Are "covers" at open mics being squeezed out?

[Judson]

The small coffeehouse I frequent was told the fee would be $650 per year. Sounds insignificant I suppose, but honestly the fellow makes no money at night and only opens on Wednesday nights for the sake of providing a place for playing music. He's not doing open mic for the money and $650 is a hardship. Bigger venues where open mics are actually a money making proposition ... I can perhaps see the logic.

Originally Posted by reidplum

I have the possibly misleading idea that the licensing fees are set by some formula of "size of venue" or general size of audience metric. Does anyone know what the ballpark amount would be for a small coffee house doing an open mike?

Reid

[Gasworker]

Originally Posted by lodi_55

Why is this ridiculous? Please explain.

Given the direction things are currenttly going, this seems very plausibile..

Well Mike I don't want to be seen as rude. I am just supporting the rights of musicians and creative artists. If I get drawn in to every argument the thread will get closed. Just to be safe I will say that the level of enforcement you are suggesting is cost prohibitive. Also there is NO evidence of things going this way. Most establishments support the musicians and pay their licensing fees. Thanks Brother. Sorry if I seem to offend It is not my intention.

$650 per year. Sounds insignificant I suppose,

Blackville, I would pay a small cover to see you play. I think most that enjoy this type of entertainment would.

[unimogbert]

Originally Posted by Willie Voltaire

Several pages of information here

That was not as helpful as one might have hoped.

Looks like you have to sign up for a license to find out what the price is. No examples were posted.

[Spook]

- Around here, it would be a rare small coffee house that made anywhere near $500 a year (42 a month, 9.60 a month, 1.40 a day, whatever) on open mic's. And that's just one license.

- Open mic's are not a reliable part of a business plan. They are put on by volunteers that may or may not be good at managing these types of events. They tend to come and go. You could buy several licenses just to have the open mic dry up and blow away.

- Would you pay hundreds of dollars every year out of your pocket just to support the local music scene? That is what is being asked of the coffee shop.

- Open mic's belong to the community and should not be shut down by ASCAP/BMI

Some shout in shrill tones that this is about musicians getting paid. It isn't. This is about ASCAP/BMI overreaching. This is about limiting that reach so we can drink some coffee, play some music, and embrace the pursuit of happiness without grasping lawyers seeking to profiteer in inappropriate places.

So.. do something.

I'm going to write my state and federal representation and point out there is an inequity to be addressed. This is a distinct negative for our society and everyone loses. Music stores. Amateur musicians. Mom and pop venues. We're not talking about Hard Rock Cafe here. The way the law is written, it can be abused. And ASCAP/BMI is abusing it. I will get every guitar player I know around here and every small venue to do the same by providing an email template for them. There needs to be some exclusions that allow amateurs to play music in public. There needs to be a place I can go for a coffee and wince while some local abuses a guitar.

[Gasworker]

So.. do something.

I'm going to write my congressman and point out there is an inequity to be addressed. This is a distinct negative for our culture. The way the law is written, it can be abused. And ASCAP/BMI is abusing it. I will get every guitar player I know around here and every small venue to do the same by providing an email template for them. There needs to be some exclusions that allow amateurs to play music in public.
__________________
Spook
New Mexico

Now this is your First Amendment right as I understand it!! Oddly I dont support your opinion but I support your actions

[Celtic12and6]

Originally Posted by drumstrummer

Starting to come around this way myself. Original music, shared among friends and family. We call it folk, but that's how it always was before there was an industry. Now that the industry is dying and clamoring for whatever they can while they still can, perhaps we will return to music as part of our lifestyle rather than as a commodity.

Sir, If it were possible, I'd like to shake your hand, wise words indeed, after all, its people that make, and made music, for people's enjoyment, until it got corrupted by financial greed.

[spitco]

I was once laughed at for playing public domain songs, and old time gospel tunes. Now who's laughing...

How do these people keep track of whos songs are being played, and how do the song creators get paid? I'm completely ignorant of the subject.

[Spook]

Originally Posted by Gasworker

Now this is your First Amendment right as I understand it!! Oddly I dont support your opinion but I support your actions

Too bad you're not closer Gasworker.. would buy you a coffee and try to convince you.

[Franklin'sTower]

Originally Posted by Gasworker

Well Mike I don't want to be seen as rude. I am just supporting the rights of musicians and creative artists. Just to be safe I will say that the level of enforcement you are suggesting is cost prohibitive. Also there is NO evidence of things going this way. Most establishments support the musicians and pay their licensing fees. Thanks Brother. Sorry if I seem to offend It is not my intention.

$650 per year. Sounds insignificant I suppose,

Blackville, I would pay a small cover to see you play. I think most that enjoy this type of entertainment would.

I'm sorry if I originally resorted to hyperbole and it offended.

