  
The only people complaining about this lawsuit  are those who have never created anything of value.
 
2014-03-23 10:15:25 AM  

TheOther: If a baseball fan requests that 'Centerfield' be played at his funeral, will BMI sue the church for not having paid a licensing fee?

Fogerty wrote many fine songs, but if I never heard them again in my lifetime, I can't say I would miss them all that much.


Possibly.  There is a funeral home in my hometown that had allowed its license to expire for a couple months, and there were a few families that were grief-stricken that they weren't able to play "Wind Beneath My Wings" and shiat like that during the period.
 
2014-03-23 10:16:39 AM  
WTF does Body Mass Index have to do with playing music????


/mindblown!
 
2014-03-23 10:16:56 AM  

TheOther: If a baseball fan requests that 'Centerfield' be played at his funeral, will BMI sue the church for not having paid a licensing fee?

Fogerty wrote many fine songs, but if I never heard them again in my lifetime, I can't say I would miss them all that much.


There is an exemption for churches. In the law.

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_States_Code/Title_17/Chapter_1/ Se ction_110 

/this hasn't stopped BMI from harassing them, though.
 
2014-03-23 10:17:20 AM  

Secret Agent X23: ryano913: Does BMI have a network of undercover moles in every bar? How do they know this happened? Any proof?

That's exactly what they do. I know someone who does this--go to the bar for an evening and then file a report on what music was played. The reason this bar got caught is just that they got unlucky enough for BMI to send someone there. I don't know what the basis is for deciding where to send these folks.


For "church" venues at least, there is a recording period every 3 to 4 years where the venue has to file a report about what music they used as well.  Don't know about bars, but it wouldn't surprise me if they have to do something similar as this is how BMI decides how many pennies they are going to pay songwriters.

I suggest everyone reading this thread go read about how much other groups are actually paying songwriters.  This isn't about paying artists, this is just like 99% of everything else in U.S. society right now: it's about corporate greed and that's it.
 
2014-03-23 10:17:28 AM  
BMI, ASCAP, SECAM....can all go to hell. The tactics they use are nothing short of old-school mafia "protection" scams.
 
2014-03-23 10:17:32 AM  

DarkSoulNoHope: MFAWG: Ennuipoet: Was it these guys?

I love those guys. I mean they got up there and did it LIVE!

What's scary is the stage size for such a crappy cover band doing The Final Countdown, makes me wonder was it part of some sort of festival or were these rich kids who are so convinced of their own talent that they decided to be ostentatious?!


I've always assumed the video was a sound check (hence the lack of audience) and the event was probably some kind of local festival. I don't really know, though.
 
2014-03-23 10:17:47 AM  

DarkSoulNoHope: MFAWG: Ennuipoet: Was it these guys?

I love those guys. I mean they got up there and did it LIVE!

What's scary is the stage size for such a crappy cover band doing The Final Countdown, makes me wonder was it part of some sort of festival or were these rich kids who are so convinced of their own talent that they decided to be ostentatious?!


Looks like some kind of 'Battle of The Bands' type of deal.

I sat in with a friends band once, and I can assure I wasn't any better than any of those guys.
 
2014-03-23 10:18:16 AM  

BitwiseShift: Turn down any gig in any bar in Medina, man. And Mecca, too.  It's a bummer.


Medina in Ohio rhymes with vagina.
 
2014-03-23 10:18:16 AM  

RY28: MaudlinMutantMollusk: DON'T PLAY FREE BIRD, MAN!

Thats odd . Freebird hasn't been cover band material for at least 20 years now .


Apparently the cover band in TFA missed the memo
 
2014-03-23 10:18:47 AM  

ryano913: Does BMI have a network of undercover moles in every bar? How do they know this happened? Any proof?


This is how people in witness protection make a living. They work on commission. It's usually the guy yelling "Play Melacholy Baby."
 
2014-03-23 10:19:03 AM  

Lokkii: The only people complaining about this lawsuit  are those who have never created anything of value.


oh dear. you need to shut up and go sit down over there.

//produced dozens of DVDs...
///just TRY to properly license music as a "little guy" and see how far you get
 
2014-03-23 10:19:24 AM  

ryano913: Does BMI have a network of undercover moles in every bar? How do they know this happened? Any proof?


They probably look at the business license listings of cities and counties, check their records for matching entries in the license database, and after they find a gap, start looking at Facebook to see if there's evidence of activity.
It doesn't cost much to send a local college kid down to do an initial investigation and email a cell-phone video clip.
After that, they can start sending letters asking for their toll.
I think the three major licensors have territory divided p pretty well and cooperate, sharing each other's databases to see if there's any non-overlaps.
 
2014-03-23 10:21:47 AM  
I've played in bands (bass, mostly) and had done countless covers over the years until I was at a happy hour with my brother-in-law, who is an attorney.  We were listening to some Joe Schmo playing a Jimmy Buffet song, when he opened my eyes to the BMI issue.

/even played "Free Bird" once as a retort, after some drunk frat boys called out for it, as a lame joke
 
2014-03-23 10:22:00 AM  
I've been playing in cover bands for most of my adult life. I've played the Bitter End, Maxwell's etc... but mostly I play in dive bars in Northern NJ/NYC. Am I understanding this correctly that those little corner bars have to pay a fee to BMI?
 
2014-03-23 10:22:37 AM  
That makes me want to go download some tunes.
 
2014-03-23 10:22:44 AM  

darch: I've been playing in cover bands for most of my adult life. I've played the Bitter End, Maxwell's etc... but mostly I play in dive bars in Northern NJ/NYC. Am I understanding this correctly that those little corner bars have to pay a fee to BMI?


Answer: yes... if they want to be within the law.
 
2014-03-23 10:23:00 AM  

browser_snake: No news here. If you have a bar that has music of any sort, you need to be a BMI member. They are seeking statutory damages, which means there's a standard amount of liability that's awarded so often, it doesn't even need to be documented in the lawsuit paperwork - they just cite the statute.


Not quite music of any sort, we have a local bar that hosts live bands, the rule is no covers, only original compositions so you can imagine how bad some of the music is (though you do get the occasional gem mixed in), regardless they received a demand letter from BMI who claimed to own copyright on several of the songs, they backed down when they found out that the bar kept recordings of every performance and had copies of all the named bands copyright filings on their songs. One semi amusing thing that happened was that a couple of the bands that BMI named in their original demand letter as having played covers of BMI songs filed Slander of Title suits against BMI, never did find out what happened with those
 
2014-03-23 10:24:47 AM  
They had it coming, any band who plays "talk dirty to me' by Poison. Should be sent to Gitmo or somewhere equally heinous.
 
2014-03-23 10:24:54 AM  

TV's Vinnie: To a copyright lawyer, someone somewhere out there singing a song IS the end of their sad f*cking world.


To Al Franken it is. He was placed into the Senate to ensure the entertainment industry is protected. He is why we will lose Net Neutrality too.
 
2014-03-23 10:25:00 AM  

d23: Secret Agent X23: ryano913: Does BMI have a network of undercover moles in every bar? How do they know this happened? Any proof?

That's exactly what they do. I know someone who does this--go to the bar for an evening and then file a report on what music was played. The reason this bar got caught is just that they got unlucky enough for BMI to send someone there. I don't know what the basis is for deciding where to send these folks.

For "church" venues at least, there is a recording period every 3 to 4 years where the venue has to file a report about what music they used as well.  Don't know about bars, but it wouldn't surprise me if they have to do something similar as this is how BMI decides how many pennies they are going to pay songwriters.

I suggest everyone reading this thread go read about how much other groups are actually paying songwriters.  This isn't about paying artists, this is just like 99% of everything else in U.S. society right now: it's about corporate greed and that's it.



All of these licensing companies expect bars to pay a fee if they have ANY noise playing in their establishment. Even a radio in the kitchen is subject to their discretion. They will contact bar owners, daily, and remind them that they should be paying dues to make sure they are covered in the event one of the songs licensed by them is played and customers can hear it.

Nights, like this one, where a bar owner isn't paying "dues", and one of these companies just "happens" to be in attendance....well...this is the result.
 
2014-03-23 10:25:31 AM  
Something that could easily be avoided by not playing any of that stupid music. Or either, pay, play something original or do without any music.
 
2014-03-23 10:26:18 AM  

durbnpoisn: Wow... I never even knew this was a thing. I wonder if its up to the band to notify the venue if they intend to play a cover when they normally to all original.


Yep, even churches have to pay to allow people to come in and sing gospel songs or be in violation.
 
2014-03-23 10:26:41 AM  
Are there any bigger drama queens than the giant music licensing organizations?

No. No there are not. Even Perez Hilton and Chris Crocker look at this shiat and go "Whoa, man, settle down."
 
2014-03-23 10:27:22 AM  
Lawyers never lose.
 
2014-03-23 10:28:18 AM  
♫ Happy Birthday to you!
Happy Birthday to you!
Happy Birthday dear Soandso!
Happy Birthday to you! ♫

img2.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2014-03-23 10:28:53 AM  
♫ ♪ Happy Birthday to you, Happy Birthday to you,  ....... ♪

www.maricopa.gov
 
2014-03-23 10:28:57 AM  
I'm pretty sure that number zero is perfectly calculable.
 
2014-03-23 10:29:43 AM  

Nemo's Brother: To Al Franken it is. He was placed into the Senate to ensure the entertainment industry is protected. He is why we will lose Net Neutrality too.


Come again?
 
2014-03-23 10:29:58 AM  

edibobb: That makes me want to go download some tunes.


Yup, makes me want to go through my music collection and torrent all the BMI stuff.
 
2014-03-23 10:30:36 AM  

d23: darch: I've been playing in cover bands for most of my adult life. I've played the Bitter End, Maxwell's etc... but mostly I play in dive bars in Northern NJ/NYC. Am I understanding this correctly that those little corner bars have to pay a fee to BMI?

Answer: yes... if they want to be within the law.


Sheesh- I pride myself on being pretty aware of stuff, but this one made it right past me. Had no idea.
 
2014-03-23 10:31:04 AM  

AltheaToldMe: Nemo's Brother: To Al Franken it is. He was placed into the Senate to ensure the entertainment industry is protected. He is why we will lose Net Neutrality too.

Come again?


I was still wiping off my monitor

/WTF?
//That's not what I've heard
 
2014-03-23 10:31:07 AM  

ryano913: Does BMI have a network of undercover moles in every bar? How do they know this happened? Any proof?


Yes.  Not in every bar of course, but they make rounds.  We have a haunted house ride we run at Halloween in Oxford, AL, and in the queue area we have a stereo playing songs like Monster Mash and Thriller and what not.  There was a dude that showed up and started writing stuff down in a notebook and acting weird and out of place.  After a little while, he went back to his car and started calling people.  A few days later the BMI thing showed up in the mail.  It was fairly benign, mostly just asking us to either cease playing BMI music, or buy a license, which was a few hundred dollars.
 
2014-03-23 10:32:45 AM  
I will say it appears that the bar screwed up.

But I think there is a bigger problem. These types of actions have caused a lot of places to stop having live music. That is bad. I think there are too few places where you can see people performing. There should be rules so that musicians, who do not earn the majority of their income from entertaining, can earn an exemption for the bar/venue. Because there is no way a band like in the FTA caused anyone to seek them out.

I can see BMI deserving a cut if the main reason you filled the house was the music. And as a amateur musician I fully see the artists point of view. But when your rules have the effect of reducing the pie for everyone, then there is a problem.
 
WGJ [TotalFark]
2014-03-23 10:35:00 AM  
The real crime here is BMI collecting $944 million and only distributing $814 million to songwriters, composers, and music publishers. And I'm guessing the publishers get most of that money as well.
 
