Playing Copyright music in public

[lostinidlewonder]

When doing a paid performance in a concert situation you are legally expected to pay the copyright holders a royalty if playing any of their music. However I go to places like cocktail lounges and restaurants and hear copyright music played all night. Maybe these copyright pieces have the own arrangement but they are still using music that needs royalty when performing. Can anyone clarify the difference in legal issues when it comes to performing copyright music as a "cocktail pianist" or a concert hall stage performer?

[lloyd_cdb]

Ignoring the legality which I don't even know, exposure is beneficial. Musicians regularly do covers of other people's music. I figure even if laws allow them to sue one another, why bother when someone is popularizing your song. Zeppelin cover bands play all over the place, and most of the original members are still alive. Are they really going to sue all of them for probably increasing their sales of old records? Again, no idea on the legality, but I sincerely doubt anyone would want to care even if the law protected it in that manner.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

If someone sues you for playing their music in public, then that person is a douchebag.

[dima_76557]

Can anyone clarify the difference in legal issues when it comes to performing copyright music as a "cocktail pianist" or a concert hall stage performer?

I think that strictly legally, there is no difference, but practically and for the time being, there is likely a higher level of "tolerance" for the restaurant business because, lucky us, there is no reasonable mechanism in place (yet) to enforce the law in this respect.

[lostinidlewonder]

I spoke to a barrister in my family and although he never has had to deal with a case like this he gave some perspective.


In a restaurant/cocktail lounge environment people are not there solely to listen to music (nor pay for it) where as in a concert hall they are attending with the intention to listen to music (and pay for it).

[j_menz]

In a restaurant/cocktail lounge environment people are not there solely to listen to music (nor pay for it) where as in a concert hall they are attending with the intention to listen to music (and pay for it).

I'm afraid that that is for copyright purposes completely immaterial.

In Australia, many venues operate under an umbrella license arrangement with APRA/AMCOS which covers them.

No doubt other countries haver a similar body.

[lostinidlewonder]

Interesting j_menz.

I also thought it must be similar to playing a copyright CD in a restaurant or a DVD video or whatever. Sometimes they write "For private use only".

[talby]

If I remember correctly, then in Germany an organization called GEMA hunts to collect the licence money and sues the ones who didnīt pay. All public "events" like pubs, restaurants, festivals, concerts, etc. where music is played in any form (play back from CD or live (even choir or school bands) have to pay. Usually the owner / organizer of an event pays a kind of flat rate, and then does not has to worry anymore which pieces become performed or played back. Otherwise has to list in a detailled manner which pieces have been performed. GEMA is not loved, by the way, because it can be read that the original right holders do not see a lot of money and event managers are angry to have to pay so much if the right holders in the end do not even receive their proper part of it later on. In Germany you even pay to the GEMA by purchasing a DVD burner or the empty DVDs itself because you eventually could copy music with it. If you want to be free from that payment because you use your DVD only for computer data storage, you have to go to court to fight for your right not to pay to the GEMA. GEMA therefore is not only little loved, but actually hated!
Anyway, I guess if you play in a restaurant, then it is the restaurant owner whom the GEMA would make pay or sue, not you.

[iansinclair]

I'm afraid that that is for copyright purposes completely immaterial.

In Australia, many venues operate under an umbrella license arrangement with APRA/AMCOS which covers them.

No doubt other countries haver a similar body.

I the USA it's ASCAP or BMI.  The only exception, technically, for having to pay a royalty is for educational purposes (e.g. a dance class; music education in a school; a school recital provided it's free, etc.).  A restaurant or lounge should have a license.  Many of them don't.  Enforcement is usually rather lax, but don't count on it.  A paid performance does need to have copyright release, although again a paid performance in East Overshoe, Iowa is less likely to have an enforcement problem than, say, a performance in New York or LA...

[indianajo]

Yes, there are ASCAP and BMI licenses for public performance space like restaurants and concert halls.  I don't know who has them and who does not but perhaps that is part of the "bar goes bankrupt, changes names" scam.  If I wrote something I would want to be paid.  I met a living composer once, Rich Mullins,  who was killed in a car wreck driving from one church to another to try to make a buck off his talent.  He wrote "A mighty God".  If the churches would just buy 200 copies instead of buying one and running the copy machine or posting the lyrics on the screen, maybe that wouldn't happen again. 

