Are "covers" at open mics being squeezed out?

[MrMartyr]

Originally Posted by Tobias Music

One of our teachers also runs a " Garage Band " business on the side. ( think School of Rock )

I shudder...but ok. Seriously though, this is a problem. We should be able to play a song without paying a fee.

[buzzardwhiskey]

Originally Posted by scottishrogue

I would have serious doubts ASCAP would win any lawsuit about this. Performing for free? On another thread the buskers, and other artist were told they could no longer congregate in "Old Town" in Sacramento...probably for same reason. As far as I'm concerned, it's a violation of one's First Amendment rights. I wonder if playing covers at private parties is going to be next? Just ridiculous. They should focus on all those Internet sites that offer free downloads, instead. Wait a sec...maybe not!

Glen

There's no reason in the world why this couldn't be the new American model. Places like coffee houses and restaurants where musicians are "likely" to play should be monitored 24/7 for the possibility of artistic infringement. House parties should be required to get a 24 hour "party license" whose proceeds could fund further policing. I think it could work!

[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

Originally Posted by MrMartyr

Seriously though, this is a problem. We should be able to play a song without paying a fee.

"We" can play them, but the business has to pay a fee. I honestly don't understand the objection to making a business pay royalties for using someone else's material in order to make a profit. The owner of a copyright deserves compensation when his material is bought, even indirectly.

[Gasworker]

Originally Posted by MrMartyr

I shudder...but ok. Seriously though, this is a problem. We should be able to play a song without paying a fee.

Play your own music for free forever. It's simple really, if someone stands to make money off of the performance of someone else's property the person making the money must be licensed. You can still play music with your friends at a campfire or sing in the shower. There is no first amendment argument here. As for cities and buskers I don't know what the first amendment argument posters are referring and maybe they can elaborate, but that's a different thread.

Originally Posted by reidplum

Does anyone know what the ballpark amount would be for a small coffee house doing an open mike?

Several pages of information here

[Hotspur]

Originally Posted by scottishrogue

I would have serious doubts ASCAP would win any lawsuit about this. Performing for free?

But the thing is, it's not really performing for free.

Just because the performers are not getting paid, doesn't mean no money is being made. THe house, one assumes, is incurring the expense of a PA system, an employee to keep things moving along, etc, because they expect to get more business because of it. They're making money - it's just money in terms of extra lattes sold.

I have a huge problem with the way ASCAP distributes this money. It seems to me that if they collect fees from a venue, they should be required to track those royalties and send them to the correct songwriters, but in practice they limit themselves to the highest-grossing 300 tours every quarter. This is totally not fair. But ...

... last time this came up (or maybe the time before, I don't know, it comes up a lot) we did the math on the licenses, and for a small coffeehouse doing this once a week, it sure looked like it came down to less than $10 a night. The notion that this sort of fee is killing the open mic itself is not credible.

"It's free advertising for the songwriters" is both true and irrelevant. I've seen the same argument used to justify piracy. The simple truth is that it is the rights-holder's prerogative to decide if he wants that kind of unpaid support or not, and by signing with ASCAP, he has made his decision clear. You can't say, "But I should have the right to give you free advertising" if the songwriter is saying, "I'd rather get paid."

Ultimately, the only way this will change is if members lobby ASCAP and BMI to change their approach, and there are practical issues with this, but if, say, BMI said "We don't enforce at no-cover venues with under 100 patrons" then artists would have a clear choice. But until signed songwriters make such a case, ASCAP and BMI are simply enforcing their will as they understand it.

[ryanhoots]

I'm a Linux user, so naturally I enjoy conversations about freedom, particularly freedom in intellectual property.

It all boils down to one statement. The music industry is weird.

[IVannaStrumAlot]

One night I was playing a gig with my band. It was a 45 minute set with a few other bands at a craft brewery in Orlando. We usually do all original material for "show case" nights such as this... but the crowd there seemed like they would enjoy our cover of "these boots are made for walkin"... so we announce that the next song is not one we wrote but to sing along and blah blah blah all that good stuff, made it very well known the song we were about to play was a cover. We start up the song with the very indentifiable bass intro and as soon as I start singing the first verse the owner comes out and shuts us down completely. It was not only embarrassing, but very rude. I understand supporting original music and that some venues are like that... but to actually stop us 30 seconds in just blew me away. It wasn't posted anywhere nor were we informed of their "no covers" rule. They didn't give us any explanation other than "that's the way it is". We had some fans there that were not very happy about it, and a few strangers that came up to us and said how they thought that was uncalled for and that they wanted to hear the song. I think what grinded my gears the most about it was that the two acts that went on before us played 50% covers, the only difference was that the owner didn't recognize the Jason Mraz/Jack Johnson songs so therefore nothing was said..... not playing there again.

