Karaoke Forums

Is it required to get licensing from ASCAP/BMI/SESAC for your venue to be legit? My venue has started getting letters from ASCAP for licensing fees. Does this mean that BMI and SESAC will be knocking on his door sometime soon? ASCAP's formula to calculate fees is BS.

My venue is a small pizza place, for whom these fees are alot. I just want to know what the totals could be, so I can have an intelligent conversation with the venue owner. I am sure I can talk him into paying ASCAP, but doubt he can afford much else, even if it is a business write off. If I am not there, there are no customers there on my night.

I will never put my gigs on this website under the CLUB DIRECTORY section, as I believe this is where ASCAP knew where to send their spy.

I now know why some establishments absolutely refuse to advertise their Karaoke.

Felix the KJ

Since not all music is covered by just ascap, but other music is covered by BMI & other music is covered by SESAC, yes the establishment is supposed to pay to all 3 to be covered. If you break it down by a day by day basis, it typically won't be more than $3-10 per day - depending on the size of venue, how many days they do karaoke, live music, dj, have a dance floor, tv in the bar, radio played, jukebox (sometimes this is covered under the jukebox lease agreement). Ours holds 200 (by cap), 7 days karaoke, tv & dance floor & they said they pay an avg of $5 to each per day.

And ascap will usually get tips locally either from signs saying karaoke on the front/side of the building or reader boards or by word of mouth. Your listings in the internet chances are not what caught their eye. I had a club that did karaoke for almost a year, finally put out a nice big banner out front & a new reader board - the next day ascap came in. Lost the club the next day since they didn't want to pay. They pulled all karaoke reference off & tried it a few months later with no advertising, never flew again.

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

Thanks Lonman. This venue is very small, only seats 70, supposedly. They only have karaoke one night a week, and no jukebox. A small place like this isn't likely to be able to afford paying all three. They don't contact each other to let them know there is someone out there they can get some money from, too, do they?

My first gig was at a place that had their own system, and their own music, so I never worried about such things. My second gig was at a place that had live music, so I would guess they already paid these fees before I ever started there, but don't know for sure. I just always assumed that as long as I own the originals of the disc's I use, that I was Okay. I own them, but I guess that only released any liability from me.

Thanks,
Felix the KJ

Lonman is right about needing to pay fees to all three agencies providing that you are using music covered by all three and that you consider karaoke a public performace. I do not consider it a public perfromance. Since people come to do karaoke and not to hear it, it has no audience only people waiting their turn to use the equipment for purposes of practice, which is exempted under "fair use."

I have had an ASCAP agent or two blanch at this prospect. Think of it. If they sue and lose, karaoke would become exempt from their evil clutches and that would cost them a heck of a lot more money than leaving your little bar alone.

_________________
Okay, who took my pants?

The only problem is that "your little bar" can afford a lawyer to fight them in court. Its just not worth it.

_________________
Good music, good friends, howling good times!

I agree with you exweedfarmer, that it is fair use. ASCAP has already sent the treatening letter to the venue. How do I move forward, or how does the owner move forward. Does he refuse to pay, using your argument? They first sent him the nice brochure, with the sad story of how some lady is on the streets due to her not getting her royalties, he ignored it. They then sent him the bill, with the fee's itemized. What should I do?

Felix the KJ

Well you can go along with exweed's belief & ignore the letters, but I believe lawyers would see it quite differently. It is entertainment in a public place - like a dj or live music, karaoke IS entertainment. People in the audience are in the public venue listening to performers & performing themselves. It's ludacris to believe that it would be considered 'educational' or awaiting their turn to practice. They want to 'practice' they can practice at home in a non-commercial setting.

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

With due respect Lonman, that's just plain silly. What entertainment value is there in just playing a karaoke track? None. Try it, just play the music and don't let anyone sing. You would clear the place in a heartbeat wouldn't you? That they are singing might be entertainment, what they are singing is irrelevent. Of course it's practice. How can you practice singing in front of a crowd without singing in front of a crowd? But to be fair, although I have never been to one of your shows I can see that we approach KJing fro the opposite ends of the spectrum. You tweak the knobs, I tweak the singers ( and sometimes offend them and often trip drunkenly over them as well.)

