thebreakfast.info
General Discussions => Tribal Funk Affliction => Topic started by: davepeck on July 09, 2007, 09:25:49 am
-
Al Kooper told the crowd (which I was blessed enough to be attendance for) that a musicians songs will take care of them. For him it was when a Mr. Jay Z sampled his song "Love Song (Theme From Landlord)". He had never heard of Jay Z before until one day he recieved a nice fat check in the mail. The checks continued and he was able to remodel his bathroom thanks to the jigga man.....
-
My 2 cents:
Bars, clubs, coffee houses and all other venues, when having either live or recorded music broadcast to their patrons, should pay royalties to the publishing companies. Even though the piece of the royalty pie is small for most artists, it still serves them. Nearly every venue I\'ve ever played at pays either BMI or Ascap. Its really no big deal. A few hundred bucks a year? Come on.
I am a big fan of licensed music. I love the bose jukeboxes that actually calculate royalties, even though they are more expensive.
SBC Thursday and Friday.
-
If I was a wealthy song writer... I wouldn\'t be in a stupid coffee shop because half naked women would be serving me beverages via carafes nestled in their bosom.
rotflrotfl
-
Up next:
Recording industry representatives comb city streets for bums playing cover tunes in public. "empty out that bucket (or hat) of nickels"
-
here, you can add this bullshit to this list of other bullshit
http://www.angelfire.com/falcon/flamingchickens/pointlesslaws.html
New Hampshire
You may not tap your feet, nod your head, or in any way keep time to the music in a tavern, restaurant, or cafe.
:lol: Stone Church is ****!!
-
And technically The Breakfast and Schumacher and everyone else for that matter do indeed owe the song writers they cover $. They play those songs because they are popular or appeal to their fanbase or will bring in X # of folks who like the red Hot Chili Peppers or whatever. It helps them to become better known or more popular etc.
I would imagine taht if any of you wrote a song and it was used by a large touring act live you guys would be the first in line to lawyer up and get paid.
Technically, shouldn\'t the breakfast & schumacher be covered by the venue\'s paying these fee\'s to ASCAP? Or does ASCAP double dip, hitting the venue and the cover artist?
I think your view of this issue is too black & white. The free advertising that an artist receives by having someone cover their song (on the "coffee shop" scale... and maybe a little above) should outweigh the technical letter of the copy write law.
If I was a mid-level song writer getting a cup of coffee at a crowded shop and someone covered my song, as long as they mentioned my name, I\'d be psyched.
If I was a wealthy song writer... I wouldn\'t be in a stupid coffee shop because half naked women would be serving me beverages via carafes nestled in their bosom.
-
Again it doesn\'t matter if the venue, any venue charges YOU to hear music they are benefiting from music being played
The fact that non-commercial music (ie radio station music, they already paid the fees) is being played in a venue means the business is profiting from it. You might not think that way but it is a real thing
We don\'t charge people to listen to our hold music. Does that mean we shouldn\'t have to pay ASCAP for the use of their artists music ?
this is not the RIAA that is doing this this is the folks protecting artists. If you have a problem with ASCAP then you have a problem with all the artist that ASCAP represents.
And by the way Business is about $ not making people feel good. Its about dollars and cents. If what you do for a living makes people feel good then great but it is all about the $ and don\'t try and kid yourself that it isn\'t.
People work to make $. they write songs for a living etc etc.
And technically The Breakfast and Schumacher and everyone else for that matter do indeed owe the song writers they cover $. They play those songs because they are popular or appeal to their fanbase or will bring in X # of folks who like the red Hot Chili Peppers or whatever. It helps them to become better known or more popular etc.
I would imagine taht if any of you wrote a song and it was used by a large touring act live you guys would be the first in line to lawyer up and get paid.
-
dont have time to read all this, but i know that there are created averages and percentages that calculates how often songs are played by each musician for each year, and they get paid based on those calculations. so no, if you only play jackson browne songs, jackson browne does not get all your money. but, jackson browne gets a percentage of all the pay that ALL recorded musicians make from the year, including thousands of performances where his music was not played at all.
im stoned and dont know if that makes any sense at all. but i know im right.
-
How do you think these folks make a living ?
They make their money when artists record the song and sell it on an album.
Charging some coffee shop owner money because they\'ve got some local artist performing covers seems greedy.
Obviously this coffee shop story is an extreme situation, but I think it points out a flaw in the system.
On the converse, I think that a venue like Toad\'s that brings in a cover band and charges a fee to see that band should be paying into the copy write system.
I was always under the impression that live "covers" were not considered a copyright infringement.......
from the ASCAP site
WHAT ASCAP LICENSES:
At a nightclub, music creates that party atmosphere;
-
here, you can add this bullshit to this list of other bullshit
http://www.angelfire.com/falcon/flamingchickens/pointlesslaws.html
-
I think we\'ve strayed from the point of the thread. The coffee shop in the original article has, "no cover charge" and "no pay for the musicians". That\'s far different than, for example, "I Shot the Sheriff" appearing on an Eric Clapton album that has sold millions of copies.