[Franklin'sTower]

Where do they draw the line? Say you're playing covers on your porch and a small crowd of passerbys gather; one of them gives you a $10 bill. Do you need a license?

The music "industry" is ridiculous. An outdated, dying behemoth.

[Gasworker]

Originally Posted by Franklin'sTower

Where do they draw the line? Say you're playing covers on your porch and a small crowd of passerbys gather; one of them gives you a $10 bill. Do you need a license?

The music "industry" is ridiculous. An outdated, dying behemoth.

Really?? you need to take it to the ridiculous? Are you reporting the sawbuck to your IRS? Worry more about the taxman. This is really simple, this is a forum populated my musicians of all levels, we should support the ones trying to earn an honest living off of their creations.
By the way the behemoth is not dying its dead. Its replacement is called Itunes which is alive and well.

[ryanhoots]

Originally Posted by Franklin'sTower

Where do they draw the line? Say you're playing covers on your porch and a small crowd of passerbys gather; one of them gives you a $10 bill. Do you need a license?

The music "industry" is ridiculous. An outdated, dying behemoth.

Theoretically, if it's payment for the impromptu "performance", then yes, which doesn't feel right. In that situation, you wouldn't have asked for money, or even have asked for an audience. But you still made money, I guess.

I doubt anyone would sue, but you never know in this crazy world.

Myself, I think I need to start writing some originals. That way I don't get sued for playing my favorite songs while practicing in my room.

[lodi_55]

Originally Posted by Gasworker

Really?? you need to take it to the ridiculous? Are you reporting the sawbuck to your IRS? Worry more about the taxman. This is really simple, this is a forum populated my musicians of all levels, we should support the ones trying to earn an honest living off of their creations.
By the way the behemoth is not dying its dead. Its replacement is called Itunes which is alive and well.

Why is this ridiculous? Please explain.

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

[Franklin'sTower]

Originally Posted by Gasworker

Really?? you need to take it to the ridiculous? Are you reporting the sawbuck to your IRS? Worry more about the taxman. This is really simple, this is a forum populated my musicians of all levels, we should support the ones trying to earn an honest living off of their creations.
By the way the behemoth is not dying its dead. Its replacement is called Itunes which is alive and well.

I took it to the ridiculous, because to me, the fact that you can't play a cover without someone being charged a fee is ridiculous.

Don't get me wrong, I entirely support professional musicians, I go to shows, buy merchandise, etc. I have a feeling however that the fees that are charged to a small establishment for these covers do not actually go to the songwriters so I don't entirely know what you mean by supporting the ones trying to earn an honest living. I don't see how that relates in this scenario.

And regarding the dying behemoth, I really meant the record companies and all the middle-men that mooch off of the artists. I realize it's necessary in most cases, but you know what I mean.

[Antares]

Most of us musos/artists are not that cute when it comes to reading the samll print.Some are but most are not interested.We all want the gig.It's great when you meet an intelligent musician.No disrespect but just because you can play doesn't mean you don't have to bone up on entertainment law and local regulations.Sure some musos are bright but most are living in a dream world imho.Anyway a woman I know set up an open mike in London in a hotel and **** herself when she was dragged to court.Luckily and rightly so she was found not guilty of performing without the proper licence.The stress of the case was painful.
Owners of venues in England can either be freeholders or leaseholders and if you are organising the event as this lady was then the local authority will sue you and anyone connected which usually means the owner as well (not usually the performers) since he/she is allowing or promoting the event.Qwners often plead ignorance and push it on to the organsier.There is very little defence since it's one of strict liability.The simple answer is to contact your local Council and tell them what is proppsed and then find out whether a special permission is required from the Council in addition to the owner having a prs licience.You are safer if it's pure songwriting so there is no need for the PRS licence but of course people will perform the occasional cover and that's not covered.You will still probably need a performing licence.