2014-03-23 10:35:13 AM  
-Horatio, a corporate giant is setting it's sights and lawyers on a small bar in Medina.
-Slow down. There are two sides to this case:.....*puts on sunglasses*  funky and cold.

/brb, have to write some checks for licensing rights for this comment
 
2014-03-23 10:35:47 AM  
Great and incalculable damage. The incalculable part means they don't want to calculate it. If they did the damage would amount to $1,
 
2014-03-23 10:36:16 AM  

edmo: Do they have a sales tax license? Liquor? Business? Do they steal ESPN?


Does the Alcoholic Beverage Commission demand a fee per drink, over and above the original license fee, if the bar is very successful?  If patrons drink more, does the ABC get more?  Same with the business license.

Make it a flat fee, and the licensing agencies (BMI, etc.) should be non-profits!  Why should BMI get $130M in profit?  Shouldn't that money go to the songwriters????
 
2014-03-23 10:36:21 AM  
For the record, most bar owners aren't aware of this silly law for one reason. The source of their music (jukeboxes) are provided by 3rd party vendors who obtain these licenses for them. I would think if the jukebox has a license it should cover any live music played there as well. Problem solved.

/also, support your local scene. Don't hire parrots.
//also problem solved.
 
2014-03-23 10:37:29 AM  
I don't get why some people are upset. If you own a commercial venue that draws a financial benefit from someone else's property, it seems only normal that you should have to pay them a share. It's not even a large share.

A friend of mine who used to own a bistrot had to pay a license because he had the radio on.
 
2014-03-23 10:37:43 AM  

italie: d23: Secret Agent X23: ryano913: Does BMI have a network of undercover moles in every bar? How do they know this happened? Any proof?

That's exactly what they do. I know someone who does this--go to the bar for an evening and then file a report on what music was played. The reason this bar got caught is just that they got unlucky enough for BMI to send someone there. I don't know what the basis is for deciding where to send these folks.

For "church" venues at least, there is a recording period every 3 to 4 years where the venue has to file a report about what music they used as well.  Don't know about bars, but it wouldn't surprise me if they have to do something similar as this is how BMI decides how many pennies they are going to pay songwriters.

I suggest everyone reading this thread go read about how much other groups are actually paying songwriters.  This isn't about paying artists, this is just like 99% of everything else in U.S. society right now: it's about corporate greed and that's it.


All of these licensing companies expect bars to pay a fee if they have ANY noise playing in their establishment. Even a radio in the kitchen is subject to their discretion. They will contact bar owners, daily, and remind them that they should be paying dues to make sure they are covered in the event one of the songs licensed by them is played and customers can hear it.

Nights, like this one, where a bar owner isn't paying "dues", and one of these companies just "happens" to be in attendance....well...this is the result.


This is exactly why the background music over the speakers in my place is via a  SiriusXM Business Internet Radio player. If anyone asks I can tell them to EABOD's, we're legal. The subscription covers royalty fees and allows me to play it in our business.
 
2014-03-23 10:38:13 AM  
My town (Hoboken, NJ) has the most bars of any similarly-sized town in the country and most of them don't have live music anymore. It's a shame. Am thinking that this silliness might have something to do with it.
 
2014-03-23 10:40:41 AM  
What is a Kasbah and did they rock it ?
 
2014-03-23 10:41:29 AM  

Nemo's Brother: TV's Vinnie: To a copyright lawyer, someone somewhere out there singing a song IS the end of their sad f*cking world.

To Al Franken it is. He was placed into the Senate to ensure the entertainment industry is protected. He is why we will lose Net Neutrality too.


wow, all by his lonesome? he's really powerful.
 
2014-03-23 10:42:33 AM  

darch: My town (Hoboken, NJ) has the most bars of any similarly-sized town in the country and most of them don't have live music anymore. It's a shame. Am thinking that this silliness might have something to do with it.


Also live music is freaking expensive. Most places that do it these days have the band play for the door. Bars that don't charge cover generally lose their asses on a band.
 
2014-03-23 10:43:25 AM  

Geoff Peterson: For the record, most bar owners aren't aware of this silly law for one reason. The source of their music (jukeboxes) are provided by 3rd party vendors who obtain these licenses for them. I would think if the jukebox has a license it should cover any live music played there as well. Problem solved.

/also, support your local scene. Don't hire parrots.
//also problem solved.


Bar owners are most certainly aware. BMI and the rest make them very aware. Often to the point of harassment.

This has become a big point of contention as most jukeboxes now support the in house TV's/PA/etc. Bar owners and licensing companies are in a battle over this, as the license only covers items provided by the juke. Bar owners are expected to pay a fee on top of that for anything that that might be put over the amps in the juke from an outside source like a TV/satellite radio/etc. Bar owners are often not doing so, sometimes with right...sometimes not.
 
2014-03-23 10:43:31 AM  

capt.hollister: I don't get why some people are upset. If you own a commercial venue that draws a financial benefit from someone else's property, it seems only normal that you should have to pay them a share. It's not even a large share.

A friend of mine who used to own a bistrot had to pay a license because he had the radio on.


So the rights holders got paid by the radio station *and* the bistro *for the same broadcast*. You said it yourself, but you're confused.

Hm?
 
2014-03-23 10:43:45 AM  
If they can't calculate the damages, then the suit should be dismissed.

"Your honor, we can't even calculate the damage!"

"Then how do you expect this court to assess damages? Case dismissed."
 
2014-03-23 10:45:08 AM  

Geoff Peterson: darch: My town (Hoboken, NJ) has the most bars of any similarly-sized town in the country and most of them don't have live music anymore. It's a shame. Am thinking that this silliness might have something to do with it.

Also live music is freaking expensive. Most places that do it these days have the band play for the door. Bars that don't charge cover generally lose their asses on a band.


Absolutely. I actually just play for free these days. If the bar buys back, all the better, but I find that it's not really worth it to argue with the bar owner. I just set up, pound the fark out of my drums and leave.
 
2014-03-23 10:45:45 AM  

Mirandized: If they can't calculate the damages, then the suit should be dismissed.

"Your honor, we can't even calculate the damage!"

"Then how do you expect this court to assess damages? Case dismissed."


No, you set policy.

"Incalculable" means $0.00 and the case becomes a benchmark.
 
2014-03-23 10:47:20 AM  

WGJ: The real crime here is BMI collecting $944 million and only distributing $814 million to songwriters, composers, and music publishers. And I'm guessing the publishers get most of that money as well.


In many cases, the songwriter IS the publisher. And as far as the money is concerned, BMI administers songwriting royalties for thousands of artists all around the world, calculating usage and distributing payment. And they don't charge the artists a penny for it up front. So I for one have no problem with them taking some off the top for administrative expenses.

/BMI songwriter since 1991
 
2014-03-23 10:48:26 AM  
Dont songs become public domain after a certain amount of time
 
2014-03-23 10:48:31 AM  
I ain't got no problem with writers getting royalites.  Publishing is one of the last reasons to commecially relase music in an era where, as soon as you've sold 100 CDs, there's 2938745985748 copies available for free.  "Great and incalcuable damage"?  From some band covering CCR and Van Morrison in a beer joint in Medina?  Oh, Prunella, how you DO go on.
 
2014-03-23 10:50:33 AM  
Maybe small bar owners should get together and file a class-action against BMI. It sounds like a classic protection racket.
 
2014-03-23 10:50:58 AM  

Mirandized: If they can't calculate the damages, then the suit should be dismissed.

"Your honor, we can't even calculate the damage!"

"Then how do you expect this court to assess damages? Case dismissed."


Sort of related: I was on the jury in a civil case recently where the plaintiffs wanted a cash settlement, but pointedly avoided saying how much they wanted.

"What were your damages, exactly?"
"Whatever the jury thinks is appropriate."

How about zero? Does zero work for you? We told them to get farked. If you want monetary compensation, at a minimum you should be able to say how much you want.
 
2014-03-23 10:50:59 AM  

italie: Bar owners are most certainly aware. BMI and the rest make them very aware. Often to the point of harassment.


This is true. I stand corrected.
 
2014-03-23 10:54:35 AM  
Justin Beiber was singing songs on YouTube.   Sue him.  He has lots of money
 
2014-03-23 10:55:15 AM  

BluVeinThrobber: Dont songs become public domain after a certain amount of time



When Copyright Protection Becomes Public Domain
The data below will let you know when you can safely use a piece of art or music without permission because it is now in public domain after copyright protection expiration, or how long the copyright protection will last.

Published before 1923 - now in public domain

Published from 1923 to 1963 - When published with a copyright notice © or "Copyright [dates] by [author/owner]" - copyright protection lasts 28 years and could be renewed for an additional 67 years for a total of 95 years. If not renewed, now in public domain.

Published from 1923 to 1963 - When published with no notice - now in public domain

Published from 1964 to 1977 - When published with notice - copyright protection lasts 28 years for first term; automatic extension of 67 years for second term for a total of 95 years.

Created before 1/1/1978 but not published - copyright notice is irrelevant - copyright protection lasts for the life of author and 70 years or 12/31/2002, whichever is greater

Created before 1/1/1978 and published between 1/1/1978 and 12/31/2002 - notice is irrelevant - copyright protection lasts the life of author and 70 years or 12/31/2047, whichever is greater

Created 1/1/1978 or after - When work is fixed in tangible medium of expression - notice is irrelevant - copyright protecion lasts for the life of author and 70 years based on the the longest living author if jointly created or if work of corporate authorship, works for hire, or anonymous and pseudonymous works, the shorter of 95 years from publication, or 120 years from creation.
 
2014-03-23 10:57:06 AM  

italie: BMI, ASCAP, SECAM....can all go to hell. The tactics they use are nothing short of old-school mafia "protection" scams.


I have dealt with all three, buy a license from any of them and want to cancel it. fark no, you have to show proof that you either A.Went out of business and will no longer play any music, B.Provide a PLaylist of songs you will be playing so they can make sure your in compliance and not playing any of their covered songs, C. Provide the contract for the other Licensing company your going to be using. If you cant do 1 of these 3 they tell you to fark off and keep giving me all your money.
 
2014-03-23 10:57:54 AM  
Pribar:
Not quite music of any sort, we have a local bar that hosts live bands, the rule is no covers, only original compositions so you can imagine how bad some of the music is (though you do get the occasional gem mixed in), regardless they received a demand letter from BMI who claimed to own copyright on several of the songs, they backed down when they found out that the bar kept recordings of every performance and had copies of all the named bands copyright filings on their songs. One semi amusing thing that happened was that a couple of the bands that BMI named in their original demand letter as having played covers of BMI songs filed Slander of Title suits against BMI, never did find out what happened with those

As someone who works for a company that is frequently getting hit with lawsuits for made-up environmental and occupational safety violations, usually by people who haven't even been in my state, I hope BMI got hung from their toes for that shenanigan.

Probably just wrist-slapped and told to be more careful next time.
 
2014-03-23 10:59:11 AM  

doglover: Mirandized: If they can't calculate the damages, then the suit should be dismissed.

"Your honor, we can't even calculate the damage!"

"Then how do you expect this court to assess damages? Case dismissed."

No, you set policy.

"Incalculable" means $0.00 and the case becomes a benchmark.


I like that even better. I don't believe BMI and the others add anything of value to the product, and they are the cause of copyrights becoming almost perpetual. At some point the public is best served by the copyright expiring.
 
2014-03-23 10:59:30 AM  
This is why my DVD copies of Northern Exposure sound nothing like my pirated versions of Northern Exposure and why it took so damned LONG for it to come out on DVD in the first place.
 
2014-03-23 11:04:10 AM  
The next big thing in bars.....Total Silence
 
2014-03-23 11:04:25 AM  
The judge should award them incalculable damages. Perhaps a shrubbery.
 
