If one actually is imitating a band or individual, as with Elvis impersonators, it is a different situation and is not just a matter of licensing the songs. I've heard of 'tribute' musicians being sued for 'theft of act.' Some get around this by not performing two songs in a row that are associated with the artist being imitated but I don't know how well that holds up legally.

Originally Posted By: Guitarhacker
Originally Posted By: JohnJohnJohn
I wonder if tribute bands fall into another category? Because they not only cover a certain band's songs but they use that band's reputation, success, persona, etc. in order to promote themselves. Seems like they should be paying more directly to the band they are impersonating/copying/tributing!


Nahhhh... It's all the same as cover.

I've seen a few bands that played normal cover sets for the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd set of the night, then, did a tribute set of a given band for the closing set. And they had several different tribute sets....quite literally, a different one for every night of the week.

The host venue pays the license fees.


I wonder..... does a concert promoter at a concert venue have to pay PRO royalties? I mean, after all, the artist who originally did the song is performing the song.... kinda like paying themselves..... but the PRO gets a cut of the action...... hummmmmmmmmmm????? Don't answer this.... it's rhetorical.

the Insolent Lad
Enough small empty boxes thrown into a big empty box fill it full. ~Carl Sandburg