Bar sued for having cover bands - An ASCAP Story

[moxham123]

Who is actually making the money from these "licenses"?

http://hamptonroads.com.nyud.net/200...copyright-suit

Would you pay almost $14,000 to hear a local band play a cover version of Tom Petty's hit "I Won't Back Down"?

Randy White might, and he's not happy about it.

White's problems began Aug. 10, 2007. It was a Friday night, and a crowd came to his club, called Randzz, to drink beer, play pool and maybe listen to the band.

At least one person listened - closely. The band's playlist, which included hits by Stone Temple Pilots and Bob Sege r, got that person's attention.

About 10 months later, several music publishers filed a lawsuit against White, accusing him of copyright infringement. They argued that he was allowing bands to play copyrighted songs without their permission or the proper license. In late May, a federal judge ruled in their favor.

White said he plans to appeal. "I just don't feel I'm responsible for it," he said. "They should be talking to the bands."

The American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers says otherwise. For an annual fee, ASCAP issues licenses that allow TV networks, radio, restaurants, nightclubs and a slew of other venues the right to play clients' music - an inventory of about 8-1/2 million songs.

The 2009 licensing fee, based on seating capacity and other factors, would cost White $1,501.20 for his business.

"This is how songwriters make a living," said Vincent Candilora, ASCAP's senior vice president of licensing. "I think the problem with the public is they don't separate the songwriter from the recording artist. They think that everybody is Bruce Springsteen or Rob Thomas."

For a place that isn't easy to find, Randzz Restaurant & Pub drew ASCAP's attention quickly after it opened in 2006.

Randzz sits on a 55 mile-per-hour stretch of Holland Road, surrounded by farm fields. Motorcycle parts, Harley-Davidson memorabilia, quirky signs and women's lingerie line the walls. Its slogan: "Conveniently located in the middle of nowhere, but worth the ride!" It bills itself as more than a biker bar, with live music most Friday and Saturday nights.

ASCAP has teams assigned to monitor whether businesses are following the public performance aspect of copyright law. About five employees cover Virginia and North Carolina, scouring the Internet for leads and making note of openings and closings, Candilora said.

They will call and send letters to remind business owners that they need a license to play songs in the ASCAP inventory - whether on compact disc or performed by a live band. Most comply, Candilora said.

White didn't.

Between September 2006 and August 2007, he received at least nine letters regarding the need for a license or artist permission, according to an opinion filed May 22 by U.S. District Judge Mark S. Davis.

White said he ignored the letters and also some phone calls because he thought they were "bogus."

"How does this little place do irreparable damage to some Joe Blow who wrote a song 20 years ago?" he asked.

ASCAP sent an investigator to the bar on that August night in 2007. The investigator cited three instances where ASCAP members' songs were performed live.

The publishers of those songs - "I Won't Back Down," "Interstate Love Song" and "The Fire Down Below" - filed the copyright infringement lawsuit almost a year later, after White still refused to buy a license from ASCAP.

"I guess he figured he was the small fish: 'I'm in Suffolk, Virginia. They must have bigger fish to fry,' " Candilora said of White. "It isn't about the size. They gave us no choice."

White said t he performances are done by garage bands made up of people who play on weekends.

"I have nothing to do with the playlist for the bands," White said.

It d oesn't matter, Candilora said. People go out to eat or drink for the atmosphere, for which music is a critical component. White benefits from having a band play live, he said.

The judge agreed.

"Defendant asserted to ASCAP that the performer has the sole responsibility to obtain permission or a license to perform copyrighted material. This argument is without merit," Davis wrote. "As Defendant was operating an ostensibly profit-making establishment, he had a financial interest in the infringing activity."

Davis forbade White from allowing performances of any music in the ASCAP inventory without authorization and ordered him to pay $10,500 in statutory damages, plus about $3,300 for the music publishers' attorney fees and other costs.

White said he might close down if he loses the appeal.

[Hawk]

White's a fool. He was warned. He knew he was screwing the owners of the music. He got what he deserves.

It's not up to the bands to pay licensing fees for White to fill up his bar. If he thinks it is up to the bands, then just add (whatever the cost) $200 to the bands pay to cover ASCAP. He'd still bitch. Screw him.

They should also tack on a licensing fee for DJs, for the performers on the recordings (which is different than the owners of the songs).