2014-03-23 11:09:31 AM  
This is why you don't see shiatty little cover bands in every bar on Friday night anymore.  And I miss that.
 
2014-03-23 11:14:18 AM  

BluVeinThrobber: The next big thing in bars.....Total Silence


Good.  That will make it all the easier to pick out which dumbass 19-year-old with low self-esteem is telling her friends "Oh God! I'm SO DRUNK!"
 
2014-03-23 11:15:24 AM  

unitednihilists: They had it coming, any band who plays "talk dirty to me' by Poison. Should be sent to Gitmo or somewhere equally heinous.


Exactly. The bar should just argue the band was was just doing a parody by making fun of all these cheesy old played out songs and the aging rockers that composed them. Bonus if the lead singer is bald and wears a bandana on his head.
 
2014-03-23 11:16:30 AM  

Fuggin Bizzy: capt.hollister: I don't get why some people are upset. If you own a commercial venue that draws a financial benefit from someone else's property, it seems only normal that you should have to pay them a share. It's not even a large share.

A friend of mine who used to own a bistrot had to pay a license because he had the radio on.

So the rights holders got paid by the radio station *and* the bistro *for the same broadcast*. You said it yourself, but you're confused.

Hm?


Not confused. Just different laws in Canada, I think. If you are a business that plays radio for its customers, you pay a small license fee.
 
MFK
2014-03-23 11:17:40 AM  
The licensing fee, which this bar seems to have not paid, is relatively inexpensive and covers your ass against shiat like this. the Performing Rights Orgs like BMI, ASCAP and SESAC are how musicians get royalties for the use of their music. This particular bar seems to think that he shouldn't have to pay for having music in his establishment and is basically stealing it.  You can't go into a record store and say "I want to have that album by the Rolling Stones playing in my house" and just walk out the door with it without paying. It's kind of the same thing here. Most establishments that feature music aren't ignorant dickbags and pay the couple hundred bucks a year that allows them license to do whatever they want, but every now and again, you get a guy like this owner who thinks he shouldn't have to pay for the entertainment/atmosphere he offers his clientele so the PROs have to make a big stink about it and take him to court in order to make an example so others don't do the same thing.
 
2014-03-23 11:19:51 AM  

rolladuck: BluVeinThrobber: The next big thing in bars.....Total Silence

Good.  That will make it all the easier to pick out which dumbass 19-year-old with low self-esteem is telling her friends "Oh God! I'm SO DRUNK!"


Easier pickins
 
2014-03-23 11:21:58 AM  
Farking parasites.
 
MFK
2014-03-23 11:23:52 AM  

Stoker: Farking parasites.


yeah, the musicians who spent all the time and money crafting, recording and distributing the music you want to hear when you go out to the bar are farking parasites for demanding compensation from people who use their work in their commercial endeavors.
 
2014-03-23 11:24:24 AM  

d23: Lokkii: The only people complaining about this lawsuit are those who have never created anything of value.oh dear. you need to shut up and go sit down over there.//produced dozens of DVDs...///just TRY to properly license music as a "little guy" and see how far you get


Ok, maybe what Lokkii should have said was: "...anything that is of value to another human being".
 
2014-03-23 11:25:12 AM  
Rock and pop music grew to great prominence and became the de-facto American musical form in a way that is usually antithetical to art and music flourishing.  A lot of culture comes to the fore in spite of commerce, but rock and roll, and those little 45's that sounded like hell and AM radio and all of the venues that supported it got huge BECAUSE people voted with their wallets.  It became a huge growth industry and it allowed for nice, old fat men in expensive suits to say "yeah, throw money at anybody who needs a haircut.  The kids love this stuff."  The label made money, the publishers made money, the bands made money, the venues made money.

Alles gut.  But you have to understand something.  Nothing in America survives, no religion, no art, no culture, no "movement", unless it moves money around.  Period.  So this was the perfect place for a huge industry to grow up around the kids forking over their lunch money for that new single.  This was implicitly how it worked.

And all in all, it worked well.  It allowed new artists to whang away at whatever their take on the music was and still eat and live indoors.  If you got a label deal, you essentially bumped up to the minors and had a chance to swing for the center field wall.  If you knocked one out of the park, you made it.  But here's WHY you made it.  People bought your records.  When the money flows in ANY given economy, it lifts all boats.  If you don't believe me, look at the pissant excuse for an economy we have now with 90% of the capital sitting comfortably up the asses of 1% of the people in the country.  The money isn't flowing.  It's static.  And unless you're in one of about 700 families clutching it like it was the antidote, you're probably not doing so hot.

And what flipped the off switch on this round robin of artist creates, records, gets paid, label gets paid, signs more artists?   Digital.  Digital, and to ay otherwise is ridiculous, took the money out of the equation because any mook with a torrent client, the P@P sites having been handily dismantled by kiddy fiddlers, can get your CD - the one you and your record label put a lot of money into to create - for free.  Eff Arr Eee Eee.  And that means making recordings is now a hobby.  Which is why that "way cool band that only you and your hippest friends know about" are playing some joint with 30 people in it and selling T-Shirts, CDs and hot sauce for a living.

So, what's left?  Publishing.  If you have songs that people play in bars, you get a performance royalty.  And that's a consolation prize, but it helps pay bills.  Is BMI full of sh*t?  Yeah, essentially.  So's ASCAP and the rest of them.  Are the people who say "OMG I am their biggest fan!" and never laid down 9.99 for the f*cking CD but have 8 copies of it, full of sh*t?  Yeah.  Are bar owners full of sh*t when they say they shouldn't have to oink up a few bucks to pay a few royalties, the stupid amount they are billed for them, not withstandinfg?  Pretty much.

The music isn't new anymore.  The form has arced and peaked.  And you really want to keep rock and roll alive and well, you're gonna have to start voting with your wallets again and BMI is going to have to stop getting blood from a stone.  I ain't holding my breath.
 
2014-03-23 11:26:05 AM  

FlashHarry: WGJ: The real crime here is BMI collecting $944 million and only distributing $814 million to songwriters, composers, and music publishers. And I'm guessing the publishers get most of that money as well.

In many cases, the songwriter IS the publisher. And as far as the money is concerned, BMI administers songwriting royalties for thousands of artists all around the world, calculating usage and distributing payment. And they don't charge the artists a penny for it up front. So I for one have no problem with them taking some off the top for administrative expenses.

/BMI songwriter since 1991


Write anything we'd know?
 
2014-03-23 11:29:20 AM  
The cover band is not responsible for the license fees: the venue is. This is pretty common knowledge and I'm guessing that 69 Taps has been being a jerk about paying the licensing fee.

As annoying and as seemingly unreasonable it is, it's the law. Don't want to pay the fee" don't play the music.

I used to have a place where I was the only musician to perform (cocktail piano) and, yes, I had to pay the licensing fee. The BMI rep wasn't a jerk about it; it was just business. No threats.

I also had this conversation a few times:

"How much do you get paid to play here?"
"Not very much [grin], why?"
"If you join the union, we can make the scumbag owner pay you more."
"Probably not. I'm also the scumbag owner. Any other benefits to union membership?"
"Oh, forget it."
 
2014-03-23 11:32:13 AM  

Lokkii: The only people complaining about this lawsuit  are those who have never created anything of value.


If a good deal of this money trying to be recouped were going to the original artists, or original song writers, then people would be "OK, that's cool".

Since I believe most of it just goes to bloat BMI, that is why people complain and don't have sympathy.
 
2014-03-23 11:35:06 AM  

dletter: I believe most of it just goes to bloat BMI


Acttually, and it's difficult to believe, no.  They are constantly audited by all of their member artists and their publishing concerns.
 
2014-03-23 11:40:32 AM  

Great_Milenko: edmo: Do they have a sales tax license? Liquor? Business? Do they steal ESPN?

It ain't rocket science.

Right.  The reason the hundreds of other bands out there playing cover songs didn't raise concerns is because the establishments hosting them were playing by the rules.  Unless The bar is being sued for eleventy kajillion dollars or some other comically excessive amount, I don't see the problem with this.   As for the "great and incalculable damage", that's just legal-ese for "if we let them get away with it, everyone else will do the same."


...and that's why people think lawyers are scum.
 
2014-03-23 11:41:12 AM  

doglover: Mirandized: If they can't calculate the damages, then the suit should be dismissed.

"Your honor, we can't even calculate the damage!"

"Then how do you expect this court to assess damages? Case dismissed."

No, you set policy.

"Incalculable" means $0.00 and the case becomes a benchmark.


Wouldn't it become a benchmark that sets precedence in that there was damage, and the value of that damage is zero? Every case after that would point to no damages being awarded.
 
2014-03-23 11:41:45 AM  

dletter: Lokkii: The only people complaining about this lawsuit  are those who have never created anything of value.

If a good deal of this money trying to be recouped were going to the original artists, or original song writers, then people would be "OK, that's cool".

Since I believe most of it just goes to bloat BMI, that is why people complain and don't have sympathy.


People would probably have more sympathy if they had a choice in the matter.  Kinda like some form of competition in the business, rather than just "pay these guys, and whatever happens, happens."

Like when Chik-fil-A went all anti-gay-derpy, I had the choice to say, "That's fine, Popeyes is good enough for me".  And when Wal-Mart pays their floor employees shiat and treats them like shiat, I have the choice to say, "That's fine, the Target a mile over is cleaner and their young cashiers are hotter and don't look like they have scurvy."

I know sometimes it gets into an oligopolist situation, but those are always vulnerable to one member deciding that it's time to screw over the rest.  And they all know it.

Currently, the music license situation, thanks to (effectively) perpetual copyright, is a nicely bundled monopoly that nobody can vote against except by forgoing that form of entertainment.  That's the point at which it ceases to serve the public good.

The rules should be re-evaluated, re-built, and the Mouse should butt the fark out while they do that.
 
2014-03-23 11:42:54 AM  

wambu: As annoying and as seemingly unreasonable it is, it's the law


cdn5.business-opportunities.biz
 
2014-03-23 11:43:39 AM  

MFK: Stoker: Farking parasites.

yeah, the musicians who spent all the time and money crafting, recording and distributing the music you want to hear when you go out to the bar are farking parasites for demanding compensation from people who use their work in their commercial endeavors.


I am fairly certain that the actual artists themselves earn either zero or very little of any licensing fee for public performances. This is pretty much all the publisher. I don't see the harm, really. Most of the bands in question did exactly the same thing, and I guarantee you paid $0 in licensing fees. The bigger problem is that cover and tribute bands are boring and unoriginal. Even if you cover the song well, it's a bad copy on the best of days. Yeah, you got that guitar solo, but hearing Jimmy Page improvise in his own concerts is something these bands can never do. I get copyrights. I just think they are retarded in how they are implemented.

So should we just cover dead people? No one is alive from the Jimi Hendrix Experience. But I bet that if there was a cover band in the subject bar, they would ask for money just the same.
 
2014-03-23 11:44:52 AM  

rolladuck: the Mouse should butt the fark out while they do that.


The mouse is the biggest record label on the planet and is kicking phat ass in an era when the "majors" and considering T-Shirt franchises.
 
2014-03-23 11:48:02 AM  

PC LOAD LETTER: I am fairly certain that the actual artists themselves earn either zero or very little of any licensing fee for public performances. This is pretty much all the publisher


And that's why there are now several mobillion "publishing" companies that consist of cat with guitar and songs written by cat with guitar.  Cheap to charter and file and you own your own publishing.  Ray Charles was the first dude to own his master reels from a major.  After a lot of spandex farmers woke up to realize that they got .02 USD per song performance or sale and their publishers got .98 USD, they wised up.
 
