A retirement development that I play one or two dances per year got hit by the ASCAP rep and is forcing them to pay thousands of dollars per year so they can hold 6 parties a year in which they hire a band or DJ.

The parties are for the residents and guests, and the charge to the guests barely covers the entertainment and food. They usually break even or run at a slight loss.

That does not seem to me to be the proper place for ASCAP to be charging that much money.

I'm all for people getting paid for their copyrighted works, but come on, it's just a party between friends who live in the same place. What's next? Charging you to have a birthday party for your 6 year old and hiring a DJ?

Excuse the rant, I needed to vent.

Insights and incites by Notes

If it's a private event I wouldn't think that they should have to pay. I'm with BMI and I know that I cannot claim private parties on BMI live. It has to be a public event.

I suspect because that's easy pickings. Of course the net result in situations like this often is that there ends up being no DJ or band or music of any kind and then ASCAP doesn't get paid (because no music gets played and no license is required), but it's the elderly residents that actually get punished in the end.

I suspect that the retirement community should have found a way to ensure it would be seen (in the eyes of the law) as a private, not public, event, in which case the license would not be required. However, that's hard to justify if the family members from outside the community are invited to attend.

That sounds a bit fishy to me.

I played in a private club...members only.... so yeah, they can come in on private places too....

But they asked for set lists and looked at the juke box... which also was privately owned. They base the fee on the songs and the frequency of the live acts. It's all math. how many live bands, how many songs they play in a night, and apply the formula.

So if it's thousands of dollars, they might be looking at the venue in a retroactive sense which they might actually be entitled to do by law. Kinda like when the cable company catches you stealing cable. They determine when it started and can charge from that point plus interest and late fees etc... So yeah, if they have been using live music for many years and ASCAP just found out.... it could be painful.

I have been playing at one particular retirement facility for five years, once a month in the memory unit and approximately six times a year in the independent unit for their happy hour. One very nice lady that I chat with both before and after the performance is always writing in a notebook. She mentioned one day that she had a list of my songs from each performance and almost in the same breath mentioned that her son worked for ASCAP.
So far I haven’t a clue of what she does with her “lists” and whether or not ASCAP is in contact the facility.

Thousands PER YEAR for 6 parties totaling roughly 300 songs at most performed at them? I suspect that includes retroactive payments.

And just because I am always completely objective, let me ask you this. What if all 300 of those songs were written by Notes Norton? Would you be complaining that you didn't get your royalties? And the next devil's advocate step in my reply that will sound more snarky than it is intended to. Other than the possibility that you may lose 2 gigs a year, why does this bother you? You aren't paying the thousands of dollars. A completely disinterested party reading this is likely going to think those 2 gigs are what matters to you more than any kind of "It's the principle" motivation.

From my perspective, if it was 300 Eddie Anthony songs played at those 6 parties I would go to the ends of the earth to get my royalties. And as stubborn as I am about things like this I would probably spend more to get the royalties than the total of the royalties. Then again, I once spent $750 to sue somebody when the judgement was $650, so yes, you could say I am a vindictive SOB.

It's the "thousands" that is throwing me. I can't imagine 300 plays costing thousands. Could you elaborate on how many of those thousands they are being charged? 2000? 3000? 10,000? Could some ASCAP member who has collected those royalties please elaborate?

Once they know the fee per song, I anticipate that they will build language into the contract where they specify the number of songs you play and adjust the fee accordingly so they don't pay that fee. You do.

Would I care if my songs were being played at a not-for-profit private party?

I haven't written any songs, but I don't think that would bother me at all.

If you play songs made with my copyrighted BiaB styles at a party, I don't expect to be compensated for it other than the price you paid for the styles in the first place.

If you make a recording with a song made with my styles and sell a zillion copies, I'm happy for you, and you don't owe me any more money.

But that's different.

The thousands asked for is for a yearly license. They paid it last year, and ASCAP is asking for it again this year. I advised them to contact a lawyer.

It's a large multi building condominium complex, with a 55 year old age limit to live there. Perhaps ASCAP factors in the number of residents.

But I agree, it's probably just easy pickings.

