Jump to content

ASCAP Can Cripple Small Venues


Jahfin

Recommended Posts

PJD, thank you very much for your stereotyping and character assassinating post.

I'm happy to hear that my argument can be so easily brushed aside due to having an inherently different philosophy toward music than you.

...which really makes it senseless to reply further, but I'll share my passing thoughts.

Thank you also for your honest clarification on your relationship with the publishing agencies. Your ardent position reminded me more of enforcement dogma than opinion.

I see now that you are just an enthusiast and am happy to accept that.

I never said that artists promoting their music through alternative channels are expecting to get paid by their PRO. I inferred from your eagerness to claim that a website mentioned should be paying royalties for promoting an artist that the 'PRO' would want to get money from any promotion of the artist. The artists have many avenues for profit other than whatever fees they receive from ASCAP, etc. It would be very unfortunate if those avenues were hampered by crippling fees that don't even reach the artists who use independent and alternative promotion.

And yes, what I wrote was laced with sarcasm as noted in the disclaimer that read something to the effect of "(paranoiac reactionary rant to follow, enjoy)" I was well aware that much of what I had to say was very extreme, but these were the impressions I received from both the original article as well as your replies.

I don't think the artist who was mentioned directly complained about not getting money for playing in small clubs, but more that, in general he doesn't see money for any use of his songs, be it his own performances or those of amateur fan musicians enjoying his music, who are more than likely already paying the club to do so, rather than getting paid themselves.

The whole system is obviously flawed when the PRO are charging their clients for a service they cannot perform.

It's one thing to prevent the use of a song from being abused, but to jeopardize the entire independent music scene to distribute more money to the artists who are already making the most without even auditing their charges is absurd.

You may notice, that The Grateful Dead, even with their "hippy dippy" music philosophy have made more money than they know what to do with. No lack of profit there.

I just don't like to see the little guy being held down. Rather than 'hippy-dippy' it is more of a reaction to pro-monopoly practices that gradually eliminate perceived competition. Elimination of the birthplaces of new artists assures the continued prominence of the status-quo.

This too is an extreme apocalyptic statement, but to envisage the middle path one must see the extremes clearly.

Thank you for helping to illustrating the other extreme.

No, i do not for for ASCAP, BMI, SEASAC, MCPS-PRD, CMRRA, or any other PRO?

Is this a joke?

No, what I'm saying is if you are promoting your record on channels that do not pay a blanket license to performing rights societies even though you may be raising your visibility as an artist you are not increasing the amount of use in area's where ASCAP would pay you.

Grassroots guys can get as much exposure as they want, they just should not expect to get paid for it from their PRO if is through non-traditional and unlicensed channels.

Are you missing the hypocrisies of this article? We've got a small club owner complaining his licenses fee is too high and a guy who plays small clubs complaining that he doesn't get paid when he plays more small clubs. Now can you see why Will.I.Am is getting so much more than Brent Best? Every single black eyed peas song you hear is through a PRO licensed channel, unless you own their CD of course, generating constant performance monies.

And how do you think the writers would feel if there were 50% fewer dollars to distribute because they spent that much more and got pretty much the same results. Everybody forgets that BMI and ASCAP are a non-profit organization, not a for profit venture. They are strictly going after their clients money.

As I read this I thought to myself dear god where does this hippie dippie music is free and let's all hug stuff come from and I saw the Dead logo in your sig. :D Totally perfect, the biggest taper free music sharing tribe on earth! Makes total sense now.

Don't worry dude, another day; another hackey sack game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rockthing, I'm really sorry if you felt I was assassinating you're character. Truly that was not my intention, rather it was to point out that the PRO system is not that flawed, it just doesn't do much for small indy artists. It never has. As I posted earlier the bulk of performance monies come from TV use, closely followed by radio. There will never be a shortage of artists who feel they are being shortchanged and likewise their will always be club owners who complain about alleged unfair practices. It's misinformation by people who don't understand what the system is designed to do that leads to this 'the man is keeping real music down' crap. It's really not true, nobody is forced to affiliate with a PRO, it just makes good sense and that article is essential a sour grapes story of another unrecognized indy. I take issue with the idea that ASCAP doesn't do it's job properly.

Mr. Best's quote is "I am an ASCAP member. This means that I should collect money, based upon their system of the tracking of 'use' proportional to said 'use' of my music. Problem is, their bullshit system is the biggest one-sided bell curve you've ever seen...In the end, I, or anyone else 'represented' by ASCAP make no money proportional to what I sell or what of mine is used unless or until I'm as big as Mariah Carey or who-the-fuck-ever. In fact, all those publishing songwriters affiliated with ASCAP who aren't on that monetary level actually make money for those who are. If I go from selling 10,000 albums a year to 40,000, along with the predictable increase in 'use' (such as jukebox plays and the like), I will never see a proportional increase in royalty payout from ASCAP. Instead, the extra money I earn, along with the thousands of other artists on the lower rungs earning progressively more, will go the top 2 or 3 percent of ASCAP artists already earning millions a year from their vapid shit."

He is claiming that when he sells another 30,000 units he doesn't see an increase in money from ASCAP. Well, how much of an increase in use does he think there is going to be? Again, without TV or radio play, there is a negligible amount of use. He doesn't stop to ask why these top 3% are in the top 3% of ASCAP payouts. It's because their music is everywhere that ASCAP collects and his is not! I know guys that have written a few jingles and can work part time because of the money they get from their PRO. Why is that? Because they were major ad campaigns that were inconstant rotation (read: use)

And the Dead were consistently making money from their PRO, they were among the top grossing tours from 1985 to 1995. They don't get a lot of television use and radio play, while substantial, isn't near the levels of many other classic rock artists. I'm sure they are quite happy with their ASCAP checks. The bulk of their fortune came from touring and excellent merchandising.

And FWIW I'm in agreement that there is a problem when performance monies are only paid to the top 200 grossing touring acts but small clubs are required to pay a fee. My guess is they calculate these clubs playlists based off of local radio station playlists and treat them like a jukebox, use wise. I understand the club owners position, but the 'music should be free' thing doesn't help artists. That isn't pointed at you, it's just a theme that has come up throughout the thread.

It's the music business, if it's not making money don't expect to have an easy time hearing it.

Hunter S. Thompson said it best: "The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side."

As a side note, the real problem began long ago and was made worse in the 90's with the telcom deregulation that led to all these corporate conglomerates devouring radio stations and narrowing playlists coupled with the death or A&R but that is a whole other thread.

If you want t really good laugh at what's wrong with the business read this Wired magazine piece on Doug Morris, CEO of Universal Music Group. Talk about scary! All I can think of is senator Ted Stevens "The Internet is a series of tubes..."

Unversal CEO Doug Morris is totally clueless

Now that would make for an excellent thread!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, i do not for for ASCAP, BMI, SEASAC, MCPS-PRD, CMRRA, or any other PRO?

Is this a joke?

No, what I'm saying is if you are promoting your record on channels that do not pay a blanket license to performing rights societies even though you may be raising your visibility as an artist you are not increasing the amount of use in area's where ASCAP would pay you.

Grassroots guys can get as much exposure as they want, they just should not expect to get paid for it from their PRO if is through non-traditional and unlicensed channels.

Are you missing the hypocrisies of this article? We've got a small club owner complaining his licenses fee is too high and a guy who plays small clubs complaining that he doesn't get paid when he plays more small clubs. Now can you see why Will.I.Am is getting so much more than Brent Best? Every single black eyed peas song you hear is through a PRO licensed channel, unless you own their CD of course, generating constant performance monies.

And how do you think the writers would feel if there were 50% fewer dollars to distribute because they spent that much more and got pretty much the same results. Everybody forgets that BMI and ASCAP are a non-profit organization, not a for profit venture. They are strictly going after their clients money.

As I read this I thought to myself dear god where does this hippie dippie music is free and let's all hug stuff come from and I saw the Dead logo in your sig. :D Totally perfect, the biggest taper free music sharing tribe on earth! Makes total sense now.

Don't worry dude, another day; another hackey sack game.

This sounds way too much like a Q&A ......Where's Lisa Robinson ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...