Karaoke Forums

ASCAP - any comments?

Who pays ASCAP/BMI dues? Is this normally the responsibility of the KJ or the venue? Or is this just kinda forgotten with karaoke?

Thanks
John

It's the responsibility of the venue.

_________________
I like everyone when I first meet them. If you don't like me that's not my problem it's YOURS!
A stranger is a friend you haven't met yet

These fees are a very sensitive issue for many bar owners. I know of at least two bar owners that quit karaoke after ASCAP/BMI caught up to them. The fee for karaoke is more than the other license - I heard through the grape vine that one owner quit after she got an $800 bill. Another owner made his KJ take a $6 decrease in pay to pay for the license.

They are indeed the responsibility of the bar owners, but if you are hard up for shows, you might be willing to make a small concession on pay if you know that the bar owner is sensitive over the fees.

In fact, that bar owner who got the $800 bill is going to get a visit from me in the next week with a concession proposal.

Venue is the one who pays. The fee for karaoke is not higher than any other, it is like a $.25 per night addition to the fees they would already need if they do any kind of dj, live music, TV. If they quit karaoke because ASCAP caught up with them, they weren't paying any fees to begin with which they need to for any of the above. It's based on a per seat capacity. Our club pays approx $15 per day (between all 3 agencies) for 7 nights of karaoke in a 200 cap venue.

_________________
LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!

it's the responsibility of the venue to make sure PRS royaties are paid (PRS = Performing Rights Society, which includes BMI/ASCAP/SESAC and whatever ones overseas collect royalties for their members). And yes, they need to pay fees to BMI, ASCAP, and SESAC, because an artist can only belong to ONE performing rights society in the US.

If they're not paying their performance royalties for the music they use to draw customers, they're in violation of Federal law and subject to civil and criminal prosecution.

For ANY venue that expects to have some form of entertainment these fees should be considered part of the cost of doing business.



if the venue is trying to coerce you into paying all or part of the PRS royalties, they're in violation of Federal law. By law, the entity that is the PRIMARY BENIFICIARY of a performance is the one legally liable for paying those royalties. This KJ needs to report the scumbag owner so he can get his money back.

I've posted more on this topic here: http://www.karaoke-forum.com/viewtopic. ... ht=#286412

_________________
Dave's not here.

I guess I am confused. You said that the fee for karaoke is not any higher, but then you say that your club pays 25 cents per day for karaoke. So, you are saying that the bars do pay extra for karaoke? Or doesn't?

The Venue

_________________
No venue to big or too small. From your den to the local club or event, we have the music most requested. Great sounding system!

The bar pays a basic fee but there are additional fees if you have more than a juke box. A lot of bar owners don't even realize they are paying BMI and ASCAP for the jukebox because the actual fees are being paid through the guy they rent the juke box from. He just ups the rate enough to cover the licensing.

If the bar is bigger, they have to pay additional fees. If the bar has live entertainment -say a band, they have to pay an additional fee for that If they have a dance floor and allow dancing, then that's an extra fee. If you have karaoke, then it's an additional fee as well - it's not any more expensive than what they would have to pay to have a live band, but yes it is an additional fee. There's even a re-broadcast fee if you have a real huge venue and you put the music on television that BMI can get you for, but it has to be a pretty enormous place for that to kick in.

I'm all for the song writers and the artists getting paid, but the whole process desperately needs to be streamlined, consolidated and simplified.

Alright I don't equate $.25 to a massive charge. Yes it is $.25 more per day over what they are supposed to pay anyway. Sorry that is not a make or break to a bar. If they are going to sqawk at an extra quarter out of their pocket, they shouldn't be in business.

_________________
LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!

ASCAP was breathing down the neck of this woman that owns a TINY cafe in town because she has small acoustic acts play a couple times a week.
Subsequently she made sure the acts only played original music, but ASCAP STILL wouldn't leave her alone. So she just said screw it! And stopped the performances altogether.

I heartily agree. In many countries like the UK there's only a single PRS that handles all copyright licensing.

_________________
Dave's not here.

Seems like Mafia tactics to me..

Oh, wait. The Mafia has been in the Music business since the beginning..

Maybe that explains it..

You know, when I do a solo show, I play only original music. That still doesn't change the fact that the venue owes ME performance royalties for my original music. if they're paying fees to BMI, who I'm affiliated with, then no problem.

If they're trying to cheap out of paying licensing fees they're legally obligated to pay, I don't have much sympathy for them.

_________________
Dave's not here.

How would you handle it?

_________________
Dave's not here.

Actually, if you are performing the original music of which you own the copyright you, as the author of that copyrighted music, already have exclusive rights to perform that music in public (the copyright act clearly states that) and no license is required. However, anyone else wishing to perform your music in public must gain permission to do so, either directly from you, or from the affiliation that represents you.

So, if you are expecting the venue to pay for a license to have you perform your own material on top of the fee you charge for the performance, when no such license exists, then the venue is not "trying to cheap out of paying licensing fees" at all.

ASCAP and the rest are like a tiger without teeth. They are not government agencies so all they can do is sue. If they sue a venue for karaoke and lose, then president is set and they can't intimidate the rest of the bar owners. About ten years ago I did some pretty heavy research on the subject under US copyright law and came to the following conclusions:

1. ASCAP and the rest are entitled top collect no more than the songwriters they represent.

2. The songwriter is entitled to collect the value of the net profit collected due to the performance of his/her/their work.

3. Since no one knows which works will be performed on any given night the particular songs cannot be a contributing factor to the over all net profit and therefore no payment is due.

_________________
Okay, who took my pants?

So you're saying that composers and songwriters don't deserve to make a living. Odd thing for you to say when part of your living depends on the composition of new music for you to play for others.

I'd like to see the US go to a single gov't PRS and use the system used in some European countries. Bands and DJs must turn in a log of all music performed at the venue, with the composer's name. This list to be used in calculating royalties owed by the venue.

My suspicion is that bars would soon be wishing for the days where the fees were guesswork, and lower.

_________________
Dave's not here.

No. What I'm saying is that as for karaoke, under the law as I have read and understand it, no fee is due.

_________________
Okay, who took my pants?

The problem with your theory Weed is the procedure ASCAP follows.

After ASCAP finds a bar that doesn't pay the fees, they send out a notice or two. If the bar ignores the notice and still doesn't pay they don't go straight to court.

Instead they send out an undercover investigator who sits and listens to the play lists and writes down whenever they have heard an ASCAP licensed song played. Once they have a few they leave and THEN ASCAP sues strictly on those few songs which are still worth thousands of dollars in punishment for an unlicensed public performance and makes it much more expensive then paying ASCAP would have been in the first place, but not so much as to drive the bar out of business. That way ASCAP can keep on collecting year after year and the bar owner will tell their friends in the business to just pay the fee...

A case in point....
http://hamptonroads.com/2009/06/suffolk-bar-may-have-back-down-over-copyright-suit

Now that last case involved a band but here is one where Taylor Swift who is a very karaoke friendly artist is joining a suit by BMI for playing her music without a BMI license.

http://www.tmz.com/2009/11/19/swift-sues-sports-bar-after-sting-operation-2/

excerpt for educational purposes below...

A public performance of someone else's work is a public performance, period. Doesn't matter if it's done by karaoke, cover band, dj or the bar owner's CD player. What does matter is that the bar is using the music or video to attract and retain customers and profits by using that music.

_________________
Dave's not here.