I do know that I also play in commercial, for-profit establishments that do pay their ASCAP license fees. And I'm happy about that.

I do want songwriters and publishers to get paid for their creations, but I think a not-for-profit party on private property for residents and guests should not owe anything.

I'm not sure what the law is though.

Insights and incites by Notes

One thing we agree on is attacking a senior citizen community that holds 6 events per year is a huge pile of manure, that choice of words made in deference to the filter the forums have that would have inserted asterisks where I defined it as what falls out of the south end of a northbound bull.

Bars that have bands 6 nights a week, I get that. But this? It's not like they are recording the shows and selling them. And in my opinion, that is where the line is. If I put out 30 songs and somebody wants to pay them 10 times each, I see that as a business opportunity in that it might generate CD sales. The only complaint I would have is if someone resold my stuff for a profit and didn't pay me. That would be that same stuff from the bull.....

They should absolutely have a lawyer involved. If ASCAP is so soulless that they go after this low hanging fruit, they need to be stopped.

I worked at a law firm once that had a private server for the IT people to use where we could put our own music so we didn't have to bring CDs in every day and risk scratching them up. Each user had the password to the server, and the rules were that each user's directory had to be password protected. So for Joe to get to Mary's music, he would need Mary's password. To the best of my knowledge nobody shared passwords, thus nobody copied tracks. Somehow the RIAA got wind of it. They sent lawyers in to grill everybody who had a folder. As you can probably imagine from my "edge" on display here, my interview was, at the very least, entertaining and fiery. On and on they went about the evils of file sharing. I sat there and said "I agree." They then asked why I participated, to which I responded "You have just made an accusation based solely on your supposition that I share the music in my folder. And to supposition, I say that you are going to have to prove that I allowed anybody to share my music. Also, are you aware that the music in my folder is MY music? Songs I have written, performed and copyrighted? So tell me, why you think you have the right to tell me what I can and can't do with songs to which I own the copyright?" (Insert the amount of expletives you can be sure were included. Again..... asterisks.)

That ended my interview.

I hate bureaucracy in any form.

I know someone who was turned in for playing his own songs at an event.

That did clear up rather quickly... With an annoying interview much as you had, Eddie1261.

...Deb

Without knowing the details of the ASCAP billing.... it's just conjecture on our part to assume.

But as I mentioned... it does seem excessive. Then again, ASCAP could be cutting them a break depending on the details of the complaint.

It sounds as though they are expected to pay the same fee regardless of the number of hours of music played. Certainly doesn't seem fair.

Oh, and venting is good for the mind and body. Feel free

Trying to understand this thread...ASCAP is bad because they are collecting royalties from an organization that used their licensed music? I don't see any issue here. If they used the music then they need to pay the fee. Is their lawyer also looking into the local Walmart because they charge them for the bread and potatoes they buy to serve dinner in their cafeteria?

This is my take:

A: I own a department store that opens all hours, seven days a week. I play commercial music continuously on multiple speakers located throughout the store.
I pay ASCAP a fee.

B: I work in a retirement home. There is no music broadcast facility. A couple of times a year I invite a band to provide some music entertainment for the residents. The band plays for a total of, let's say 12 hours - per year.
I pay an ASCAP fee.

Should ASCAP fee A: be the same as ASCAP fee B:?

I'm interested in perceptions. What do you think?

I respectfully disagree.

If it were a commercial venture I'd say it was right to pay, but the residents and guests having a party? What's next? When your six year old has a birthday party at your house and invites her friends over, should you pay royalties for the songs played?

Like I said, I don't know the law and I suggested that they contact a lawyer, but this seems pretty excessive to me and IMHO an abuse of copyright law.

Insights and incites by Notes

Many years go, before they changed the law, I used to eat at a small Italian restaurant. One bay in a strip center with a total of 12 booths. The ASCAP man demanded a license because he was playing the radio.

The owner got a CD player and then played nothing but Public Domain Italian folk songs.

Insights and incites by Notes

Hi all
Well not sure about this one, but I think the problem lies in the fact that money is changing hands as entrance price and performer payment maybe ?

Here In the UK retirement homes do not have an entertainment budget, and all the keyboard players that I know on another forum perform for free, well, maybe a bit of cake and cup of tea.