I cannot give legal advice as I am not a lawer but I can tell you what I did. I read every bit of the US copyright law starting with the first amendment section 8. Now, that one in (in my opinion) would seems to preclude the holding of copyright after the death of the author. Then, I looked into the matter of "actual damages" which would seem to indicate (to me at least) that the author of a work publicly performed would be entitled to the amount of net revenue over and above which the venue would have made if his/her work had not been performed. Then, there are very interesting particulars of The second amended final judgement in US v ASCAP 1941 which took effect (if memory serves) the same day the twin towers went down. The one particular that I liked best was the requirement that ASCAP and other licensing agencies provide upon request a machine readable listing (such as a CD) of the songs for which they were entitled to collect fees. A few days after the jugement took effect I sent a registered letter to ASCAP asking for this machine readable list and got a plain old letter back on ASCAP letter head saying that no such list was available. Having that in my back pocket, my response to ASCAP agents got down to "F*** you... sue me." without ever telling them what I was sitting on. They might have since complied with that particular interesting artical but there were others.... Proceed at your own discression.

_________________
Okay, who took my pants?

I guess I couldn't really say as the crowds that come into our club come in specifically to sing - KARAOKE!... I would suppose if a club didn't have any kind of karaoke worthiness may be able to pull that kind of an answer off, but we get a steady stream of singers that come in specifically FOR karaoke - not practice, but to entertain. Many have even stated they PRACTICED ALL DAY AT HOME to come out to sing a new song! So I guess there is a LOT you could put into the actual ENTERTAINMENT value of karaoke in certain clubs! If a song is being performed ina commercial venue - IE a BAR, it is considered entertainment - whether it be a professional singer or an amatuer karaoke singer. Sorry!!!!

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

The bottom line is that the venue has to pay. There's no legal way around it.

At the very first venue I worked at, the owner had been paying ASCAP and BMI, and then he was approached by SEASAC. He decided that he didn't want to be "extorted", so he put in a rule that no SEASAC songs could be performed in the venue (including cover bands). Obviously, no band is going to know whether they are performing a SEASAC song, and for me to delete all of those songs would be a monumental task. His choice was to pay the fee, go about it illegally, or have no entertainment. Even though the fee was very small per day, he constantly was b****ing about it. He had a fit when I advertised karaoke, because he thought it was calling undue attention to his bar.

I quit the place, because he complained about low attendance, yet he refused to let me try and make it better.

Classic idiot bar owner.

Here in the UK I think the equivalent of what's being discussed here is

1. PRS licence (performing rights society)

2. PPL licence

3. Entertainment licence from local council.

As a bar owner in a previous life we had to pay to all 3 of these individually. Apart from all the other bills for health and safety, disabled access, the list goes on and on.

It was a nightmare at times and one of the reasons I quit the business.

I remember, in the first year of business, getting a bill from PRS for over a £1000 ! I was horrified and immediately phoned them to complain and protest that such a small business as ours was should have to contribute to Elton John's 5th Rolls Royce !!!!

I agree with Lonman here that you haven't a chance of claiming that karaoke isn't entertainment. Certainly here in the UK if you do it you have to pay for it. The precedent is already set.

PRS even chase garage owners, hairdressers etc if they so much as have a radio playing within earshot of the customers !

I think I should concentrate my efforts on songwriting.

_________________
[font=Fantasy][/font] "Travellin' at the speed of light"

Why does the bar owner have karaoke in his establishment? More than likely it is to attract more customers into the bar and thus increase his revenue.

In other words, the the owner is using copyrighted music in his establishment to enhance his business. He is not using it to practice singing, he is using it to create a bigger profit in his commercial enterprise.

Felix, there is a way in which the bar owner would only have to pay ASCAP and not the others to play karaoke music... If you knew who were the copywrite holders that ASCAP represented, you could remove all other music from your catalogue. The business would not have to pay a licence for karaoke music that is not being played!

