 sj |
||
|
||
ASCAP
|
|
|
Subject: ASCAP From: Date: 01 Apr 99 - 02:52 PM ASCAP is one more verification of Lord Acton's adage that "Absolute power corrupts absolutely." The theory of rewarding composers and musicians is fine and I support it. However the bureaucrats that currently run it are mindless bloodsuckers (to be charitable in this holy season). A couple of years ago that threw a snit because kids who went to summer camp weren't paying royalties on the songs they sang. After considerable adverse publicity they backed down. Bud Sherman |
|
Subject: RE: ASCAP From: Bert Date: 01 Apr 99 - 02:55 PM See this site. about ASCAP |
|
Subject: RE: ASCAP From: dwditty Date: 01 Apr 99 - 02:57 PM ASCRAP |
|
Subject: RE: ASCAP From: Mikal Date: 01 Apr 99 - 02:59 PM This is all too strange. I have copyrighted material out in the world. I have publicly given permission for it's use both on the net and off. I can understand wanting to get a profit, but I do not understand the problem we have here. Mikal |
|
Subject: RE: ASCAP From: DonMeixner Date: 01 Apr 99 - 03:27 PM I once worked for ASCAP, I worked for 2 weeks, I don't work there anymore, I rarely admit it to anyone. Don |
|
Subject: RE: ASCAP From: LEJ Date: 01 Apr 99 - 04:48 PM Why would anyone want an ASSCAP? Wouldn't you keep crushing the brim when you sat down? |
|
Subject: RE: ASCAP From: Chet W. Date: 01 Apr 99 - 07:31 PM Interesting to note the difference between BMI and ASCAP. Historically, BMI started because ASCAP considered itself an exclusive club that kept out the undesirables, like most of us. Still believe in rights to intellectual property, as we've discussed so many times, but I realize that BMI may also be implicated sometimes in actions like the one that crazy Max decided to make a joke about. Knowing the history of ASCAP, I ONLY considered joining BMI when it came time to protect my work. If anyone ever wants to use my work, including my performing, for a non-profit or generally worthy cause, I never say no if I can help it. Let's have all jokes approved ahead of time, in writing, in the future. Still disturbed, (and maybe that was the point), Chet |
|
Subject: RE: ASCAP From: rob d. Date: 09 Apr 99 - 01:38 PM I refer you to a song in DG inspired by that very "Girl Scouts and the Macarena" incident THE ASCAP SONG (J.O. Thereditor) Who controls the music from "c-sharp" to shining "c"? A-S-C- A & P A-S-C-A-P! Who's got Woody Guthrie spinning in the cemet'ry? A-S-C- A & P A-S-C-A-P! Pay it up! (shout: "Pay it up!") Pay it up! (shout: "Pay it up!") Forever let 'em get a royalty! (shout: "Tee! Hee! Hee!") They got all the lawyers 'cause they got the dough-re-mi. A-S-C- A & P A-S-C-A-P! So be sure to pay your dues, by Royalty Decree, A-S-C- (etc.) So They can send more lobbyists to Washington D.C. A-S-C- (etc.) As - Cap! (Duck solo: "BMI!") all As - Cap! (Duck solo: "BMI!") You never get to sing without a fee! (big bass solo shout: "Fie! Foe! Fum!") (slower:) Now it's time to say goodbye to all our revelry. (real slow:) A - S - C - - - (spoken solo:) "See you in court!" A - and - P - - - (spoken solo) "And please pay promptly" (Full orcestration, five part harmony, and all kinds of things:) A - - - S - - - C - - - A - - - P - - - ! |
|
Subject: RE: ASCAP From: rob d. Date: 09 Apr 99 - 01:59 PM See here for a very good essay on music licensing: Harvey Reid on ASCAP I found this during the GS fiasco, during which I had a net argument with a lawyer about Copyright Law, during which I also discovered the Home Recording Act. Oh, and the lawyer fled with his lawyer-tail 'tween his legs. rob d. |
|
Subject: RE: ASCAP From: Vixen Date: 09 Apr 99 - 02:05 PM D'Cats-- In all seriousness, as a singer/songwriter, how does one manage one's own work? I have been unable, in all my research, to find or create a "flowchart" of procedures that will lead to national publication/distribution of one's work. I just gave up and copyrighted all my stuff myself, a very simple thing to do, and something I'd hate to pay someone for. Now I'm trying to figure out how to handle producing my first recording. I've bought/borrowed/read more contradictory experts on this than I would have imagined possible. If ASCAP has a stranglehold and BMI and SESCAP are not much better, what's a body to do? And how does one do it??? V |
|