Where as I know folks on the same forum that live in the USA one in particular in the San Francisco area that make a living out of playing multiple homes he has a round and some times plays more than 1 a day
This begs the question who should pay the fee the performer or the venue, one thing for certain who ever pays it will be paid for one way or another from the homes entertainment budget.
But this is a much different scenario to someone who may well be retired themselves going round and entertaining the folks in a home for free. But still may depend on the public having access or not.
Just my take
Mike

Is the retirement facility a nonprofit? I suspect it is not and if not then someone should pay or just use out of copyright music.

There is no set fee. It's based on the situation.

Look here>>> https://www.howmuchisit.org/ascap-license-cost/


According to this..... radio and television available over the air is NOT under this rule. https://www.paaba.org/2011/10/when-should-small-business-pay-ascap-or-bmi/ This keeps the small hardware mom and pop store from getting raked over the coals by ASCAP and BMI for the radio behind the counter for the clerk to listen at work.

This is a really tricky and touchy area, but I am going to have to side with John (J3) on this one because of one small concern:

The law.

People will hate me for making this comparison, but it is like the border issue. How many "illegals" do you turn a blind eye to? 1, 1,000, 10,000, 1,000,000, zero?

What does the LAW say?

Strictly speaking, if a law is in place (and copyright laws are in place to cover many things) you can't pick or choose which situations you think they should apply to, if those situations are already spelled out under the law. Is the ASCAP rep being greedy? That depends on your definition. They are mercenary soldiers. They get paid for a "kill." It is how they earn their living. ASCAP pays them for all the violations they can find. Same with BMI. Some may say they are the musical equivalent of ambulances chasers, or vultures or whatever other analogy you want to use. Others may say they are just doing their job. Who is right?

But does the law guarantee and uphold their right to do this, however cold-hearted and chiseling it may seem in some cases?

Yes. Absolutely.

It might totally suck, and in this case I feel sorry for everyone, but the law is the law, when all is said and done.

If the law does not work you have to make a new one.

I would like to see a law passed that would allow people to play show tunes for the elderly, but legally, I don't see how you would be able to do that without gutting the very intention and spirit of the law itself--which is to protect the rights of songwriters to get paid when their songs are performed.

A very thorny area, though, I admit. Very thorny.

Well the retirement development sent it to the lawyer they have on retainer, and a couple of weeks later after much research he came up with the advice to pay the fee.

It seems aggressive of ASCAP, and since the license is a bulk license and they are not required to keep a log of the songs played, I don't think the proper songwriters are going to get compensated directly. Perhaps it goes into the retirement fund or something else.

The fee just goes on their condominium residents' monthly assessment fees and the residents will probably not notice a difference.

When it's the law, individual opinions that disagree are unimportant. It's obey the law, and if you want it changed, either (1) comply and then get a petition up to send it to your congress person to get it changed, or (2) comply without fighting it.

In this case, the second choice is IMO the wiser one.

Insights and incites by Notes

Funny, but I have always thought that IT people are the most soulless bureaucrats on earth It takes a special kind of rules guy to turn a Personal Computer into a machine that can only be modified by people with administrative credentials.

Former RIAA employee here. Although our people may have told you that they were investigating file sharing among your small group, it was probably a cover story to throw the employees off what they actually knew. We didn't ever look at a small group of friends sharing files. That would have been a waste of resources. If we zeroed in on an IT department, you can bet that we traced a peer to peer file sharing operation back to your IP address and were trying to discover who was running it. That is the kind of large scale piracy that we could justify going after. Someone who started giving me a hard time and cussing me out would have gotten an extra hard look right after I turned a recorded copy of my interview over to his employer.

Sorry to disagree with your assertion as to the width of the net the RIAA cast in those years, Sandra, but that law firm paid out 7 figures to keep it quiet. It was the largest law firm in my state, and as such any sort of doubt as to their character would have been quite damaging. So they paid the amount of the extortion and moved on.

I never saw a cent, by the way, for the handful of songs under my copyright, a total of 23, stored on my drive.