Of course no one publishes a list of SESAC songs. If you had that, you could run your playlist against it and exclude those. I am guessing it would be no big loss to not have SESAC to play. Though in Florida, the loss of Neil Diamond would be fatal.

_________________
[color=#ffff55]Mickey J.[/color]
Alas for those who never sing, but die with all their music in them.
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr.

This might help you Micky!

http://www.sesac.com/repertory/sRepertorySQL.asp

Of course Felix, if you did happen to remove all but ASCAP-represented music from your catalogue, then you might well find that the number of customers at your gig will diminish due to the fact they couldn't sing the songs they wanted to. Bottom line is that, if the business owner wants to increase his profit by using copyrighted music, is it not fair that the owners of the copyright be compensated for their contribution to that profit?

A business that uses copyrighted music to enhance it's appeal to it's customers, without paying for the right to use that music, is nothing more than freeloading.

My point exactly. The folks come in "for karaoke" not a specific song and all anyone can charge you for is a specific song. ASCAP is only entitled to collect the money to which the song writer is entitled. As I said before, That they sing might be entertainment, what they sing is irrelavent. If they practiced all day at home, there is no way that you or the bar owners could know that. There's no way anyone but the singer could know what song is to be sung. Therefore by my sick reasoning, if a specific song cannot be predicted before you get the request slip that night, a specific song cannot be factored into the night's profit/loss picture. If it has no quantifiable value the song writer is entitled to nothing and therefore ASCAP is entitled to nothing. They are not the government.

_________________
Okay, who took my pants?

I knew about that, but searching interactively every time you do a song is not feasible. Running a program against a database and flagging the song is.

_________________
[color=#ffff55]Mickey J.[/color]
Alas for those who never sing, but die with all their music in them.
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr.

Only if it doesn't have elements of blackmail. If there was one agency, with statutory fees and transparency, then it would be one thing. But ASCAP and BMI come in and propose ridiculous rights fees ($1200 a year, BMI only, one night a week in a 75-person capacity bar) only later acceding to less.

SESAC is the worst. A miniscule catalog and no transparency. Many of their biggest names only came later, and rarely is SESAC listed on a Chartbuster or SC copyright blurb (and SC is ridiculous with how short their flash is, too).

All in all, they obfuscate as a means of doing business. I consider them to be barely more than blackmail artists. I would be all for fair compensation. Not for paying money into black holes.

_________________
[color=#ffff55]Mickey J.[/color]
Alas for those who never sing, but die with all their music in them.
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr.

Well, if you feel that way the business owner still has options. Nobody HAS to pay SESAC or BMI or ASCAP anything. They only collect royalties for their members. The business owner has the option of contacting the copyright holder and obtaining the permission/licence directly. Yes, that would be a painstaking process, but it is an option.

Another option is to not play copyrighted music in the business.

Don't be ridiculous. It is not a realistic option.


That's copyright, by the way.

That is not a realistic option either if you are to be in the mainstream entertainment business. They don't publish a price schedule, so you have no way of knowing where you stand and making intelligent choices. Hence my claim of borderline blackmail.

Statutory relief is long overdue in today's digital market. But again, because of their tactics these organizations make more money for their members (and for themselves in the case of SESAC). They don't want fair, because they feel their fees would decrease. Hit songwriters make *lots* of money.

For the most part, SESAC doesn't show up on the radar in our area. But you can always expect a visit from BMI and ASCAP the moment you advertise, and you had better have your negotiating shoes on, because they will try to hold you at gunpoint. Eventually if you threaten to cancel entertainment they will relent. (For SESAC, just say you won't play Neil Diamond or Bob Dylan or Reba's "Whoever's in New England". No big loss.

_________________
[color=#ffff55]Mickey J.[/color]
Alas for those who never sing, but die with all their music in them.
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr.

The bar owner I work for tried to get me to help pay for the fees. I told him I'd understand if he couldn't afford it and would not hold it against him if he had to let me go because of it. I haven't heard anything since about it.

_________________
[shadow=pink][glow=deepskyblue]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
[updown]~*~ MONKEY BUSINESS KARAOKE~*~ [/shadow][/updown][/glow]