Clapton had to pay Marley (and associates), Schumacher shouldn\'t owe Dave Matthews a dime. It\'s a world of difference.
-
I was always under the impression that live "covers" were not considered a copyright infringement.......
Obviously if you are going to package and sell a recording (live or studio) which contained someone else\'s material, then yes, there needs to be some kind of financial satisfaction for the original artist, but this is proposterous....
-
This is the problem with the world today.
Everybody wants everything for free and no one wants to pay for it.
How do you think these folks make a living ?
Sure you can name a few mega artists that made millions selling albums but that makes up such a small percentage of working musicians.
What about the song writers who have the artists perform their songs ? Like the example earlier in the thread about Britney Spears\' writing people. What about them ? They aren\'t mega millionaires do they not deserve to get paid ?
here is a better example.
Should Eric Clapton not pay Bob Marley for singing "I Shot the Sheriff" ? or recording it ? It made him millions of dollars. he didn\'t write the song or the music. I guess it is OK because they all ended up being rich ?
What about all the arguments about Led Zeppelin playing music that was not theirs. Did the original Blues musicians who wrote that music not deserve any $
-
this is the most rediculous thing ive ever seen. it reminds me of that south park episode about downloading music, "now lars ulrich(spelling?) will have to settle for gold lined bathroom tiles instead of the platinum ones he wanted, still no big deal?"
-
gail zappa= rusty kuntz
-
I just sure do hope that the Zappa Family Trust does not get their hands on any Breakfast shows.......or the cover to the first album Psychedelic Breakfast....
-
i wonder if bands are supposed to pay for teases too?
-
lets put the shoe on the other foot. Say a major touring act liked a Breakfast song and were playing it fairly regularly. Would you think it was BS for Tim or whoever wrote it to get paid ? Now I am not sure how the $ gets paid out.
Bands like The Dead and The Black Crowes expanded my record collection ten fold thru their choice of covers. Ya think any of the surviving members of the Flying Burrito Brothers are gonna chase Chris Robinson or The Palace Theater for some lousy $1000 or thank him for the fans, like me, that came outta their shows wanting to hear the original version of White Line Fever?
Is this copy write infringement or free fuckin\' advertising? It\'s greed, plain and simple greed.
-
here is a link to their page about licensing. It doesn\'t include the fees but is interesting none the less.
http://www.ascap.com/licensing/about.html
-
how can a thousand dollars be chump change to a coffee shop operating in the red? hell, to anyplace that\'s operating in the red?
what if all i do is play, say, jackson browne covers at the coffee shop and i\'m the only person who plays covers at that coffee shop and that coffee shop does, in fact, pay its dues. can be proven that jackson browne is getting all the money paid to ascap or whomever? and if not, how can that company then argue that it is enforcing for that artist?
seems to me that, rather than enforcing century-old laws in a manner sure to produce an even worse reputation for an industry already looked at as evil, they\'d perhaps work on coming up with some way to deal with this issue in the 21st century. because, if they haven\'t been able to figure it out yet, their efforts so far are causing the death of their own industry.
is the extra few dollars a night (and in a coffee house, it is literally an extra few dollars) brought in by those folks playing covers really worth the bad press? or do you charge, say, clear channel, more than the coffee shops? that\'s one thing that wasn\'t clear in the article - does the fee change according to venue size, amount of live music, etc? if so, again, it should place the onus of costs on the real clubs, etc. so much so that going after the couple hundred bucks from a place that doesn\'t even make that much from its music doesn\'t make financial sense.
now, i understand that most of these laws are for the protection of the songwriters and not the performers. like, no money at all is going to britney, but a bunch is going to the people who actually write her songs. and that seems perfectly fair. but how the hell can you say, at any venue, who got played how often without literally having someone sitting in every single venue in the entire nation? and if they aren\'t doing that, then i would imagine a half-way decent lawyer would be able to poke holes in their \'enforcement\' techniques. sure, what they\'re doing is legal, but are they treating every single venue the same? and if not, doesn\'t that show unfair bias in enforcement?
Dude,
$1000.00 is nothing and it has nothing to do if they charge you to get in or not. We have to pay the fees simply for having music on our Phone system.
This is not the record companies. These are the companies who protect musicians and song writers.
lets put the shoe on the other foot. Say a major touring act liked a Breakfast song and were playing it fairly regularly. Would you think it was BS for Tim or whoever wrote it to get paid ? Now I am not sure how the $ gets paid out.
Same goes for the internet. You create a piece or artwork that you made and put it online. Someone sees it, likes it, and then takes it and puts it on their site. Would you not want to be compensated for your work ?
Also I think the issue is 2 fold. I believe that the venues are supposed to pay a flat fee to these folks like BMI, ASCAP etc but I also think the bands are supposed to submit their setlists to these companies and pay for using the songs. I recall a Rolling Stone article from not too long ago where Frank Zappa\'s wife was pissed off that all these bands cover Franks tunes and don\'t pay. I guess bands not submitting setlists is common but they are supposed to.