I sent a letter directly to Hillary Rosen asking that the RIAA disbursement logs be made public (As well as demanding payment for my 23 songs that were on that server, though I am sure it would not have even been enough to buy a Snickers bar from the vending machine) so we could see all the "good" the RIAA was doing. She declined to reply. It is only right that the artists see all the good work the RIAA was doing on their behalf. I was particularly interested in seeing settlement data from the elderly people who know nothing about computers yet were taken to task for the actions of their grandchildren.

My best guess in the case of that law firm is that one particular former employee who was terminated about 4 months prior, and escorted from the building in handcuffs by security amid a fit of violent rage, was looking for any way possible to cause damage to the firm and reported the server, as benign as it was.

Again, I hate bureaucracy in any form.

I also see that this is your first post, and typically people who come here and make one post this acerbic are trolls, though it's been fun, and thanks for playing!!

I think it would make more sense if the license to perform music was paid by the musicians, not by the venue. My reason for thinking this is that the musician has a vested interest in the ability to play music... much more so than the host. The venue sees the costs incurred to offer live music as a liability to be circumvented. When this circumvention takes the form of trying to slide in under the radar... and they get caught... the predictable result is twofold:

1) that venue stops hosting live music
2) other venues take note of what happened, and some of them stop hosting live music too

If the license followed the band instead of the venue, then more places would be willing to host live music, and everybody would win. It would also open up many small venues that could never justify the cost of a license (such as those who only host live music a few times each year, like the one in this example)

It would also give licensed musicians an edge over those who tried to compete without their own license.

I like it, Pat.

Yes, sounds good, on paper, until the band (YOU) actually have to pay the FEE.

I suspect under that arrangement the fee would then end up being not ONCE (i.e., lump sum annually or even forever for some TBD catalog of songs) but for EVERY performance you make of said catalog, real-time deviations from catalog not allowed - without new fee structure - and and honor system to send in extra money when you want to deviate real-time would never be allowed.

You'd end up having to post your entire allowable catalog of songs so that customers (venues) could pick and choose which bands/musicians they want based on the catalog.

It would end up being - who has best or biggest Jukebox list.
Larry

Pat.

The musicians are already underpaid. So I would make less.

On the other hand, it would keep the amateurs who play for free on 'open mic' nights because they would have to pay to play.

So who knows if it would balance out with more gigs?

Insights and incites by Notes

Nobody is going to open mic nights to avoid paying for music. In my experience the crowd, if you can call it that, at open mics is about 10% regulars who could care less and 90% the open mic performers. You are just not losing gigs to folks having a little fun at open mics.

What was "acerbic" about her post? Just because she disagreed with your story?

Yeah, I understand the rational objections to a system in which the musicians pay the licensing fee. Nobody wants more fees. I'm mostly thinking out loud here, please hear it as an idea not as a lobbyist pushing an agenda. ;-)

my thinking:
Other trades that are licensed (plumbers, electricians etc) have a distinct advantage. Certain jobs can't even be bid on by unlicensed contractors. The license is money well spent, because they make way more than the cost of their license just by having it. Those with licenses can charge more for the same services, because it creates somewhat of a monopoly on their credentials.

Anybody who has ever prospected for gigs has heard "NO" at some point because the business doesn't want to open a can of worms by offering live music. Having your own license would answer that objection.

Based on the link Herb posted, I don't think the price threshold is that high given the small crowds somebody like me would play to... even if you had to pay per gig. The annual fee is even more reasonable. Like, what you might pay the roadie for one gig.

If your band were the only licensed entertainment solution in town, and you advertised as such... I have to think it would open up doors to you. Pretty soon venues would be asking the other bands "Do you have your own ASCAP license? We let ours go, so we only hire bands that have the license. You understand.. it keeps us in business..."

Nuff said.

I must respectfully disagree.

Here in South Florida venues that used to hire bands now hold open mic nights on Friday and Saturday nights. Since they used to pay musicians on those nights, it does take food out of the mouths of working musicians.

Sure the musicians are going there to have a little fun, but the club owner is saving hundreds of dollars by not paying them.

The owner gets paid, the bartenders gets paid, the wait staff gets paid, the cook (if there is one) gets paid, ASCAP gets paid, and even the people who scrub the toilets get paid. In the club owner's eyes, these people are worth more than the musicians.

