Musician question

[jwgh]

So, what do the musicians and songwriters (and, I guess, anyone else who is interested) out there think of this?

(Summary: Local music club/artist's collective is boycotting ASCAP and BMI and are requiring bands who play there to perform only original music or other music they have a right to play for free.)

My own opinion, which is worth not very much because I am not all that well-informed on the issue, is that it's abstractly a good idea, but that it makes it difficult for a band like mine (which usually plays a lot of covers) to play there.

Comments

[mmcirvin.livejournal.com]

I'm not a musician or, really, a songwriter, but I've heard that other people have tried things like this and not been able to maintain it for very long; the spies always get them.

[jwgh]

I remember hearing a few years back that ASCAP/BMI had never lost a lawsuit. I am guessing that if a musician slips a non-original in there that AS220 (and not the musician, or maybe also the musician) who will get in trouble.

[sanspoof.livejournal.com]

Weird. What causes something like this?

[jwgh]

I'm not sure exactly why this is happening, or anyway why it's happening now. Maybe I'll try to pick up some scuttlebutt on Sunday.

[pootrootbeer.livejournal.com]

Venues normally have to pay blanket license fees to the ASCAP and/or BMI (usually both) to cover licensing of any music played at the club that was written by a member of those songwriting guilds. Venues don't like this, because it's an expense and they'd rather keep the money.

One alternative to blanket licensing is to make sure that no BMI- or ASCAP-licensed music gets played at the venue. This plan generally hasn't been all that effective, because by limiting the catalog of music that can be played at a club, you're effectively limiting the club's ability to draw a crowd.

The other alternative, to go with a la carte rather than blanket licensing, could potentially be cheaper, but would be a logistical and recordkeeping nightmare.

In conclusions, venues should get over it. Now, if only ASCAP and BMI would distribute some of those licensing fees to the artists like they ought to...

[jwgh]

The other alternative, to go with a la carte rather than blanket licensing, could potentially be cheaper, but would be a logistical and recordkeeping nightmare.

It's easier and more efficient to put all the money in a big dumptruck and drop it all off at Diane Warren's house!

(I've sort of been assuming that the unfair distribution of licensing fees is why AS220 is doing the boycott in the first place, but I may just be naive.)

Never dealt with them but

[vardissakheli.livejournal.com]

my impression was always that ASCAP and BMI were generally good at sending royalty checks, and particularly a lot better at it than performers who licensed songs directly. Composers I knew in college seemed happy with their practices. And Sis Cunningham, for instance, talked about getting checks out of the blue from BMI but never from Pete Seeger.

It's the RIAA members that I think of as being bad at getting money to the artists.

On the other other hand, I would find this an intriguing practice if the motivation were not financial but creative. I'd love to go to a club where I was guaranteed never to hear a cover tune, even when it meant giving up the really innovative covers like Wall of Voodoo's "Ring of Fire" or Agitpop's "Funkytown." Note that my examples there are 20-25 years old--though I'll grudgingly confess there are probably some more recent ones on tribute albums like Twisted Willie and Where the Pyramid Meets the Eye (whoa, which I didn't even realize was 15 years old now).