But like I said in my previous post, I'm curious as to whether the relevant artists even see a penny from these fees.

[Tobias Music]

So I have one more point to make. My buddy has the garage band business. Yes, he earns some of his income from teaching kids and adults how to "be in the band". In order to teach the newby band how to play AC/DC or Train, he buys the song books / print music from our store. If you buy the print music, doesn't that give you the right to play it and / or teach it ?

[Turp]

Just a side note about a venue I played regularly BMI said they had to pay license fees for rights to play radio broadcast music or CDs. The venue went with a satellite broadcast because they were told the the broadcaster paid the fees. I don't know anymore details than that.

Just for fun - If a venue is obligated to pay fees for performers to play covers then performers or the venue should charge BMI / ASCAP, or their represented artists, for advertising and promotion of their product

I recall reading in some music history, when technology allowed the ability to record music, some musicians protested the idea. They believed the music should be performed and fade with the performance. It seems there's more wisdom to this than was evident even then.

[Gasworker]

Originally Posted by Franklin'sTower

I would read my last reply before resorting to implying my post is the lowest common denominator. Thats pretty rude, my friend.

I'm sorry if I originally resorted to hyperbole and it offended your senses.

But like I said in my previous post, I'm curious as to whether the relevant artists even see a penny from these fees.

Sorry I will edit. I removed that reference it only appears in your quoted comment I think you can edit it from there. Sorry. Oh and I am not sorry for supporting musicians on a forum populated by musicians. Actually seems kind of natural.
Spook did you say free coffee? hmmmm New Mexico eh??

[buzzardwhiskey]

Originally Posted by Tobias Music

So I have one more point to make. My buddy has the garage band business. Yes, he earns some of his income from teaching kids and adults how to "be in the band". In order to teach the newby band how to play AC/DC or Train, he buys the song books / print music from our store. If you buy the print music, doesn't that give you the right to play it and / or teach it ?

You can play it for yourself. But teaching and/or performing for money is a big no-no without tithing ASCAP/BMI.

[scottishrogue]

Most musicians/singers/performers realize that only a small percentage of artists actually make enough money to just barely scrape by. Others do it for a passionate hobby or just part-time and have a day job to help fund their passion. Those performers deserve to be paid for their original works or any performance they give. But, in the music industry, that's not how it works, as several other members have pointed out.

When I stop and listen to buskers, I will always make a contribution, but many don't, that have far more money than I do. I also tip really well, when I go out to dinner, but many don't do that either. It's very sad how the public treats creative people...it's like they pretend they don't exist. Ok, I'm done with my rant, now.

Glen

[royd]

yes, this topic comes up pretty regularly... but it is an important one

Let me begin by saying that I agree that artists should be paid for their work and that they certainly deserve to make a living. a coupe of observations regarding the music business in general and this issue in particular

music has not always been viewed as a product to be bought and sold. Musicians/composers often had patrons who supported them so they would be free to create but they didn't "sell" their music. Other performers traveled from place to place and essentially performed for tips. I'm not arguing that is a better model, just saying that viewing a piece of music as a product to be sold is a relatively recent phenomenon.

The current ASCAP/BMI/SESAC scheme doesn't work and I think is, in the long run detrimental to music and musicians.

First, the licensing fees, in spite of what has been said, are not insignificant, especially for small struggling venues.

The fees that are collected are not based on the realities of either the venues or the artists. A small coffeehouse that allows covers will not likely have very many folk playing top 40 tunes (I've yet to hear an solo acoustic player do a Lady Gaga tune) but they pay the same fees as a bar with a top 40 cover band.

OTOH, I may hear a cover of a Peter Mulvey song or a Greg Greenway song. They'll likely get nothing from the distribution scheme of the agencies that does not count those outside of the mainstream. The reality then is that little coffeehouse is subsidizing artists like Lady Gaga rather than the artists whose works are actually being played in the venue.

Many of the small acoustic venues really do operate on a shoestring budget. Those fees have to come from somewhere and as often as not, the only non-fixed expenses are the pay for the performers. Their pay gets cut in order to pay the fees... and again, those fees are not likely to go to the artists whose songs are actually being covered.

Finally, those small venues are the incubators for up and coming talent. Had Cafe Lena not been there when Bob Dylan was first starting out, he may have chosen a different path than songwriting. When a venue is dancing on the edge, live music often becomes untenable because of the costs and we lose one more venue that in the past nurtured young and up and coming performers.

FWIW, playing public domain songs is not always a solution. Someone picks up a public domain song and registers their "arrangement" of it and suddenly ASCAP/BMI/SESAC are collecting fees.

I don't know what the solution is, but I really don't see the current scheme as working well or fairly especially for the lower level or niche artists and venues - read acoustic musicians and venues that support them.