And the musicians are agreeing that they are worth less than the person who cleans the toilets.

Plus the musicians bring their friends along who buy drinks and/or food so the club owner makes even more money by exploiting musicians who want to have fun.

You can't blame the club owner: free entertainment that brings their own business. I can blame the musicians though for allowing this to happen.

Most of the 'open mic' musicians have day jobs. How would you like it if someone came in to work one day a week on your job for free, and your boss gave you the day off and docked your pay for that day? That is essentially what you are doing to a fellow musician when you play for free in a for-profit establishment.

I'm not totally against playing for free. I go down to the VA hospital's nursing home and play for the disabled vets for free, I play for charities I believe in when I know that everyone else is volunteering their time, and I jam with other musicians either in non-profit venues or when I know the house band is getting a fair wage for the evening.

But as Pat mentioned, if the musicians were responsible for paying for the performing rights, perhaps the people who go to open mic nights wouldn't want to pay to play.

On a side note, I know the law does not agree and I advise people to follow the law, I feel that once a song gets to the Billboard hot 100 or equivalent, the public should be able to play these songs in a not-for-profit situation (like a condominium clubhouse party) without paying royalties under the Fair Use provision.

In the old days, the publishers and artists made money by selling sheet music. They didn't care where you played the music, you bought the rights to play it.

So perhaps if a musician buys a piece of music, he or she should be able to play it wherever he or she wants.

After all, if you own a book you can read it out loud wherever you want.

Just another thought to complicate the issue.

Insights and incites by Notes

So I assume you are also opposed to people using Band in a Box for live shows and recordings? Because it would be pretty hypocritical to complain about open mic folks while putting bass players, drummers, keyboard players, etc. out of work just because you found software that could do their job a lot cheaper, right?

Thank you Triple John for saying what I thought. I had no idea that I was being acerbic, being a troll, or playing a game. I was attempting to point out that Eddie's understanding of how the RIAA works is very flawed. Since he accuses me of being a troll (and since his signature says that he really doesn't post here anyway) I will simply invite him to stop commenting on my posts and to report them to the administrators if he thinks that I'm trolling. I regard his posts as more typical of the true troll so I would be more than happy to have the mods review our respective posts. Mr. Eddie, I will not be speaking to you but my fellow forumites and you can go play whatever game you think your are playing with others. I'm not one bit interested in having an exchange with you, but at least you had fun and thank you for playing. Now, go away and let my humble comments be.

I'm a 10 month lurker on the forum. My husband bought BIAB for me as a Christmas present. The comments that were made about RIAA was the first time I saw something that I actually knew something about and thought I could correct some misinformation posted by a person who knows little to nothing about the subject matter. The declared assumption that RIAA was alerted to a problem by a disgruntled employee led from the building in handcuffs is just the poster's assumption, which he admits, yet talks like it is a certainty. The most likely scenario is that someone on the server fired up a peer to peer program and had files in his shared folder that were owned by one of RIAA's member record labels. These are the conditions that result in investigations of the nature described.

I worked for Ms Rosen and can tell you that she probably had a pretty good laugh at the poster's demand for royalties. The RIAA doesn't collect royalties for artists. RIAA members are the record labels and distributors. RIAA lawsuits barely cover the costs of the anti-piracy program but in any given case, its impossible to say if the lawsuit, or threatened lawsuit is being pushed by the RIAA or a member record label. I'm zeroing in on the poster's claim that his employer settled for a sum above a million dollars. That indicates to me that a specific record label or labels identified a quantifiable number of internet shares of their intellectual property either originating or ending up on the computer of the law offices. High powered law firms as a rule don't pay out damages to avoid embarrassment over something they did not do unless the shared intellectual property was particularly embarrassing, like Gay [*****]. Of course if the readers would rather accept the poster's guess that the firm was a victim of a disgruntled employee please feel free to join him in his delusional world along with the rest of the world's conspiracy theorists.