Subject: RE: ASCAP From: puzzled Date: 09 Apr 99 - 03:03 PM Bert, your link works but when i get to the nmol.com page none of their links work. and the email address comes back undeliverable. has he been shut down or what? rob d., what is the Home Recording Act? |
|
Subject: RE: ASCAP From: Joe Offer Date: 09 Apr 99 - 03:35 PM I can't quite figure it out, either, Puzzled. Bert's link didn't work, so I fixed it and got to the home page, so I thought it was OK. When I saw your message, I tried the links on the home page, and got the same results you did. However, when I added www to the links, then I got somewhere. The information on the site seems inflammatory and irrational, although I agree that there's something wrong with the way song copyrights are anforced by ASCAP and BMI. Rash generalizations and accusations aren't the way to deal with the problem, and "rash" seems to be the exact word to describe the Web site. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: ASCAP From: Vixen Date: 09 Apr 99 - 03:58 PM Joe, I agree with your assessment of "rash." It seems that everything I've read on the topic falls into the "rash" or "propaganda" categories, and I'd really like to find a balanced assessment of the process and its products. Joe and Bert, I just clicked on the link, and I was into the website. I only looked at two or three articles, the bio, and a couple of other links while there, but they all worked fine, without having to do anything other than click on the link. Very Weird. V |
|
Subject: RE: ASCAP From: Ross Date: 09 Apr 99 - 04:29 PM Confirming Vixen's experience, one click seemed to "do it" |
|
Subject: RE: ASCAP From: Bert Date: 09 Apr 99 - 04:32 PM Don't know why you are having a problem finding it? Yes, it is a very biased and irrational view. The guy is really mad about the whole deal. I don't think it harms us, though, to know the extremes of opinion that are out there. Us Mudcateers would be much more polite. Rob d. link is to a much more reasonable site. Bert. (who has a soft spot for odd outspoken folks) |
|
Subject: RE: ASCAP From: Arkie Date: 09 Apr 99 - 09:12 PM I know musicians who have copyrighted material in folk and bluegrass who rarely receive any compensation. It seems the licensing agencies pay on some kind of formula that rewards the top 40 artists. On the other hand, ASCAP, in particular has really clamped down on a lot of venues, bluegrass festivals among them, which perform alternative music. Since they get to keep 100 percent of the proceeds from live performances, they seem to be more concerned about that end of the business, at least as far as alternative music is concerned. I questioned one promoter on how he dealt with the licensing agencies. His response was that he wrote them stating that if they would show him proof of payments to artists he was using, he would pay their fees. He never heard from them again. It seems that the agencies need to revamp their policies and formulas. Recordings of folk music and bluegrass do not sell anywhere near the rate of top 40 stuff, nor does it get the airplay. However, live performances of that music may be much closer to the level of top 40 music. The current formulas discriminate against the folk venue. Man, I feel better now. |
|
Subject: RE: ASCAP From: puzzled Date: 09 Apr 99 - 09:34 PM thanks for the tip on fixing their links, Joe. I looked at the source code and saw that they, indeed, did not have www. as part of the reference. By adding www i can access them all. Don't know why the email address didn't work though. The Harvey Reid article mentioned by rob. d talks a little bit about how only the top of the charts people get paid. I am very bothered by the small venues that are being shut down for lack of ability to pay the high fees being required (demanded) by ASCAP. And If ASCAP is now charging venues for having done a traditional tune that ASCAP holds a license for an arrangement of, then we are all going to be creating problems for non ASCAP stages. just take a look at how many versions of Will the Circle be Unbroken are listed as ASCAP (and none of them the composer's) It does feel like there is nothing that we the performers can do to correct the bad situation created by the financial power of ASCAP and BMI. And that is what feels the worst. Protecting the rights of creative people? I don't think so. Rather they are protecting the financial interest of the corp offices. And definitely scaring some of us creative little folk.
