Thread: KIAA Membership
View Single Post
  #92  
Old February 10th, 2010, 09:29 AM
muzicman144 muzicman144 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Richmond, Va
Posts: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by marklwood View Post
That one is already covered by my license agreement with these guys as a venue owner. Live performance, that is. The karaoke issue is for displaying the words on a screen that SC or others have produced. This not only requires a separate license for the audio portion and live performance, that is supposedly paid to the original artist/copyright holder, but also the lyrics display. Then the CDG producer for displaying their words requires that you paid for the CDG.

Also, it isn't a flat rate, or anything simple like that. It is figured on your total occupancy as if you were completely packed every night that you have karaoke. Then, if you charge a cover, (I don't) they want a piece of that too. That also is charged like you were completely full every time the doors are open.

Then you have to pay again for the privilege of playing the CDs in your jukebox, that you already paid for, even if the total income from your jukebox doesn't even cover the license fee.
I understand how that system works. That license only covers you as the venue owner, not the entertainer. I understand how and why they have not pursued the bands or "live acts". My question was what stops them from pursuing touring cover acts or even local acts other than the problem of collecting the money, which, would be the same problem with collecting the money from a kj.
Seems they (BMI/ASCAP, etc.) have the same option as SC to pursue the bands. A name is all they need, band's lead singer for example, and bingo, a court could rule just as they do in these karaoke cases.
muzicman144
Reply With Quote