I have less knowledge about how ASCAP does business but I can share with Mr. Norton what I know from conversations with ASCAP people. As I recall, ASCAP has a standard contract that they sign with Hospitals, Nursing Homes, and other health care services that are FOR PROFIT. Non-profits as I understand it are either left alone entirely or sign a contract that costs the facility a nominal amount per year. Any facility that is FOR PROFIT can sign a contract for a standard amount when they first open for business OR they can declare that they will never use any material that is under copyright. It seems likely that Mr. Norton's facility either declared that they were a non profit, or that they were for profit and did not ever use ASCAP's intellectual property. After they were in operation for several years, ASCAP then found that whatever initial declaration they made was fraudulent. That would result in ASCSAP seeking damages for the years that the facility was in operation under a false declaration.

Welcome... and quite an interesting read.

Glad something dug you out of the woodwork. So... tell us about yourself. Do you write, play an instrument, sing, etc...?
Have you dug in and used BB to compose something?

Hope you hang around and become a part of this community. you really don't need to know anything about a topic to comment here as an expert. (sorry... I thought that was funny) We have lots of discussions on many topics, so jump in if it's only to say you agree or not.

Of course, a well thought out reply such as you gave on this one always makes for interesting reading.

Welcome to the forums and the world of BB

We never played at an open mic night or a jamboree for the exact reasons that you mentioned. But, like you, we did play for free at a local VA hospital.

I also agree with you about the not for profit play issue. As long as no money is exchanging hands then you should be able to play without paying royalties.

I think that very few guitarists or bassists buy sheet music. They just get the chords, lyrics and tabs from the Internet. I also do that at times but I also have a ton of sheet music, music books, and fake books.

The above is only my opinion and YMMV.

Thank you Guitarhacker. I thought that was funny too.

I'm an Attorney with the State Government in North Carolina. As far as music, I'm a singer (contralto) and I've been trying to learn to play guitar for the last year or so. I have been using Band in the Box to help me practice what I learn and to back up my singing. I've dabbled with writing songs but I've not published anything or recorded anything yet.


Maybe one day soon I'll learn RealBand and start recording some songs.

Sandra McG, you are most welcome here!

We have a few irascible folks on this forum but by and large, we're quite friendly and even helpful. The reference to first posters applies to those who post one inflammatory message and never return, and we have indeed had our share of those.

You are not one of them. We greatly welcome your participation.

I've noticed it is confusing to some to understand what ASCAP/BMI do versus RIAA and SoundExchange. It's great to have someone here who does have experience with RIAA. I think you are correct; I don't recall RIAA coming up in discussions here in well over a decade.

I think we are comparing apples to oranges here. The situation you describe IMO is entirely different. Let me explain:

A single or duo using BiaB or other backing tracks will play in a place where the owner/management will never hire a trio or quartet, so no musicians are out of work.

The venues around here that traditionally hire larger bands still hire larger bands. The venues around here that have always hired singles and duos, still hire singles and duos. So who is out of work?

I know this from experience. I am in a duo where we play very small rooms on 'stages' where even a duo with a drum set would not fit. So who is out of work here?

However if a club that used to hire a quartet hired a duo with backing tracks instead, I'd agree with you 100%.

Last Friday we played at the very place where ASCAP is billing the condominium board of directors. Small room, perhaps 75 guests, they brought their covered dishes and alcoholic drinks, mixers and ice was supplied by the entertainment committee. We set up in front of the kitchen between two doors in a space I'd guess 4' by 10'. In front of us was the dance area (tables cleared out and replaced when done) and after the covered dish dinner the dance area was full until we stopped playing. A trio with a PA would have never fit there. So who is out of work?

Tuesday we played outdoors at a marina. They have music 7 days a week. Mostly singles and duos. They have been there since the 1940s and never hired bigger bands. So who is out of work here?

Wednesday we did a Yacht club for about 65 people in a 'cubby hole' so small the speakers wouldn't fit in with us. Leilani had to be careful not to hit her guitar against the wall. I'd guess 8' width max. Who is out of work here?

Saturday we did a mobile home park where a lot of Canadians spend the summer, perhaps 60 people. The 'stage' would have probably fit a quartet if the drummer had a small kit, but the park has been there since the 1960s and as far as I know have never hired anything but singles, duos and an occasional trio. So who is out of work here?