-
how can a thousand dollars be chump change to a coffee shop operating in the red? hell, to anyplace that\'s operating in the red?
what if all i do is play, say, jackson browne covers at the coffee shop and i\'m the only person who plays covers at that coffee shop and that coffee shop does, in fact, pay its dues. can be proven that jackson browne is getting all the money paid to ascap or whomever? and if not, how can that company then argue that it is enforcing for that artist?
seems to me that, rather than enforcing century-old laws in a manner sure to produce an even worse reputation for an industry already looked at as evil, they\'d perhaps work on coming up with some way to deal with this issue in the 21st century. because, if they haven\'t been able to figure it out yet, their efforts so far are causing the death of their own industry.
is the extra few dollars a night (and in a coffee house, it is literally an extra few dollars) brought in by those folks playing covers really worth the bad press? or do you charge, say, clear channel, more than the coffee shops? that\'s one thing that wasn\'t clear in the article - does the fee change according to venue size, amount of live music, etc? if so, again, it should place the onus of costs on the real clubs, etc. so much so that going after the couple hundred bucks from a place that doesn\'t even make that much from its music doesn\'t make financial sense.
now, i understand that most of these laws are for the protection of the songwriters and not the performers. like, no money at all is going to britney, but a bunch is going to the people who actually write her songs. and that seems perfectly fair. but how the hell can you say, at any venue, who got played how often without literally having someone sitting in every single venue in the entire nation? and if they aren\'t doing that, then i would imagine a half-way decent lawyer would be able to poke holes in their \'enforcement\' techniques. sure, what they\'re doing is legal, but are they treating every single venue the same? and if not, doesn\'t that show unfair bias in enforcement?
-
So... should we stop posting setlists?
I can understand this law (sort of) when it comes to something like the Good Time Boys, because they are advertised as playing the music of RHCP at a venue that is charging money. But for something like Timmy Tour in a bar that isn\'t charging a cover, it\'s ridiculous. At least Tim has enough originals if this ever happened to him (though I don\'t know how much he would enjoy playing only originals at acoustic gigs when he could be doing the same and getting paid more for Breakfast shows).
-
on the list of people that should never get upset about people playing their music, led zeppelin should be at the top.
-
I would think they\'d be responsible for the fee\'s only if they were charging folks to get in and see these performances.
I wonder if these record companies could impose finds on street performers?
"Mr. Palmieri, we understand that you\'re destitute, mentally ill and your only source of personal revenue is busking. But you were heard performing "Hey Hey What Can I Do" while standing in the gutter on Chapel Street. You now owe Robert Plant $45,000."
-
the good news is, perhaps this will be the end to karaoke! ;)
:thumbsup: :thumbsup:
-
the good news is, perhaps this will be the end to karaoke! ;)
-
Andrus said a friend of his who owned a restaurant that did not feature music was contacted by a company looking to charge him because it owned the rights to a Hank Williams Jr. song, "Are You Ready for Some Football?" The song preceded every "Monday Night Football" telecast, which the restaurant carried on its televisions.
Are you SER???
Say goodbye to The Goodtime Boys!! :sigh:
And also, how do these "fees" get divvied up amongst the artists? How can ASCAP possibly know what covers were played in a small coffee house during the course of a year for which $400 was paid?
I am not sure how the $ gets divided but they will send in under cover operatives to sit and record setlists when it comes to fines. There was an article about a music venue in the mid west that had not paid fess in years and BMI sent folks in to take setlists etc.
-
Andrus said a friend of his who owned a restaurant that did not feature music was contacted by a company looking to charge him because it owned the rights to a Hank Williams Jr. song, "Are You Ready for Some Football?" The song preceded every "Monday Night Football" telecast, which the restaurant carried on its televisions.
Are you SER???
Say goodbye to The Goodtime Boys!! :sigh:
And also, how do these "fees" get divvied up amongst the artists? How can ASCAP possibly know what covers were played in a small coffee house during the course of a year for which $400 was paid?
-
the law is the law. Bullshit as it may be.
-
Actually I would side with ASCAP BMI and the others on this.
They represent musicians and not the record companies for the most part.
The mom and pop shop listed in the article is basically complaining about $1000.00 a year to make sure they have covered themselves. Thats chump change. If they can\'t afford it then don\'t have people come in to your business and play covers. Pretty simple if you ask me.
We have to pay BMI and the others to have "On Hold" music for our customers.
It seems to me that they are claiming hardship when they turned to live music to draw more customers and make more money. They just don\'t want to pay the folks who created the art that they are promoting in order to make $.
The fees are nominal. The fines are not.
-
the continuing downfall of of the live music scene. thanks you greedy, self absorbed, money hungry pre-madonnas
-
read this.. it\'s disgusting.
http://www.floridatoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070708/NEWS01/707080343/1006
:sigh: