Karaoke Forums

Gain their authority from artists\writers they represent to fine or sue clubs for not paying fees due if the bar plays their songs on a juke box or hires bands\djs\kjs that plays their songs?

Songwriters join those organizations as members and sign agency agreements with them that allow them to police their copyrights.

You know sort of like Europe where in England you could be hung for killing the king's deer. All the deer belonged to the king and anyone trying to feed their family could be hung. In the past the rights belonged to the nobles and the serfs had none. Some things change and others do not. This whole concept of rights is one of them. Just like when the settlers sized the Indians lands, because in their European reasoning, the Native Americans, were not exploiting it properly. Have a blessed day.

Thanks James. Two follow ups, just so I have an understanding as to why those agreements hold up. So the wordings of those agreements suit a courts desire to make sure BMI does actually have the right to represent a song writer? Can the songwriter still peruse it's own interests or have they signed those performance rights away?

So Lone, artists/businesses should not be allowed to have a copyright or a trademark and not be allowed to protect THEIR rights?

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

Dionne Warwick has been in the news lately.....it's been consistantly reported, that her only income is about $1000 a month in royalties....... guess the vast amount they collect goes to the artists.....

Dionne Warwick is known primarily as a recording artist, not a songwriter. Most of her hits were written by Burt Bacharach and Hal David, often specifically for her but without a songwriting credit. It bears saying that:

(1) there is no "public performance" right in sound recordings (which is the only thing that she would own part of the copyright in), and
(2) as a result, ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC do not collect public performance royalties for the owners of copyright in sound recordings (because there is nothing to collect).

There is a performance right in sound recordings when the performance involves a digital transmission (streaming), so she would receive a royalty from services like Pandora or Spotify if those services play her music--assuming, of course, that she did not assign her rights to someone else.

Recording artists who are not also songwriters make money primarily through live performances and sales of their own recordings.

Which I might add "sales of their own recordings" would be the main income of karaoke manu's. Since the manu's "are not songwriters" and the "live performances" are really not the manu's, so they do not get any ASCAP/BMI payments.

Karaoke venues that pay the ASCAP/BMI must still pay but are not immune if using counterfeit karaoke content since those fees don't pay the people who made a recording of their own rendition of a song. However, the person who wrote, or owns the rights to the song, will get their cut for the karaoke version.

_________________
-- Mark

Karaoke is somewhat different because the courts have decided that karaoke tracks are "audiovisual works," in which there is a public performance right. ASCAP and BMI do not collect for karaoke manufacturers because they exclusively represent music publishers and songwriters, neither of which includes karaoke manufacturers.

BMI makes our club pay for 'karaoke'. It's even in the application, if karaoke is checked, it's another $ amount on top of dj.

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

I do understand that those agencies do not represent karaoke manufactures and only represent writers, whether artists or not. I'm jut trying to understand the "contract" between the writers and the agencies. As Lonman said, BMI seems to have an, "adder" for karaoke but that doesn't change who they represent.

I would still like to know if writers can still protect their own interests or if they sign those rights over to the agencies.

The music industry has a long history of exploiting artists and song writers..

Voodoo accounting, as an example..

(Back in the day, those two categories did not have the ability to record without assistance)

Things change, yet obsolete regulations abound..

So, yes, artists have made some money by touring and selling tee-shirts..

Do I get you correct? If I play a song, from any media, in a venue, and the song is preformed by the artist who made the song famous, the artist gets nothing, and only the person who wrote the lyrics, and created the instrumental portion(not always the same person), gets any royalties? Just want to clear up any confusion on here.

Johnny, it's whoever holds the copyrights. An artist may have it written in their contract that they get a piece of it just like some actors get a percent of the movies/shows they've been in.

MrBoo, an artist/copyright holder does not have to join but it would then become their responsibility to collect any of their fees. Taking the number of venues, etc, they would probably need to pay a huge staff to conduct their business and in the long run it probably would not be economical.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

Yes, that's completely correct. (The artist made his money when you bought your copy.)

This is true, and it has always intrigued me, as karaoke would seem to be self-entertainment anyway. I never thought they had any legal grounds for it. I know a venue that is being sued for it now. Unfortunately their attorney is more knowledgeble in probate and real estate than IP, so this would not be muchof of a case example. Wish someone could explain it to me.

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."

In that case Joe their real estate and probate attorney should be sending them to a colleague who specializes in IP and/or entertainment.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

The original artist will sometimes get a royalty if their copy is played on other programming such as an advertisement. But for the most part, the compulsory licenses all go to the songwriter. Which is why so many of today's more bankable artists insist on a co-writing credit if they are going to use someone's song...

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

Provided they BOUGHT the copy!

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

I agree completely, Timberlea. Unfortunately- believe it or not- some lawyers are a bit short on ethics and will not advise their clients properly. Such is the case here.

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."