2014-03-23 11:48:33 AM  
That's quite a varied repertoire.
 
2014-03-23 11:48:50 AM  

ryano913: Does BMI have a network of undercover moles in every bar? How do they know this happened? Any proof?


They do have agents.  Bars that don't pay the licensing fee try to get away with it by saying "We only have original music, no covers" and hope nobody checks up on them.

italie: BMI, ASCAP, SECAM....can all go to hell. The tactics they use are nothing short of old-school mafia "protection" scams.


You may not realize that those three agencies are the only ones that pay the songwriters anything.  RIAA is looking out for the record labels, BMI et. al. represent the songwriters.
 
2014-03-23 11:51:05 AM  

TheOther: BitwiseShift: Turn down any gig in any bar in Medina, man. And Mecca, too.  It's a bummer.

The Shareef don't like it


Nice
 
2014-03-23 11:51:22 AM  
This should be at the beginning of any copyright discussion.The copyright clause of the Constitution"

Congress shall have the right to ... promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.

No one even considers that popular music is neither science nor useful arts, but frivolous entertainment. It is also not a discovery, and only sheet music constitutes a writing. Locking up ideas as property is ultimately no less a form of censorship than trying to suppress them. If I cannot say or write things that have been said or written before or even something similar because those words are someone's private property, then I do not have freedom of speech or freedom of the press. The original 1790 copyright law kept this in mind when limiting a copyright to 14 years, renewable once for a total of 28 years if the author were still living. Now, with Disney bribing another extension out of Congress every time Steamboat Willie is about to revert back to the public domain, where ideas once publicly expressed naturally belong, copyright is essentially perpetual and no longer tied to the original author.

It is worth noting that ASCAP and BMI money usually goes to record labels, not artists. How does that promote the progress of science and the useful arts? It doesn't. Copyright has gone against its very stated purpose in the Constitution ever since the 1790 statute was expanded. It may have never served that purpose. The worlds first copyright law, Queen Anne's Law in the UK, was about censorship and nothing else. The ruling class were afraid the Gutenberg printing press threatened their base of power. Copyright is incompatible with freedom of expression.
 
2014-03-23 11:51:26 AM  

MFK: The licensing fee, which this bar seems to have not paid, is relatively inexpensive and covers your ass against shiat like this. the Performing Rights Orgs like BMI, ASCAP and SESAC are how musicians get royalties for the use of their music. This particular bar seems to think that he shouldn't have to pay for having music in his establishment and is basically stealing it.  You can't go into a record store and say "I want to have that album by the Rolling Stones playing in my house" and just walk out the door with it without paying. It's kind of the same thing here. Most establishments that feature music aren't ignorant dickbags and pay the couple hundred bucks a year that allows them license to do whatever they want, but every now and again, you get a guy like this owner who thinks he shouldn't have to pay for the entertainment/atmosphere he offers his clientele so the PROs have to make a big stink about it and take him to court in order to make an example so others don't do the same thing.


Often the problem to a bar owner isn't the paying of a fee. It's paying  three or more fees. You have three major companies, all attempting to collect the same money. A bar owner has little control over what might be played over airwaves (unless he has something like the Sirius box mentioned). You generally aren't fully "Legal" unless you are paying all three, covering all the songs any of them may license.

//Correction to previous post "SESAC"
///Always forget the acronym on that one
 
2014-03-23 11:52:53 AM  

blair1: You may not realize that those three agencies are the only ones that pay the songwriters anything


Define "anything"?
 
2014-03-23 11:54:39 AM  
Well, I think the lesson here is: Be in a band(or own a bar that hosts bands) that play original material, and aren't trying to scrape up 50 year old cooze to the tune of Jesse's Girl.
 
2014-03-23 11:54:59 AM  

Ennuipoet: Was it these guys?


Came for The Final Countdown, leaving.
 
2014-03-23 11:55:02 AM  

uncoveror: No one even considers that popular music is neither science nor useful arts, but frivolous entertainment. It is also not a discovery, and only sheet music constitutes a writing. Locking up ideas as property is ultimately no less a form of censorship than trying to suppress them.


And any attorney who could find his ass with both hands would handily argue that into the dirt in about 3 minutes.  This gray area is the very gist of the law as an arguable construct.
 
2014-03-23 11:59:03 AM  

neongoats: Well, I think the lesson here is: Be in a band(or own a bar that hosts bands) that play original material, and aren't trying to scrape up 50 year old cooze to the tune of Jesse's Girl.


This, and mainly because cover and tribute bands suck. "Wow, he did the scream well from Won't Get Fooled Again" is a low bar to set. The Iron Maidens have a huge following because they are incredibly hot aside from being good musicians. But all these bands play to the album or a well-known live performance. Boring.
 
2014-03-23 12:02:38 PM  
Labels were never anything more than investment banks offering per client contracts with advances, fees, and profit distribution agreements.  Labels care about what people think is "the best music" as much as GM cares about what people think is "the best car".  Just move units.  Organizations who collect sales and performance and air royalties are nothing more than the goon at the door with a clicker and a hand stamp.  And for  while, it worked when people still payed for recordings.
 
2014-03-23 12:03:19 PM  

darch: My town (Hoboken, NJ) has the most bars of any similarly-sized town in the country and most of them don't have live music anymore. It's a shame. Am thinking that this silliness might have something to do with it.


It does.  My dad used to play in a folk band as a hobby, but they pretty much stopped when the bar they played in ran afoul of this same thing.  The extra bullshiat there being that they were a trad band, and the songs they were playing were mostly written by people who died before there ever was such a damn thing as the BMI.
 
2014-03-23 12:03:37 PM  

PC LOAD LETTER: The Iron Maidens


EXCELLENT!!!

www.billandted.org
 
2014-03-23 12:03:40 PM  

PC LOAD LETTER: neongoats: Well, I think the lesson here is: Be in a band(or own a bar that hosts bands) that play original material, and aren't trying to scrape up 50 year old cooze to the tune of Jesse's Girl.

This, and mainly because cover and tribute bands suck. "Wow, he did the scream well from Won't Get Fooled Again" is a low bar to set. The Iron Maidens have a huge following because they are incredibly hot aside from being good musicians. But all these bands play to the album or a well-known live performance. Boring.


Art is subjective.  T'was ever thus.
 
2014-03-23 12:05:59 PM  

UndeadPoetsSociety: the songs they were playing were mostly written by people who died before there ever was such a damn thing as the BMI.


Which is why there are publishing houses sucking up every song thay can get their hands on and assigning it to their song base.  See "Happy Birthday To You."  Everybody is harvesting, nobody is planting.
 
2014-03-23 12:06:34 PM  
I write music.  None of it will ever be played in bars or on the radio (because I write barbershop quartet music for barbershoppers. It's aca-awesome, but that's not relevant.).  So, if I write a bunch of stuff and submit it to BMI, it's their job to hunt around looking for people playing my music in bars to see if they owe me money?  Sounds like a waste of time and resources, to me.
 
2014-03-23 12:07:26 PM  

browser_snake: No news here. If you have a bar that has music of any sort, you need to be a BMI member. They are seeking statutory damages, which means there's a standard amount of liability that's awarded so often, it doesn't even need to be documented in the lawsuit paperwork - they just cite the statute.


This is incorrect. If I have a bar, and I play only music that I've created myself, or background noise I've personally recorded, then NO, I don't have to be a member of or have a license from BMI, ASCAP or any other entity. If I was a member of ASCAP, or under contract as a musician I would though. But to say outright that you NEED any sort of license or pay fees with regard to music if you own a bar is absurd. Want to restrict to your live performance to unsigned bands and absolutely NO COVERS? Sure. You won't have to pay crap to anyone.

If you think I'm wrong, then by all means point it out, because I've ONLY ever seen performance licenses and fees applied when BMI, ASCAP, and other entities, is when copyright coverage becomes involved with the musical acts and their choice of songs, and standard background music.

Case in point, a dive bar down the street from where I live has license to play music, but not live performances. So what does she have for live performances? Poetry slams, comedians, a piano that anyone can play at any time. Afaik, the piano player it doesn't constitute as live performance under their terms, since it isn't a scheduled appearance nor are they charging a cover, or paying the performer. I'd like to see them try and sue under that and have a jury trial side with the plaintiff. A company fining an establishment for patrons peaceable assembling and letting loose? Good luck with that.

As I said, if I'm wrong please point it out. Devils in the details, and there are ways around this crap. Might not have the most popular song selection, but beats being locked into the music MAFIAA.

/ Non-ASCAP and unsigned professional musician here, not that it matters...
 
2014-03-23 12:09:47 PM  

blair1: italie: BMI, ASCAP, SECAM....can all go to hell. The tactics they use are nothing short of old-school mafia "protection" scams.


You may not realize that those three agencies are the only ones that pay the songwriters anything.  RIAA is looking out for the record labels, BMI et. al. represent the songwriters.


I completely understand this. I also understand the multitude of bar owners who are sick of their shait.

I have no complaint against the service they provide to the artist. I have a complaint against the tactics they use. I have personally seen them, companies I've worked for have lost money because of them. I've had bars pull audio equipment just to silence the harassment.

"We had someone here who heard songs x,y,z coming from the kitchen radio, and it was within earshot of someone walking to the bathroom. Pay us or face legal hell." [obviously a scenario where people were coming to the bar to hear the kitchen radio]

(caller) "Hi, this is Joe from ASCAP, we noticed you aren't paying us due. This could seriously harm your business is one of our songs are played"...(owner) "But I'm already paying SESAC and BMI, and I don't play any of your music"...(caller "Funny that, we were in there last night and hear someone playing  songs x,y,z from their cell phone"  [obviously a scenario where people were coming to the bar to hear a cell phone]

"Hi, Joe from ASCAP again. I know we talked this morning [and yesterday, and the day before that], but I just wanted to make sure you knew what exactly you were in for by not licensing with us as well"


These people can be bastards. I'm sure not all of them are, but a good majority often cross the line from spirit of the law, to copyright-trolling-magnitude letter of it.
 
2014-03-23 12:09:48 PM  

PC LOAD LETTER: neongoats: Well, I think the lesson here is: Be in a band(or own a bar that hosts bands) that play original material, and aren't trying to scrape up 50 year old cooze to the tune of Jesse's Girl.

This, and mainly because cover and tribute bands suck. "Wow, he did the scream well from Won't Get Fooled Again" is a low bar to set. The Iron Maidens have a huge following because they are incredibly hot aside from being good musicians. But all these bands play to the album or a well-known live performance. Boring.


Exactly. No problem with the occasional cover thrown in the middle of a set, or at the end of a show, or whatever. But yeah.
 
2014-03-23 12:10:43 PM  
derpy:
There is an exemption for churches. In the law.

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_States_Code/Title_17/Chapter_1/ Se ction_110



We are not a Bar.
We are a house of alcoholic worship.
Now if you will all grab your hymnals....turn to page 244..
let us all sing... ' the Rodeo Song'
 
2014-03-23 12:12:17 PM  
69 Taps is a shady bar. I live halfway between this location and the original in downtown Akron. Used to go there in my twenties. They always ran out of different beers. We used to call it 45 taps.

TL;DR:
It couldn't have happened to a more deserving bar.
 
2014-03-23 12:12:31 PM  
On one hand everybody's gotta eat - on the other hand, Patent trolling is pretty slimey.
Would that bars Friday and Saturday night really contribute much to anything?
Even if it is in the Paris of the Mid West . . .
 
2014-03-23 12:15:20 PM  
Of course the people who wrote/sang those song will never see a dime.
 
