Let's come up with an alternative to BMI and ASCAP and I'll work to support it. But I agree that we should have access to whatever we want. I'ts just that we have to pay when we make money off of it, unless we're "just" the performer. I play for free most of the time, charities and such, but if someone owns, say a restaurant, bar, or bookshop, and people come there because of the music, then why should the owner of that venue get it for free? The way it is handled now, especially as in the music teacher situation above, is atrocious. But the answer has to lie somewhere between what it is and complete anarchy in the intellectual property market of ideas. I learn most of the songs I do from other performers, often from recordings. I learn the lyrics and the chords and I share them with my partner, but I don't publish, so I don't owe anything. When we perform for payment, the venue owner or contractor has the responsibility and it's not all that much (the last I heard, around $250-$300 per year each for BMI and ASCAP). If a business is not generating enough to pay that as an operating expense, then it is more of a hobby anyway. When we record others' songs on a CD for sale, the royalty cost comes to about 6 cents per song per salable copy. Not a big deal. For those who have venue owners say that they can't hire you because of the licensing fees, it is they who are lying and screwing you just as much as the licensing agencies. I don't like them either, but I can't get over the feeling that producers of intellectual property, just because it's not something you can feel or carry or wear or drive home, do not deserve to be paid, and if we can come up with a real alternative, let's do it. The analogy of sharing a book above, is a very good one for me.

Chet W.