Quote:
Originally Posted by muzicman144
I do believe this is an overly simplified theory. Not trying to argue here.
Just would really like to know the correct answer.
Again, We are basically doing the same thing. This musician is using self generated tracks on a computer just as i do, except i have bought the tracks i use. He is not the original song writer nor composer. No one is getting royalties from his use. The clubs i play at pay their fees to the music industry, just as they do when he plays, and i use tracks of my own, do not display written lyrics for the public to see. If your answer is correct (i'm not saying it isn't) then no one gets royalties from entertainers using self generated tracks, using a computer to play the files on the Hoster Program, or any other software of this type.
Seems to me this entertainer and i do the same thing, except the music industry gets royalties from my use and none from his use.
I just can't seem to get it through this thick head where the difference is in the legal reasoning, if there is such a thing.
muzicman144
|
You asked
Quote:
|
If i burned a track from someone else's karaoke disc and used it, is this legal if i don't display written lyrics to the public
|
In this scenario it is not legal - no different than using the burnt disk for a karaoke show. If you own the original then yes it is legal.
If you recreate the music in your home studio and use that recreation in your performance then the music industry gets there royalties from ascap, bmi, etc. Those associations pool all those fees and split it up based on some mathematical formula and pay it to the song writers (original artist get some as well since this covers DJ's also). If you use a karaoke track then along with the association fees the song writers will get a royalty from the songs on that disk just as the songwriters and original artists will get a cut from the music CD the DJ purchases for his music.
Sam