2014-03-23 12:16:38 PM  

MFK: Stoker: Farking parasites.

yeah, the musicians who spent all the time and money crafting, recording and distributing the music you want to hear when you go out to the bar are farking parasites for demanding compensation from people who use their work in their commercial endeavors.


The musicians aren't demanding compensation, the recording company is.  If damages are awarded, the artists won't see a penny of it.

Hell, even a tapeworm can't absorb all of the nutrients you take in. These guys are worse than parasites.
 
2014-03-23 12:17:26 PM  

stuffy: Of course the people who wrote/sang those song will never see a dime.


Again, actually, they do.  Dime is apt, but.. dimes none the less.
 
2014-03-23 12:17:38 PM  
"'Incalculable' means we couldn't even bother to make up a number, like we usually do."
 
2014-03-23 12:17:47 PM  
I'll just leave this here...  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1a9aruzVcM8
 
2014-03-23 12:25:36 PM  

Secret Agent X23: ryano913: Does BMI have a network of undercover moles in every bar? How do they know this happened? Any proof?

That's exactly what they do. I know someone who does this--go to the bar for an evening and then file a report on what music was played. The reason this bar got caught is just that they got unlucky enough for BMI to send someone there. I don't know what the basis is for deciding where to send these folks.


They also call companies and listen to the hold music to see if its something copyrighted.
 
2014-03-23 12:25:41 PM  
Here's a simple test we should use in cases like this:Could anyone reasonably believe that this band was the original author or performer of any of this music?No?Then they could not possibly cause any harm to the original authors/performers/copyright holders.
 
2014-03-23 12:26:21 PM  
Every cover song is somebody's original song.  So it goes.  And if we don't start laying down our 9.99 for stuff we like, we're all gonna end up in your bedrooms with a copy of Reaper, a Casio and our little sister trying to howl her way through our latest opus in Gm because the people who are good at it all work at Home Depot, now.
 
MFK
2014-03-23 12:26:59 PM  

Bonobo62: MFK: Stoker: Farking parasites.

yeah, the musicians who spent all the time and money crafting, recording and distributing the music you want to hear when you go out to the bar are farking parasites for demanding compensation from people who use their work in their commercial endeavors.

The musicians aren't demanding compensation, the recording company is.  If damages are awarded, the artists won't see a penny of it.

Hell, even a tapeworm can't absorb all of the nutrients you take in. These guys are worse than parasites.


This is not the case. The artist will indeed see money from these things.  PROs are not the recording companies. While some of the royalties may indeed go to some of the labels (if for instance your record deal guaranteed the label a certain percentage of publishing royalties) these are mostly songwriting royalties we're talking about here that go to the artist/songwriter.

The PROs are demanding payments on behalf of the musician so they can then turn around and pay them - which they do. This isn't anything at all like the RIAA coming in and suing downloaders on behalf of mega-corporations.

Incidentally, i believe the fee is the same for live or recorded music, so unless your bar/club is bathed in total silence, this is part of the cost of doing business.
 
2014-03-23 12:28:29 PM  

ChrisDe: Wouldn't it become a benchmark that sets precedence in that there was damage, and the value of that damage is zero? Every case after that would point to no damages being awarded.


No, I want every court in America to bankrupt BMI and groups like them. Sue the little guy? Lose money.
 
MFK
2014-03-23 12:36:53 PM  

doglover: ChrisDe: Wouldn't it become a benchmark that sets precedence in that there was damage, and the value of that damage is zero? Every case after that would point to no damages being awarded.

No, I want every court in America to bankrupt BMI and groups like them. Sue the little guy? Lose money.


in this case "the little guy" is stealing outright and then biatching to the media (who clearly has no understanding of the matter) when he gets caught. Why are you white knighting for a thief?  The guy knows he wants to serve beer in the bar and he understands he has to pay a distributor for it. He wants a certain kind of atmosphere/entertainment but refuses to pay for it and all of a sudden he's the victim? Gimme a break.
 
2014-03-23 12:37:46 PM  

FlashHarry: WGJ: The real crime here is BMI collecting $944 million and only distributing $814 million to songwriters, composers, and music publishers. And I'm guessing the publishers get most of that money as well.

In many cases, the songwriter IS the publisher. And as far as the money is concerned, BMI administers songwriting royalties for thousands of artists all around the world, calculating usage and distributing payment. And they don't charge the artists a penny for it up front. So I for one have no problem with them taking some off the top for administrative expenses.

/BMI songwriter since 1991


Myself as well although I've let my account lapse ( you need to renew every 2 years iirc)
One quarter writer credits and one quarter performer credits on two songs. Got a check for a few bucks when the album came out.

However now, the record company has made the album available for listening online and also for sale via rhapsody and iTunes.

I wonder if there's another couple bugs headed me way...sweet sweet passive income lol...
 
2014-03-23 12:45:06 PM  

Relatively Obscure: I wish it actually did do great and incalculable damage.


I tire of classic rawk, too. Given my age, if I'm lucky, I'll have ten to fifteen years of listening to the hits of 1980 after the last monstrously self-regarding boomer is drooling into his or her Depends.
 
2014-03-23 12:47:10 PM  

Valiente: Given my age, if I'm lucky, I'll have ten to fifteen years of listening to the hits of 1980 after the last monstrously self-regarding boomer is drooling into his or her Depends.


Yeah, the boomers.  How about you put a band together and blow all those old, stupid old people old songs off the radio.  S'easy.
 
2014-03-23 12:49:00 PM  

WGJ: The real crime here is BMI collecting $944 million and only distributing $814 million to songwriters, composers, and music publishers. And I'm guessing the publishers get most of that money as well.


That's 86.2% of what is collected distributed to where it belongs if the numbers are true. I can live with >15% kept for the cost of collecting and processing payments. It's better than most non-profit/charity collection organization do. I expected the number to be more like 50%.

I was also surprised it was the bar that needed to be licensed...somehow I always thought the band/DJ had to pay the royalties.
 
2014-03-23 12:49:17 PM  

Nemo's Brother: TV's Vinnie: To a copyright lawyer, someone somewhere out there singing a song IS the end of their sad f*cking world.

To Al Franken it is. He was placed into the Senate to ensure the entertainment industry is protected. He is why we will lose Net Neutrality too.


As if Mike McFadden wouldn't have bent over and grabbed his ankles when the RIAA commanded it.
 
2014-03-23 12:49:35 PM  

d23: Secret Agent X23: ryano913: Does BMI have a network of undercover moles in every bar? How do they know this happened? Any proof?

That's exactly what they do. I know someone who does this--go to the bar for an evening and then file a report on what music was played. The reason this bar got caught is just that they got unlucky enough for BMI to send someone there. I don't know what the basis is for deciding where to send these folks.

For "church" venues at least, there is a recording period every 3 to 4 years where the venue has to file a report about what music they used as well.  Don't know about bars, but it wouldn't surprise me if they have to do something similar as this is how BMI decides how many pennies they are going to pay songwriters.

I suggest everyone reading this thread go read about how much other groups are actually paying songwriters.  This isn't about paying artists, this is just like 99% of everything else in U.S. society right now: it's about corporate greed and that's it.


Yeah for the first art. The exemption is for worship services. And they still need to have print licenses for printing the words. There are licenses for churches that cover non worship service events.

I don't know about the second part. My wife does not make much, but she has never had big exposure either. Don't lots of songwriters give up a lot of their royalty rights in order to get the exposure to make it big? Kind of like advertising costs.
 
2014-03-23 12:56:27 PM  

Nemo's Brother: TV's Vinnie: To a copyright lawyer, someone somewhere out there singing a song IS the end of their sad f*cking world.

To Al Franken it is. He was placed into the Senate to ensure the entertainment industry is protected. He is why we will lose Net Neutrality too.


Oops, I guess you are a moron...

I googled: "Al Franken on net neutrality" and these were the top three results

Link 1
Link 2
Link 3

To long didn't click?
1 Tech blog article about Franken's Support of net neutrality
2 Article on Franken's website about the importance of net neutrality
3 Petition hosted by Franken's website in support of net neutrality

Moral of the story?
Its kinda hard to spout blatant lies on the internet without proved wrong...and stupid
 
2014-03-23 12:58:17 PM  

TurnerBrown: Don't lots of songwriters give up a lot of their royalty rights in order to get the exposure to make it big? Kind of like advertising costs.


If you can get anything like a band and a catalogue of songs together to the point where a label believes it will turn a profit to advance the recording cost, distribution and promotion, you got some good songs and a good band because getting people to pay for that product when it's free after the first torrent rip is a difficult thing to do.  As such, every deal is different.  This is why lawyers have snazzy German cars.
 
2014-03-23 01:01:16 PM  

Mirandized: If they can't calculate the damages, then the suit should be dismissed.

"Your honor, we can't even calculate the damage!"

"Then how do you expect this court to assess damages? Case dismissed."


That's why they're asking for statutory damages as provided in 17 USC 504(c), which can be no less than $200 and up to $150K *per infringement* (i.e., per song), plus the possibility of double the license fees he would have paid for up to three years.  If the bar owner can show that he wasn't aware he was infringing, it'd likely be on the lower end of that scale, but I think he's going to have a hard time proving that.
 
2014-03-23 01:07:35 PM  
If anybody thinks BMI cares a flying fark about the artist and is doing this for any reason other than to get their fat white management even more money to waste on shiat they don't need, well you're stupid.
 
2014-03-23 01:08:37 PM  
And this is why the small venue (i.e. bar) as a place for young groups to develope their craft is drying up.  You say that the fee isn't that much but most bar owners I know are tight fisted bastards.  For many small garage bands just getting a venue is amazing and important.  Money doesn't even figure into it for those guys.  Will they get hired/allowed to perform on some off night at Bubba's?  If the owner is paying or it, probably not.  I have always thought that there is value to the original band/songwriter just by the act of public performance by someone else.  There should be some consideration for that.  Advertising isn't free.
 
2014-03-23 01:10:37 PM  

AgentPothead: If anybody thinks BMI cares a flying fark about the artist and is doing this for any reason other than to get their fat white management even more money to waste on shiat they don't need, well you're stupid.


And yet, they do pay the artists their royalties and publishing and are audited regularly.  So, while I can understand that the easiest thing to do is assume that like all corporations, they're thieving whores, BMI and ASCAP actually do cut checks for the agreed royalty rates to artists and their labels.
 
2014-03-23 01:11:36 PM  

MFK: This is not the case. The artist will indeed see money from these things.  PROs are not the recording companies. While some of the royalties may indeed go to some of the labels (if for instance your record deal guaranteed the label a certain percentage of publishing royalties) these are mostly songwriting royalties we're talking about here that go to the artist/songwriter.

The PROs are demanding payments on behalf of the musician so they can then turn around and pay them - which they do. This isn't anything at all like the RIAA coming in and suing downloaders on behalf of mega-corporations.

Incidentally, i believe the fee is the same for live or recorded music, so unless your bar/club is bathed in total silence, this is part of the cost of doing business.



It isn't like the RIAA, but it isn't all peaches and cream either. The fee is on a "sliding scale" based upon the type of usage, which most places will be on the high end of.

http://www.bmi.com/forms/licensing/gl/ede.pdf

Just from BMI, that fee could easily hit $10K a year on an average 250 occupant establishment. Now times that by three.

$30K a year just to have music (outside of a jukebox) and be "near 100%" legal about it under any and all contingencies. That is WAY more than the revenue it brought the bar.
 
2014-03-23 01:12:50 PM  
While I'm no fan of BMI, ASCAP and the rest, the venues can usually negotiate the license fee and it's based on how often you have music, what the seating capacity is, etc.  I once played a coffee house and after the gig, when it was time to get paid, I had to hear a 15 min. rant from the owner about how much music costs him, what with the licensing fees that add up to $1000/year.  I calmly pointed out to him that he has live music twice a week - 100 nights a year and his $1000 only comes to ten bucks a performance.  Never playing there again.
 