Back on topic. Is this a just cause for ASCAP to charge the condo where they bring covered dishes to a party a yearly fee? If so, I think the copyright laws need to be adjusted. But I've already learned 'my' government representatives may listen to me, but that's about it.

Insights and incites by Notes

Your argument works just as well for open mics. I could just as easily say those bars who sponsor open mics cannot afford to pay musicians so if not for open mic night there would be no music. So who is out of work there?

And you failed to address the fact that recording musicians lose work because of the use of products like BIAB and the products you sell.

Just to be clear, I support your right to replace musicians with your products. Just like I support venues replacing paid acts with open mics.

What I disagree with is complaining about open mics taking gigs from musicians while selling a product that takes jobs from musicians.

Very cool. Are you in or near the Raleigh area? Several of us are located within that triad area. Pat Marr I think is from the Winston area.... David Snyder is in Raleigh, I'm just east of Raleigh. In fact there's a songwriter's meeting run by David in Raleigh once a month. I've been slack about getting to the meetings, but with your job in a music related field.... I'm sure David would love to have you come and talk about what you did or do in that respect and how it relates to us ordinary musicians. We have a diverse group of folks who come to the meetings..... a few of them have BB but most don't. But it's not a BB group, it's a songwriter group.

Guitarhacker

I work in Raleigh and live in Durham. One of the reasons that I left RIAA is the job kept me on the road most of the time and I was ready to start a family. My government job doesn't involve any travel, but I have twin toddlers and another child on the way so I don't have a lot of time to invest but will consider getting involved. I already knew from my lurking that a lot of you guys live in this area.

If you ever have trouble telling the twins apart, here's an idea. Be aware, however, that at least one of them will need therapy later.

I can honestly say that in my forty plus years of making my living working in music, this is the first time I have ever heard of bands and club owners having to pay ASCAP for doing covers in the clubs.

We were a cover band - classic Country/old Rock and Roll. All of the other local bands were/are cover bands as well. In all my years, nobody ever approached us about the need to pay royalties for all the songs were were doing/covering. Nor any other band. As I said, it was never heard of.

I DID get tagged for not keeping up with my musican's union dues many, many years ago.

Sandra,

I am the Raleigh Chapter Coordinator for the Nashville Songwriter's Association International. (NSAI.) We meet once a month (the third Wednesday) at Sam Ash. Some really talented people around here
(in all genres) are a part of NSAI.

We would love to have you drop by our group sometime as a guest speaker, if you want, to share what you know about the industry. People would eat it up with a spoon.

You may even find a songwriting buddy, and I will be happy to answer any questions you have about Band in Box. I will send you a PM with my email, but I am pretty easy to find. It is hard for me to be a troll because I am all over the Internet. Too late for privacy now. My whole life is out there so I have nowhere to hide.

People VERY close to me work with the lawyers and other folks at NC State Government so looks it like we have a few things in common.



Happy Thanksgiving.

As with about anything, there are invisible under currents clouding the issues of copyright in the USA.
And, as is almost typical, the trails lead back to the congressional dome. How many remember Sonny Bono of Sonny and Cher? Remember when he became a US Representative? Some of the copyright "reforms" Sonny was able to push through were actually laughable.
Here's a reasonably educated article:
https://harvardmagazine.com/2012/07/a-radical-fix-for-the-republic

You live in Canada. ASCAP and BMI are American PRO's. Canada has it's own equivalent and it's own laws regarding intellectual property.

Many restaurants locally in NC-USA have ASCAP or BMI stickers on their doors. I've played in many bars also with the sticker on the front door. One place, a private club where we were the house band, had a visit from the PRO rep and while they never came to us to ask questions, the owner informed us they did speak to him and he wanted us to provide a set list of the songs we played over the last several months.... the further back the better. They don't speak to the bands because the bands rarely own the venue. It's the owner who has the liability and responsibility to pay the royalties and license fee. Shortly after the PRO was there and we provided the set list to the owner, a BMI sticker was proudly placed on the front door glass.

I agree, Pat, but either way, the cost gets pushed along to the venue.

Thank goodness none of those regulations were in effect, or least not employed during the time I was coming up through the ranks.