|
|
Subject: RE: ASCAP From: Anne Date: 09 Apr 99 - 10:22 PM I once heard Bill Staines remark that in all of his years performing, recording, etc. he has NEVER received a royalty check. Isn't it amazing, with all of his recordings? How many people have covered his tunes? |
|
Subject: RE: ASCAP From: bseed(charleskratz) Date: 09 Apr 99 - 10:46 PM For those of you too young (or too old) to recognize it, the song Rob D. posted is sung to the tune of the Mickey Mouse Club theme song, the copyright of which is almost certainly controlled by ASCAP. Perform it publicly at your own risk. --seed |
|
Subject: RE: ASCAP From: puzzled Date: 10 Apr 99 - 12:17 PM I have friends who are recording tunes that are copyrighted and sending the mechanical fees to the composers themselves instead of to ASCAP or BMI. I think that is a good way to see to it that the non top of the chart folks get their royalties. It doesn't take that much work (thanks to the internet) to locate the composers. |
|
Subject: RE: ASCAP From: Joe Offer Date: 10 Apr 99 - 04:23 PM Hmmmm. Anne, I'd like to hear more of that story about Bill Staines. It just doesn't sound right to me. Nanci Griffith had a minor hit with "Roseville Fair" on Rounder and later on MCA. Many reputable musicians have recorded "A Place in the Choir" on children's records. I'm sure there are several other Staines songs that others have recorded, and I can't imagine that these performers didn't have to pay royalties. Search under his name at BMI and you'll be amazed at how prolific he is. I think he did say that he didn't get a royalty check from "Buffy's Quality Cafe" for the free advertising, but I think the song was commissioned by the Burlington Northern Railroad, if my memory serves me correctly. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: ASCAP From: rob d. Date: 14 Apr 99 - 01:25 PM RE: BSeed's warning about the copyright to the Mouse theme. The good news is that parody is protected. Were I to perform the tune sans words, or the actual words, then the Mouse would have his revenge. But parody is a free use of the tune, as I understand. ---
For puzzled who asked about the Home Recording Act: ------------- Sections 1003, 1004 also describe the royalty payment that is to be made on the media, i.e., the blank cassette you buy. That means that you, having purchased blank cassettes, have already paid the royalty fees for whatever you may record on that tape. Even more impossible to get the money to the actual artists, but, the intent is clear, and even more broadly liberal than I thought when I first heard of it years ago. My argument with the lawyer concerned what I considered my right to make a tape copy of a record or CD or even tape that I had purchased, keeping the original as archival, or to allow me to play music I had purchased on one medium in a place where I could not otherwise play that medium (e.g. records in cars). The lawyer said that any copy was forbidden, absoluto, finito, end of discussion. When I found this law, I realized that not only could I make those copies, but that the technical royalty had already been paid, and as the quote above shows, the only restriction is that my copying have no commercial use. The broad implications are that as long as there is no commercial use of the recordings, you as a consumer have free right to make any recordings you wish of any music you have access to for any purpose you choose. The "commercial use" though is broad, so be careful. E.g., if you have a store, and you play the recorded music in the store so that your customers are able to hear it, then you may be subject to licensing fees and royalty fees, even if the intent is not to provide music to your customers. Now, I don't think anyone has seen, or wants to see, this law put to a test by a gross interpretation of the ACT, e.g., making 100,000 copies of a new Michael Jackson CD and giving them away for free on a street corner. But if you make a copy of something and give it to a friend, you are well within your rights. I have made many sampler tapes which I give to friends, and I know that many of them have gone on to find original recordings by the artists they hear and like, which is my intent. Admittedly, there are some folk who find this extremely distasteful whatever the justification. One acquaintence went nearly apoplectic when they saw a tape that I had made of a Vin Garbutt record I found in a City Library. However, if I could find/get the actual record, even now, I gladly would, and I had no desire to deprive Vin of any profit from his work. But, I violated no law, despite the deeply held convictions of some folks that it is indeed illegal. It is, indeed, quite legal. |
|
Subject: RE: ASCAP From: GUEST Date: 05 Dec 06 - 01:00 PM "One acquaintence went nearly apoplectic when they saw a tape that I had made of a Vin Garbutt record I found in a City Library. However, if I could find/get the actual record, even now, I gladly would, and I had no desire to deprive Vin of any profit from his work." Seven years later, and I have now acquired all of the Vin Garbutt albums that I first recorded from copies in the Norfolk Public Library. I also found Vin on the net, emailed him for corrections to a lyric, and got back a wonderful and kind response. -- rob d. |
|
Subject: RE: ASCAP From: Stilly River Sage Date: 05 Dec 06 - 05:04 PM Thanks for the update! |
| Share Thread: |