2014-03-23 01:37:35 PM  

Old_Covered_Bridge: While I'm no fan of BMI, ASCAP and the rest, the venues can usually negotiate the license fee and it's based on how often you have music, what the seating capacity is, etc.  I once played a coffee house and after the gig, when it was time to get paid, I had to hear a 15 min. rant from the owner about how much music costs him, what with the licensing fees that add up to $1000/year.  I calmly pointed out to him that he has live music twice a week - 100 nights a year and his $1000 only comes to ten bucks a performance.  Never playing there again.



Did you bring him $10 a night in additional revenue on top of what he paid you? If so, probably wasn't really worth it for him and he was being nice to you...
 
2014-03-23 01:44:54 PM  
The dream tune police, they live inside of my head.
The dream tune police, they come to me in my bed.
The dream tune police, they're coming to arrest me, oh no.
 
2014-03-23 01:51:20 PM  
Audio for live has reached a level of refinement that allows for studio quality sound at shows.

Lighting has become astounding in it's scope, applications and ability to make performances engaging, although the programming often seems to take away from the creative aspects of directing a show.

Staging, video, production values are all very well done, now.   No more stack of Altecs trying to put the singer over a wall of too loud guitar amps.  Brilliantly mixed, lit and directed shows abound.  And cost a f*cking mint for the ger and personnel.

And for what?  A form of music that is languishing on the shelves, producing very little viable new artists and is "supported" with mouse clicks that often generate nothing more than a few inconvenienced electrons.  So nobody is paying and nobody is getting paid.  And the downloaders say "but they should just give the music away and earn money from playing live1"  How?  By taking the money they made selling 3,000 CDs last year out of their trunk and planning, booking, managing and hiring production for a tour?

So what's left?  Royalties from publishing.  And that is why an hour and a half after a new cool song comes out from an emerging band, it's being used to sell toothpaste and cars.  "SELLOUTS!" cry the hip, true believers.  Who pay for nothing but two PBR's and the 5.00 cover so they can say "I knew them before they sold out."

Try paying for their CDs and the tours get better, the quality gets better, and they don't have to sell Proctor and Gamble products to eat and live indoors.  If I ever manage to get something on the radiom iTunes and brick and mortar outlets, I hoep there's some guy in a suit pestering the people who make money off of it for my lousy 27.00 royalty check.

The problem isn't "greedy labels or BMI".  The problem is people slapping down 16.00 for three cups of yuppie coffe and rolling their eyes when that way cool band they love asks for 9.00 for a copy of something it cost thousands to produce.
 
2014-03-23 01:58:04 PM  
Yeah, I tend to be more on the "consumer" side of issues such as these- things like downloading for personal use, etc, and there's  huge grey area in copyright law with regards to what is fair use and the like. That being said, the deal with ASCAP/BMI/ and SESAC is very well known, it enables creators to get paid in a way that they have accepted, and it DOES prevent the bands themselves from having to do all the legwork. This bar was certainly offered more than one chance to buy the appropriate license, which tends to cost between $500 and $3000 a year, depending on the venue, how often copyrighted music is played, how big it is, what they charge for, etc. I don't think that's unreasonable, and there's bars and the like claiming that they'd "have to close their doors" if they had to pay the $1000 a year for a license. I'm sorry, but if $1,000 a year ($83.33/ month, $2.78/day) is all that's between your bar and financial destruction, your bar is about to die anyway. Your liquor license costs more. Yes, people are paying for drinks. You know what else? A big reason that they're there, paying for drinks in the first place, is BECAUSE you have a band playing. Pay the farking fee, or shut up when you get sued- AFTER being given chances to pay the damn fee.

On the other hand, the license companies frequently go a bit too far with pursuing venues that don't play music that is covered under the license (local bands playing their own original stuff, etc.) And there's stories (whether totally true or not) where BMI/ ASCAP's "spies" just HAPPENED to be there one night where a band played ONE song that was covered under license without even knowing it and BAM! They get sued. I, for one, doubt this.

The license thing is NOT a little- known deal, the licensing companies typically are reasonable about things, and this band played, on the night in question, an entire repertoire of licensed music. I guarantee you that the other 52 weekends (or however often that bar has a band playing) that they had other stuff played, just that the night in question was the one that BMI had someone in the crowd documenting it. Sorry- I don't feel sorry for that bar at all.
 
2014-03-23 02:03:52 PM  
good. bar music is always too goddamn loud anyway.
 
2014-03-23 02:06:53 PM  
<CSB> BMI sent me a DMCA notice asking for $20 for downloading one song from The Flaming Lips's "Heady Fwends" album. Never ponied up the dough, still waiting for consequences to never be the same.
 
2014-03-23 02:09:36 PM  

Greek: Yeah, I tend to be more on the "consumer" side of issues such as these- things like downloading for personal use, etc, and there's  huge grey area in copyright law with regards to what is fair use and the like. That being said, the deal with ASCAP/BMI/ and SESAC is very well known, it enables creators to get paid in a way that they have accepted, and it DOES prevent the bands themselves from having to do all the legwork. This bar was certainly offered more than one chance to buy the appropriate license, which tends to cost between $500 and $3000 a year, depending on the venue, how often copyrighted music is played, how big it is, what they charge for, etc. I don't think that's unreasonable, and there's bars and the like claiming that they'd "have to close their doors" if they had to pay the $1000 a year for a license. I'm sorry, but if $1,000 a year ($83.33/ month, $2.78/day) is all that's between your bar and financial destruction, your bar is about to die anyway. Your liquor license costs more. Yes, people are paying for drinks. You know what else? A big reason that they're there, paying for drinks in the first place, is BECAUSE you have a band playing. Pay the farking fee, or shut up when you get sued- AFTER being given chances to pay the damn fee.

On the other hand, the license companies frequently go a bit too far with pursuing venues that don't play music that is covered under the license (local bands playing their own original stuff, etc.) And there's stories (whether totally true or not) where BMI/ ASCAP's "spies" just HAPPENED to be there one night where a band played ONE song that was covered under license without even knowing it and BAM! They get sued. I, for one, doubt this.

The license thing is NOT a little- known deal, the licensing companies typically are reasonable about things, and this band played, on the night in question, an entire repertoire of licensed music. I guarantee you that the other 52 weekends (or however often that bar has a band pla ...


Times 3 on all your figures. If you are paying one of these companies, you are on the radar of the other two.

As for the stories of people scoping places out, it is true, and happens very frequently. This is especially true to any places not paying dues, or not paying dues to all three companies.

//Source: Spent 5 years providing audio/video rental to bars and clubs in the 3rd largest metropolitan market US, at a company with over 50% market share. 3 years after that with co-ownership in a bar.
 
2014-03-23 02:10:51 PM  

Sticky Hands: good. bar music is always too goddamn loud anyway.


I've mixed over 3,400 live shows, many of them in bars, and I tend to agree with you.  I also blame snotty, arrogant guitar players whose dicks are hard wired to their volume knobs and get shirty when you ask them to turn the f*ck down so that the people can hear, oddly, the whole band and the whoel mix.  I realize your mom thinks you're Eric Clapton v.2.0 but if you suck at 93 dBA, you suck.   And adding another 10dB doesn't help.  It just makes the sucking physically hurt your ears.  Remember, kids.  If it's too loud, it's too loud.  And that cool, hip young person that is grimacing in the corner while you deafen them isn't cool and hip and he doesn't "get it", he just assumes that ear pain is a part of the process.  It isn't.
 
2014-03-23 02:25:51 PM  
There's always room for a Free Bird in a set.
 
2014-03-23 02:28:43 PM  

ReverendJynxed: There's always room for a Free Bird in a set.


You know, that's actually a prety good song.  So is Brown Eyed Girl.  Too bad they got played to the point of being self parodies.
 
2014-03-23 02:36:23 PM  
And for all the Gen X / Y'ers pissing and moaning about "old peope music", if you don't start paying for new music, it's ALL gonna be old people music cause eventually, your music will be "old people music" too.  Ha ha.

/listens to everything
//has to as part of his job
///waiting for the great leap forward
 
2014-03-23 02:44:03 PM  
I wish dick cancer on all of the plaintiffs and their lawyers.
 
2014-03-23 02:48:49 PM  
And if you really don't value arts and music, paint every single thing you own white and put in a pair of earplugs and some sleep shades and spend your life in your lovely sensory deprivation tank.  Art keeps you sane, kids.  And it's cheaper than anti-psychotics and the doctor to prescribe them.  The guy who drew the crap on your cereal box got paid.  Cough up a few bucks for the band that did that song that benchmarks a time in your life.
 
2014-03-23 02:57:38 PM  

HairyNevus: <CSB> BMI sent me a DMCA notice asking for $20 for downloading one song from The Flaming Lips's "Heady Fwends" album. Never ponied up the dough, still waiting for consequences to never be the same.


BMI or RIAA?
 
2014-03-23 02:59:18 PM  
Churches (are supposed to) get CCLI licenses so that the Christian bands that write the songs get their cut.

/church musician
//getting a kick
 
2014-03-23 03:07:31 PM  

Sanguine Dawn: ryano913: Does BMI have a network of undercover moles in every bar? How do they know this happened? Any proof?

Sort of. In more metropolitan areas they have moles. In the smaller areas they're more complaint-based. Usually, it's competition that sells a rival out to BMI for bands or jukebox music.


Do you really think they go through that much effort? It's just a computer program that cross checks a database of business licenses to their database of paying members. If you don't have a match it sets off a flag.
 
2014-03-23 03:20:38 PM  
Any performance of music "outside a normal circle of family and friends" is considered a public performance that requires permission from the copyright holder.

Okay legal GEDs, I'm curious where the cut-off is.  How about the dude murdering Mr. Tambourine Man on open-mic night at the shopping mall?  What about the chubby chick with the cute face singing the Amy Grant songs in your local megachurch?    How about the guy playing playing Stairway to Heaven on the musical saw in the subway?  All meat for the lawyers?
 
2014-03-23 03:23:10 PM  

trippdogg: Any performance of music "outside a normal circle of family and friends" is considered a public performance that requires permission from the copyright holder.

Okay legal GEDs, I'm curious where the cut-off is.  How about the dude murdering Mr. Tambourine Man on open-mic night at the shopping mall?  What about the chubby chick with the cute face singing the Amy Grant songs in your local megachurch?    How about the guy playing playing Stairway to Heaven on the musical saw in the subway?  All meat for the lawyers?


Scraps, actually.  Bars move money around because they buy stuff that is destroyed in use for about .45 to 1.20 a unit and move it at about 3.50 to 7.00 a unit.  You always go where the money already is if you want to sue.
 
2014-03-23 03:41:56 PM  
Bowel Movement Inc?
 
2014-03-23 03:45:40 PM  
ASCAP does not post rates on its website.

Could be $500 a year, could be FARK YOU, we'll charge what we feel like.
 
2014-03-23 04:02:42 PM  
Let's say anyone of you Farkers wants to buy a bar and have live music.

Let's say you want to do everything by the book and pay your dues.

Now try to google anything you can to find the price and who to pay.

Not so easy.
 
2014-03-23 04:07:45 PM  

bunner: Every cover song is somebody's original song.  So it goes.  And if we don't start laying down our 9.99 for stuff we like, we're all gonna end up in your bedrooms with a copy of Reaper, a Casio and our little sister trying to howl her way through our latest opus in Gm because the people who are good at it all work at Home Depot, now.