[hicksjd9]

This is just one more nail in the coffin of live music cover bands. The owner could have saved a lot of money by paying the 1500, but what I can't understand is how are radios, Jukeboxes, and DJs any different than a cover band? This sort of thing is ridiculous.

[Hawk]

This is just one more nail in the coffin of live music cover bands. The owner could have saved a lot of money by paying the 1500, but what I can't understand is how are radios, Jukeboxes, and DJs any different than a cover band? This sort of thing is ridiculous.

If you rented your car, would you expect to be compensated ?

The owners of the songs get compensated when someone uses their songs. It comes from licensing fees that venues pay. It's been that way for a long long time.

The fee covers DJs, radio, jukeboxes and live performance of covers.

The money only goes to song owners and not to the musicians who performed on the recordings (when used via radio, DJs and jukeboxes).

[orangekick]

This is just one more nail in the coffin of live music cover bands. The owner could have saved a lot of money by paying the 1500, but what I can't understand is how are radios, Jukeboxes, and DJs any different than a cover band? This sort of thing is ridiculous.

This isn't something new. This has been in place for quite some time. There have actually been a few venues over here in Pittsburgh that have asked bands not to play covers in order to avoid this type of situation. I have no issue with this. The bar owner in this situation is in the wrong, plain and simple.

[KeithReynolds]

He should have paid, and everything wouldve been fine.

[Blue Reality]

Here's where I have a problem. Most songwriters gained experience by playing other artists songs. They didn't go to PSU and get a degree in song writing. The survived by playing other writers' material and would have been the first to complain about being a struggling artist, getting hasseled ect. So when they make it, now they want protection from the very thing that enable them to survive and make it in the first place.... Now that's stupid. Hit up the DJ's, clubs that make money off the actual recordings, stores that pipe radio feeds for background mudic, or people who use the industry. Leave the schmuck in the cover band alone. If he's playing an artists material, then he's probalby supported/compensated the artist in the first place by buyind a cd, t-shirt or concert ticket. If this stuff had been enforced from day one, there would be no Hendrix, Clapton, Van Halen, Pantera you name it.

I still believe that the enforcement of the issue stemd from digital transfer of music upsetting the industry. An industry has its head up its ass and they go after the guy/venue that is the best avenue for developing artists. Stupid.

[ToonaRockGuy]

Sorry, but I go with Hawk on this one. Look at the door next time you go to 30 Something. There's a BMI/ASCAP sticker right on the door that shows that Claudio pays his fees. That's part of the expense of being a bar owner, and if you don't pay and get caught, you pay the price.

[moxham123]

ASCAP (formed 1914) & BMI (formed 1939) have been in existence and enforcing licensing fees for a long time.

These websites answer most licensing questions.

http://www.ascap.com/licensing/licensingfaq.html

http://www.bmi.com/about/?link=navbar

http://www.artistshousemusic.org/videos ... ap+license

In 2005, ASCAP collected US $750 million in licensing fees and distributed US $646 million in royalties to its members, with a 12.5% operating expense ratio. In the United States, ASCAP competes with two other performing rights organizations: Broadcast Music Incorporated (BMI) and the Society of European Stage Authors and Composers (SESAC) that collect and distribute fees separately to their respective members.

[bassist_25]

Here's where I have a problem. Most songwriters gained experience by playing other artists songs. They didn't go to PSU and get a degree in song writing. The survived by playing other writers' material and would have been the first to complain about being a struggling artist, getting hasseled ect. So when they make it, now they want protection from the very thing that enable them to survive and make it in the first place.... Now that's stupid. Hit up the DJ's, clubs that make money off the actual recordings, stores that pipe radio feeds for background mudic, or people who use the industry. Leave the schmuck in the cover band alone. If he's playing an artists material, then he's probalby supported/compensated the artist in the first place by buyind a cd, t-shirt or concert ticket. If this stuff had been enforced from day one, there would be no Hendrix, Clapton, Van Halen, Pantera you name it.

I still believe that the enforcement of the issue stemd from digital transfer of music upsetting the industry. An industry has its head up its ass and they go after the guy/venue that is the best avenue for developing artists. Stupid.

But the indivdual musician isn't supposed to pay the fees. It's the venue owner.

I'm with Bill, Kevin, and Keith on this. Pay the fees. Support artists. 'nuff said.

[MeYatch]

about every 6 months one of these things pop up. Eventually bar owners will learn. The reason he has to pay $15000 in fines is to serve as an example and deterant to other bars.