Now, at my advanced age, I'm settling for writing and recording my tunes with no thought of using those home-brewed songs for anything but my own pleasure. But, I guess there's really nothing wrong with 'Still trying to hold on to a dream that's long gone' (lyrics from one of my latest songs).

That episode I described about the house band gig.... that was 30 years ago. This has been a thing for a very long time.

I've made it a point to notice, and so far all the commercial places I've played have had ASCAP stickers, not on the front doors, but mostly at the manager's office.

I feel good about that.

But I can't help feeling sorry for the non-profit condominium that is paying.

But I don't agree with the 25mph speed limit on Indrio Road either, but I obey it. I'm sure the people with children on that street appreciate it.

Insights and incites by Notes

PS. JohnJohnJohn I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on that subject. Everyone has a right to an opinion, and friends don't have to agree on everything.

Notes, the music cops, not a good thing for small or private menu's, and strong DWI laws, a good thing all around, have been the causes for closing many places for bands to play around here.

The strong DWI laws have definitely taken their toll on our business. But driving drunk should not be tolerated. It is never OK to endanger the lives of innocent people.

That's why I moved from the lounge business to the private party business back in the early 1990s. The people in the retirement community can drive their golf carts home. The people in the condominium can take the elevator. The people at the yacht and country clubs come out for dinner with dancing afterwards and leave the club with the legal limit in their bloodstreams.

As the lounge business got worse for musicians, I see more and more competition for the private gigs. That doesn't bother me though, we are better than the majority, and our gig schedule proves it.

I know this is drifting off topic, but IMHO the biggest thing hurting our business is Television.

When my parents grew up, TV was 3 channels in black-and-white with tinny sound. In my younger days TV was a half dozen stations with grainy color, low rez picture(525 lines), and tinny sound (it was a function of the analog bandwidth devoted to the audio part of the signal). In order to see and hear live music, you had to go out where live music was being played.

Now you have a zillion channels, super HD screens that can be more than 50 inches, and up to 7.1 high fidelity digital sound. You can have The Rolling Stones, Slash, Nicki Minaj, or Ariana Grande in your living room. No need to go out. And with a Cable or Satellite monthly subscription payment that can easily climb to $300, who can afford to go out?

To get back on topic. I think the ASCAP people should leave the private party people alone. I know it's the letter of the law, but I think it oversteps the intent of the law. But that is just this layman's opinion.

Insight and incites by Notes

A true story, the CPA firm I work for has some Hollywood actors as clients. One is now in his late 80's and while not a big star was in tons of shows 30 odd years ago as a costar including a few iconic movies. He's been a member of the Academy for years. He was sent a confidential DVD maybe 8 years ago to watch and vote on. His grandson got hold of it, ripped it and posted it online. It had an embedded code to identify where it came from and our client lost his Academy membership over that.

Bob

Notes, I was in wedding bands for years so we personally was not really affected by the DWI laws. However a number of my friends quit playing because one, there were fewer and fewer places to play and two, some bands lowered there price to what I was making playing rock in bars back in the 60's, and that wasn't much back then!

I don't want to do weddings, unless they are second or third marriages, but it's a good gig and there is decent money there.

In South Florida there is much more business in the 55 year old and up market, and ever since the 1990s that's where my focus has been. Like weddings the DWI laws are not a factor.

Playing yacht clubs has another advantage, I've been take out for the day on some pretty nice boats that I could never afford to even think about.

Insights and incites by Notes

Yup.... NC was .12 and moved to .10 and there really wasn't a big change.... but when it was dropped to .08... people started to get scared. You lose your license automatically for 10 days and perhaps longer after the judge gets done with you.

The .08 started on January 1 of that year... and I was in a house band at the time. The crowds were noticeably smaller instantly. The NC HP used to set just down the road from the club and pull people over who they saw coming out of the parking lot. I was followed numerous times but wasn't concerned because I had stopped drinking on the job long before the DUI level changed because band members were considered employees of the bar...even though we were sub-contractors .... and the ABC law enforcement was a bigger threat than the NCHP. They could also bust us and the bar.... so we curtailed the drinking to prevent issues.

But I could tell some stories on this before the band learned our lessons.