I buy copies of all the music I listen to (with the exception of Spotify, where I pay $5 a month to find/try new music before I buy it) and I always have. But there has to be a happy medium somewhere in between "Music should be free because after all the Internet" and the strong-arm tactics of gold-digging groups like the RIAA and BMI.
 
2014-03-23 04:07:55 PM  

neongoats: Well, I think the lesson here is: Be in a band(or own a bar that hosts bands) that play original material, and aren't trying to scrape up 50 year old cooze to the tune of Jesse's Girl.


Um, no, you're just 1/2 right here... The band bears no responsibility for this at all. It's completely the responsibility of the venue.
 
2014-03-23 04:16:51 PM  

Fuggin Bizzy: bunner: Every cover song is somebody's original song.  So it goes.  And if we don't start laying down our 9.99 for stuff we like, we're all gonna end up in your bedrooms with a copy of Reaper, a Casio and our little sister trying to howl her way through our latest opus in Gm because the people who are good at it all work at Home Depot, now.

I buy copies of all the music I listen to (with the exception of Spotify, where I pay $5 a month to find/try new music before I buy it) and I always have. But there has to be a happy medium somewhere in between "Music should be free because after all the Internet" and the strong-arm tactics of gold-digging groups like the RIAA and BMI.


Agreed.  I believe it more then likely simply honesty and fairness on the part of the people who both produce and own music keeping each other's lights on.  Nobody would have the balls to walk into a McDonalds and leave 99¢ on the counter for a 4.99 sandwich, but yet, a 45 costs 1.09 in 1964 and so far, it hasn't been caught up to infaltion.  And yet, you're buying something you want that you can keep forever and keeping the people who make it living indoors.  That's a fair deal and the more peope wh subscribe to it, the better music will be.
 
2014-03-23 04:21:05 PM  
Why not copyright eggs over easy or a steak medium rare?
 
2014-03-23 04:30:49 PM  

bunner: Fuggin Bizzy: bunner: Every cover song is somebody's original song.  So it goes.  And if we don't start laying down our 9.99 for stuff we like, we're all gonna end up in your bedrooms with a copy of Reaper, a Casio and our little sister trying to howl her way through our latest opus in Gm because the people who are good at it all work at Home Depot, now.

I buy copies of all the music I listen to (with the exception of Spotify, where I pay $5 a month to find/try new music before I buy it) and I always have. But there has to be a happy medium somewhere in between "Music should be free because after all the Internet" and the strong-arm tactics of gold-digging groups like the RIAA and BMI.

Agreed.  I believe it more then likely simply honesty and fairness on the part of the people who both produce and own music keeping each other's lights on.  Nobody would have the balls to walk into a McDonalds and leave 99¢ on the counter for a 4.99 sandwich, but yet, a 45 costs 1.09 in 1964 and so far, it hasn't been caught up to infaltion.  And yet, you're buying something you want that you can keep forever and keeping the people who make it living indoors.  That's a fair deal and the more peope wh subscribe to it, the better music will be.


Then bar owners should also get a discount for any deaf patrons in the place.
 
2014-03-23 05:11:57 PM  

SwingingJohnson: Why not copyright eggs over easy or a steak medium rare?


Because you can't.  It doesn't fall under the laws that govern copyirghts and you were bing silly.

SwingingJohnson: Then bar owners should also get a discount for any deaf patrons in the place.


Wouldn't be cost effective.  Also silly.  We need more silliness, but the fun kind.  Not the "we should all wear cheese neckties!" kind.
 
2014-03-23 05:34:11 PM  

BluVeinThrobber: The next big thing in bars.....Total Silence


Pfft. I was listening to that before you.
 
2014-03-23 05:41:01 PM  

ryano913: Does BMI have a network of undercover moles in every bar? How do they know this happened? Any proof?


Probably has a handout of the gig in question, look up bar in database, see they aren't licensed and then maybe send someone over to the gig to verify or call the bar like someone said earlier.
 
2014-03-23 05:46:06 PM  
DarkSoulNoHope:

I've never understood that "No Stairway" joke in Wayne's World, even all these years later >.<
 
2014-03-23 05:55:42 PM  
Mustang Sally?!?! How farking cliche can you get??
 
2014-03-23 07:23:58 PM  

sharphead: ryano913: Does BMI have a network of undercover moles in every bar? How do they know this happened? Any proof?

Probably has a handout of the gig in question, look up bar in database, see they aren't licensed and then maybe send someone over to the gig to verify or call the bar like someone said earlier.


Let me explain it. Guitarists (or any musician) love to perform. They want people to see what they can do. Especially intermediate musicians. It's all, "hey guys, look how well I can play!" No where is this more prevalent than the local music store, where you can go in and "try out" $1500 Les Pauls you are never EVER going to buy. Now, there is a song that is actually pretty easy to play, sounds more difficult to play than it actually is to the untrained ear, and is about what might be considered advanced beginner, to intermediate skill level. Guess what song that is. Go ahead, guess.

/I play bass
//My stairway is old Iron Maiden tunes.
 
2014-03-23 07:25:34 PM  

Myria: DarkSoulNoHope:

I've never understood that "No Stairway" joke in Wayne's World, even all these years later >.<


Opps was intending to quote this fellow. Your answer is above, friend.
 
2014-03-23 08:27:38 PM  
Chicago Symphony Orchestra is just a cover band and rarely plays original stuff.

What a bunch of losers!
 
2014-03-23 08:52:43 PM  

Geoff Peterson: sharphead: ryano913: Does BMI have a network of undercover moles in every bar? How do they know this happened? Any proof?

Probably has a handout of the gig in question, look up bar in database, see they aren't licensed and then maybe send someone over to the gig to verify or call the bar like someone said earlier.

Let me explain it. Guitarists (or any musician) love to perform. They want people to see what they can do. Especially intermediate musicians. It's all, "hey guys, look how well I can play!" No where is this more prevalent than the local music store, where you can go in and "try out" $1500 Les Pauls you are never EVER going to buy. Now, there is a song that is actually pretty easy to play, sounds more difficult to play than it actually is to the untrained ear, and is about what might be considered advanced beginner, to intermediate skill level. Guess what song that is. Go ahead, guess.

/I play bass
//My stairway is old Iron Maiden tunes.


Steve Harris is my hero.
 
2014-03-23 09:17:41 PM  
eh ... here's the thing. and let me preface this with the fact that i've been playing in bands for a good 20 years now (goddamn, i got old) and am a member of BMI (i have writing credits on some of the songs on my my recent band's album), as well are many of my musician cohorts here in LA.

i'm far from a pro musician - pretty sure i make more in a day or two as a software engineer than i have in ALL those 20 years in bands - but some of my friends are. and some of them do quite well licensing their music to shiat like advertising, tv shows, film, etc. organizations like BMI protect these guys from having their work stolen and allow them to make a living doing what they love and what they're good at.

so say ... someone like michael bay is out at some bar in malibu and hears my pal terry rockin out some of his awesome bakersfield-country influenced jams, michael bay likes it, michael bay buys his album and wants to use a song in transformers 15 or whatever. because of an organization like, yeah, BMI, he can't just jack terry's music and use it simply because he's an unknown dude just doing his thing. he'd have to pay to use it. and that's great! that's how it should be. a musician is creating something of value just like anyone else.

they're an organization big enough and powerful enough to represent the small guy. otherwise, it's just some dude against some bazillionaire.

now, you get into areas like this that certainly seem silly on the surface. BUT, it's more of a precedence thing. if you draw a line that says "ok well, this is ok but this isn't" then that line's gonna get moved around until it's completely erased and then what? "oh blahblahblah john fogerty is a rich old rockstar he doesn't need the money!" but it mostly isn't about those guys (who are, in fact, members just like some dork like me is and deserve the same protection) it's about the millions of little guys no one's ever heard of that make their living writing music.

you can't play favorites, you can't make exceptions, you just have to enforce these seemingly stupid rules for the greater good.

tl;dr - it's not as stupid as it seems; the bar should follow the rules and this shiat wouldn't happen
 
2014-03-23 09:27:51 PM  

Secret Agent X23: The reason this bar got caught is just that they got unlucky enough for BMI to send someone there. I don't know what the basis is for deciding where to send these folks.


It's simple process of elimination.   BMI and ASCAP obviously have lists of establishments that have paid their fees, so all they have to do is visit establishments that haven't.   Every jukebox must have a paid license, so they do the same thing with those.    Restaurants and stores often pay Mood Media or SIRIUS XM because those companies take care of the fees for them through special contracts with BMI and ASCAP.    One time I was in a neighborhood bar and the employees unhooked their Sirius XM (business account) receiver and plugged in a cd player.   The owner dropped in and threw a fit.

The rules around playing broadcast radio and television are a bit more sensible since they include ways a small establishment can show TV without paying fees, even when those telecasts are a major draw.  But, that makes sense because broadcasters make money through advertising.  Their desire to have a large audience outweighs any concern they might have about a bars profiting from their sports telecast.
 
2014-03-23 11:31:19 PM  

browser_snake: No news here. If you have a bar that has music of any sort, you need to be a BMI member. They are seeking statutory damages, which means there's a standard amount of liability that's awarded so often, it doesn't even need to be documented in the lawsuit paperwork - they just cite the statute.


Yep. The rules are asinine, but they're still the rules - violate them at your peril. These chuckleheads violated those rules, and will, of course, have to pony up.
 
2014-03-24 03:00:36 AM  

Lokkii: The only people complaining about this lawsuit  are those who have never created anything of value.


Or people who don't think you should indenture people for the rest of your grandchildren's natural lives because of something you did once 20 years ago.
 
2014-03-24 09:04:25 AM  
....belted out the standard classic rock tunes: "Jesse's Girl," "Fortunate Son," "You Really Got me," "Brown Eyed Girl" and, of course, "Free Bird" among other songs of that ilk that every cover band plays.

WRONG.

I play with a cover group and my group makes considerable effort to AVOID cliché songs such as these.

Plus Jimmy Buffet.  We refuse to  play any song that Jimmy Buffet gets near.

In fact, our band motto is "we ain't your Margaritaville kinda band".
 
2014-03-24 09:36:01 AM  

Geoff Peterson: darch: My town (Hoboken, NJ) has the most bars of any similarly-sized town in the country and most of them don't have live music anymore. It's a shame. Am thinking that this silliness might have something to do with it.

Also live music is freaking expensive. Most places that do it these days have the band play for the door. Bars that don't charge cover generally lose their asses on a band.


Because Hoboken lost Maxwells, the only live music venue left with any bands worth seeing, and because extreme gentrification has ruined Hoboken. The place looks more like a Hollywood set these days than anything real.

ASCAP/BMI/SESAC - extortionists. Let's skip the middle-folks and pay the musicians directly. I'm not against having them get paid. I'm against sanctioned racketeering.
 
2014-03-24 11:00:57 AM  
best... caver band... ever!
(Dread Zeppelin cut, extended 8 min version, poppity pops!)
 
2014-03-24 11:05:26 AM  
cover
 
2014-03-24 11:38:33 AM  
"Incalculable damage" means that after BMI win their trial on the merits and get their statutory damages, they're going to ask for a jury to decide how much they should get in punitive damages since the bar dragged its feet and essentially forced BMI to file the lawsuit. If they put an actual figure into the complaint, they'd be limited to that figure as a maximum possible award if (when) they win.
 
2014-03-24 11:48:02 AM  

ristst: ....belted out the standard classic rock tunes: "Jesse's Girl," "Fortunate Son," "You Really Got me," "Brown Eyed Girl" and, of course, "Free Bird" among other songs of that ilk that every cover band plays.

WRONG.

I play with a cover group and my group makes considerable effort to AVOID cliché songs such as these.

Plus Jimmy Buffet.  We refuse to  play any song that Jimmy Buffet gets near.

In fact, our band motto is "we ain't your Margaritaville kinda band".


That's why there's only 10 people in your audience.

/I keed, I keed.
//Never heard Jessie's Girl live.
///No, I HATE that song, HATE it.
////DON'T LOOK AT ME!!!!
 
2014-03-24 12:06:58 PM  

Geoff Peterson: That's why there's only 10 people in your audience.

/I keed, I keed.
//Never heard Jessie's Girl live.
///No, I HATE that song, HATE it.
////DON'T LOOK AT ME!!!!


We typically get goof reviews.  People constantly tell us how glad they are that we don't play the same songs every other band plays.

As to Jessie's Girl, I don't hate it....but I've never heard a group get the vocals right.  The harmonies are critical to the song, especially in the bridge.  Never heard anyone get close.
 
2014-03-24 12:21:32 PM  

mediaseth: Geoff Peterson: darch: My town (Hoboken, NJ) has the most bars of any similarly-sized town in the country and most of them don't have live music anymore. It's a shame. Am thinking that this silliness might have something to do with it.

Also live music is freaking expensive. Most places that do it these days have the band play for the door. Bars that don't charge cover generally lose their asses on a band.

Because Hoboken lost Maxwells, the only live music venue left with any bands worth seeing, and because extreme gentrification has ruined Hoboken. The place looks more like a Hollywood set these days than anything real.

ASCAP/BMI/SESAC - extortionists. Let's skip the middle-folks and pay the musicians directly. I'm not against having them get paid. I'm against sanctioned racketeering.


Yep. 100% THIS. Only reason I still live here is that my wife loves it. All our friends are here and she doesn't like to drive- bingo- Hoboken it is. All it is now is entitled yuppie parents and entitled drunks. No more live music. We even lost the Whisky as a music venue.
 
2014-03-24 12:27:40 PM  
My dad and his buddies used to play Beatles covers for open-mic Sundays at Victory Brewery.

It was awesome, we got a private back room for the performances, great food, great beer and an all-around great time with various different local musical acts (guitar, vocals, spoken-word poetry, etc.)

We got to enjoy it for a few fun months until suits showed up with cease-and-desist orders and Victory cancelled the events : (

This is why we can't have nice things.
 
2014-03-24 12:37:52 PM  

ristst: We typically get goof reviews.


GOOF REVIEWS????

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

/should've been "good" of course....
 
2014-03-24 12:57:44 PM  

non compos mentat: I'll just leave this here...  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1a9aruzVcM8


And I'll leave this next to it.
 
2014-03-24 01:02:04 PM  

bunner: Audio for live has reached a level of refinement that allows for studio quality sound at shows.

Lighting has become astounding in it's scope, applications and ability to make performances engaging, although the programming often seems to take away from the creative aspects of directing a show.

Staging, video, production values are all very well done, now.   No more stack of Altecs trying to put the singer over a wall of too loud guitar amps.  Brilliantly mixed, lit and directed shows abound.  And cost a f*cking mint for the ger and personnel.

And for what?  A form of music that is languishing on the shelves, producing very little viable new artists and is "supported" with mouse clicks that often generate nothing more than a few inconvenienced electrons.  So nobody is paying and nobody is getting paid.  And the downloaders say "but they should just give the music away and earn money from playing live1"  How?  By taking the money they made selling 3,000 CDs last year out of their trunk and planning, booking, managing and hiring production for a tour?

So what's left?  Royalties from publishing.  And that is why an hour and a half after a new cool song comes out from an emerging band, it's being used to sell toothpaste and cars.  "SELLOUTS!" cry the hip, true believers.  Who pay for nothing but two PBR's and the 5.00 cover so they can say "I knew them before they sold out."

Try paying for their CDs and the tours get better, the quality gets better, and they don't have to sell Proctor and Gamble products to eat and live indoors.  If I ever manage to get something on the radiom iTunes and brick and mortar outlets, I hoep there's some guy in a suit pestering the people who make money off of it for my lousy 27.00 royalty check.

The problem isn't "greedy labels or BMI".  The problem is people slapping down 16.00 for three cups of yuppie coffe and rolling their eyes when that way cool band they love asks for 9.00 for a copy of something it cost thousands to produce.


That's a fair assessment.

Would you like to join my cover band, 'The Inconvenienced Electrons'?
 
2014-03-24 01:35:49 PM  
Case in point.

The Heavy.

Had really good song called "How You Like Me Now" that was immediately snapped up to sell cars with little muppet animals.

This got them on Letterman where they, along with the house band, PAVED the f*cking place.  I mean just paved it.   Letterman insisted they encore the same song, and they did so.  They were pronounced to be indeed, heavy and critics gushed and shows were planned and of course, this rocketed them to where they are now.  Off the radar for years and remanded to the cutout bin.  (To be fair, whoever mastered that brick should be rapped on the knuckles with a yardstick.)  So.  What happened?  "crucial" new band with one hit hit the heights, fell back to earth immediately and help sell a lot of Kias.  Which got them paid.
 
2014-03-24 01:36:38 PM  

RY28: MaudlinMutantMollusk: DON'T PLAY FREE BIRD, MAN!

Thats odd . Freebird hasn't been cover band material for at least 20 years now .


It is if the guitar player is drunk enough....
 
2014-03-24 01:39:20 PM  

Honest Geologist: Would you like to join my cover band, 'The Inconvenienced Electrons'?


Shoot me a song list.  I prob'ly know the word to most of them.
 
2014-03-24 01:56:01 PM  

bunner: And if you really don't value arts and music, paint every single thing you own white and put in a pair of earplugs and some sleep shades and spend your life in your lovely sensory deprivation tank.  Art keeps you sane, kids.  And it's cheaper than anti-psychotics and the doctor to prescribe them.  The guy who drew the crap on your cereal box got paid.  Cough up a few bucks for the band that did that song that benchmarks a time in your life.


And cough up a few more bucks for the recording industry, a few more bucks for the licencing agencies, and a few more bucks for the lawyers who will sue you if you don't cough up whatever amount of money they deem acceptable.
 
2014-03-24 02:00:59 PM  

LostInTranslation: RY28: MaudlinMutantMollusk: DON'T PLAY FREE BIRD, MAN!

Thats odd . Freebird hasn't been cover band material for at least 20 years now .

It is if the guitar player is drunk enough....


I do Stairway to Freebird.

It's the Freebird lyric sung with Stairway to Heaven music.  Believe it or not people LOVE it.  It's quite humorous.
 
2014-03-24 02:07:05 PM  

Bonobo62: And cough up a few more bucks for the recording industry, a few more bucks for the licencing agencies, and a few more bucks for the lawyers who will sue you if you don't cough up whatever amount of money they deem acceptable.


I'm talking about buying CDs.  Supporting the record labels who still have enough money to support, provide touring gear hire and expensive promotion for their artist rosters isn't a bad idea, actually.  A lot of what they make from a successful artist gets plowed back into promotion and the like.  Not being able to do this is why all your favorite bands are promoting themselves with facebook posts, reverb nation, blogs and a buch of other stuff nobody reads.  The whole "ebul rec'd labels" thing isn't nearly as true as the now 20 year old indie ethos says it is.  It never was.  They're investment banks.  And they take a pretty fair return if their investment pans out when you look at other investment banking types.  Attorney are going to get paid any time any useful amount of money changes hands because people are weasels and attorneys are simply professional weasels.  If it wasn't for licensing, The Heavy, having sold a bunch of Kias, would now be shopping with an EBT card.
 
2014-03-24 02:16:15 PM  

ristst: LostInTranslation: RY28: MaudlinMutantMollusk: DON'T PLAY FREE BIRD, MAN!

Thats odd . Freebird hasn't been cover band material for at least 20 years now .

It is if the guitar player is drunk enough....

I do Stairway to Freebird.

It's the Freebird lyric sung with Stairway to Heaven music.  Believe it or not people LOVE it.  It's quite humorous.


Wow, cool. I never have listened to "The Dark Side of the Moon" while watching "The Wizard of Oz", yet either....
 
2014-03-24 03:03:51 PM  

bunner: Honest Geologist: Would you like to join my cover band, 'The Inconvenienced Electrons'?

Shoot me a song list.  I prob'ly know the word to most of them.


Judging by just about every cover band I've ever seen, I think we're legally obligated or something to play 'Last Dance With Mary Jane'.
 
2014-03-24 03:11:44 PM  

Cortez the Killer: Write anything we'd know?


lol. likely not. i was in various indie bands in the 90s. for a while, one was on a subsidiary of a major. we toured a lot and got some college radio airplay. nothing big. my BMI statements usually consist of snippets played on TV shows like "the osbournes" and "MTV's making of the video." crap they play in the background.

it is fun going through your statement to find stuff played in far-off lands like norway and the czech republic though.
 
2014-03-24 03:14:08 PM  

Honest Geologist: bunner: Honest Geologist: Would you like to join my cover band, 'The Inconvenienced Electrons'?

Shoot me a song list.  I prob'ly know the word to most of them.

Judging by just about every cover band I've ever seen, I think we're legally obligated or something to play 'Last Dance With Mary Jane'.


I like Tom Petty.  I like a lot of his catalogue.  I don't much like singing it.  I came up with old school Stax / Volt / Motown / Tamla and a metric f*ckton of British invasion and some country.  You know, hits.  I'd rather chew glass than listen to or cover Steve Miller or ELO, but I think they're both formulaic to the point of abrasion.  I have a small collection of songs I try and take with me to any cover band I'm in because I think they kick ass and the crowds seem to agree.  Songs are made up of parts.  If eveybody learns their parts, you can have a really good band without all the drama.  Then again, I like Drowning Pool, Perl Jam, ABBA and the Carpenters, so my opinions should be widely discounted by the truly hip.   :  )
 
2014-03-24 03:15:44 PM  

FlashHarry: Cortez the Killer: Write anything we'd know?

lol. likely not. i was in various indie bands in the 90s. for a while, one was on a subsidiary of a major. we toured a lot and got some college radio airplay. nothing big. my BMI statements usually consist of snippets played on TV shows like "the osbournes" and "MTV's making of the video." crap they play in the background.

it is fun going through your statement to find stuff played in far-off lands like norway and the czech republic though.


A singer / songwriter / comedian I did a lot of shows with got a royalty check for like 98¢ from S. Africa once.
 
2014-03-24 03:57:58 PM  
Copyright should be 20 years. End of story.

There is no benefit to society for this crap.
 
2014-03-24 03:58:54 PM  

bunner: A singer / songwriter / comedian I did a lot of shows with got a royalty check for like 98¢ from S. Africa once.


i've had a couple of those too.
 
2014-03-24 04:03:40 PM  

pdee: Copyright should be 20 years. End of story.

There is no benefit to society for this crap.


20 years? bullshiat. if i write a song in 1992 and you perform it in 2014, i deserve to get paid.
 
2014-03-24 04:18:10 PM  

pdee: Copyright should be 20 years. End of story.

There is no benefit to society for this crap.


Let's talk about somebody who wrote a hit song getting tree fiddy for a song they wrote 30 years ago that everybody sstill likes and it's benefit to society vs. a pack of corporate whores strip mining entire sectors of the economy and getting bonuses for their dismantling millions of people's futures.  Shall we?  You go first.  Oh, the humanity!  He wrote that over twenty years ago!  Thief!  Chiseler!  Leech!  *snort*
 
2014-03-24 04:20:04 PM  
And for all he wai 1337 coders decrying the notion that people whould pay for music they like, but can't make themselves, um boosting cracks and warez is still cool, no?  I mean, if I glom a crack for a piece of code you wrote, you already got paid for it, so, whatever, no?
 
Displayed 240 of 240 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report