[oxy60]

There is a little sticker on the door.

Why does everybody want to redefine copyright and public performance for profit? It is what it is, no more no less. Obey or you will be found out.

[talby]

Whatīs about uploading my performance to YouTube
And what if I even get paid for it, because enough people watch it and I receive money via some commercials which YouTube links in on my request?

[oxy60]

Why is everybody squirming? Are you looking for loopholes? Why does everything need to be free?

Barry Manilow pays the Chopin Trust.

In my high school and later in college we "rented" the scores and parts to put on certain shows. Of course that "rent" included the royalties.

 

[talby]

I think you missunderstood some of the mentioned concerns.
My question is, if there is any tolerance in the licence regulations for small pocket money only performances, or a tolerance for obvious hobby musician only activity?

[oxy60]

NO! It even extends to a radio being played softly in a store.

A site license is so cheap compared to the hassle it isn't worth it to try and wiggle around.

[kriatina]

When doing a paid performance in a concert situation you are legally expected to pay the copyright holders a royalty if playing any of their music. However I go to places like cocktail lounges and restaurants and hear copyright music played all night. Maybe these copyright pieces have the own arrangement but they are still using music that needs royalty when performing. Can anyone clarify the difference in legal issues when it comes to performing copyright music as a "cocktail pianist" or a concert hall stage performer?

I have heard it rumoured that in order to avoid any such problems many musicians arrange teensy little changes which they call "variations on a theme...of..." ...and then they name or they don't name the original composer of the piece.

I have also heard it rumoured that some modern composers do the same thing (with or without mentioning the original composer of a piece), whilst combing sources for an "inspiration on a theme..." ...and then they compose a "brand new piece" which often sounds eerily familiar to music lovers.

I don't know how true that is ? Does anyone know ?

Thanks from Kristina.

[oxy60]

I have heard it rumoured that in order to avoid any such problems many musicians arrange teensy little changes which they call "variations on a theme...of..." ...and then they name or they don't name the original composer of the piece.

I have also heard it rumoured that some modern composers do the same thing (with or without mentioning the original composer of a piece), whilst combing sources for an "inspiration on a theme..." ...and then they compose a "brand new piece" which often sounds eerily familiar to music lovers.

I don't know how true that is ? Does anyone know ?

Thanks from Kristina.

The English level is so high on this board that this sort of misunderstanding would seem impossible.

A site license for an establishment is a blanket authorization to play any sort of music from any source/composer/band, etc., and collect admission, sell food items, etc. The organization that gave you the license GUARANTEES to protect you from any copyright suit. They in turn distribute money to their members.

[pianoplunker]

When doing a paid performance in a concert situation you are legally expected to pay the copyright holders a royalty if playing any of their music. However I go to places like cocktail lounges and restaurants and hear copyright music played all night. Maybe these copyright pieces have the own arrangement but they are still using music that needs royalty when performing. Can anyone clarify the difference in legal issues when it comes to performing copyright music as a "cocktail pianist" or a concert hall stage performer?

I have heard that songwriter organizations such as ASCAP have actually followed up with some clubs and issue a cease-and-desist-or-else type of letter to the establishment, not to the musician. In the area where I live ( San francisco Bay area ) , almost all music venues must have a Cabaret license in order to operate with entertainment.  I believe the Cabaret license includes some type of arrangement regarding copyright, not sure. but I do know the cities are pretty strict about the venues having the Cabaret license. The issue of copyright is not just "you got paid to play, therefore you owe ".  It does not matter if you get paid or not, a violation is a violation. An owner of a club can play a CD or have a DJ play a cd as long as the cd is not being distributed or recorded. That is still private use. Youtube is a different story since by default, it is distributed world-wide by virtue of internet. All that said, I am not a lawyer, I play covers all the time in clubs and I dont have an ounce of guilt. At some point I either bought a sheet music or a cd from the publishers, or I give credit to the artist,  so it is not like I ripped anyone off.     

[oxy60]

I have heard that songwriter organizations such as ASCAP have actually followed up with some clubs and issue a cease-and-desist-or-else type of letter to the establishment, not to the musician. In the area where I live ( San francisco Bay area ) , almost all music venues must have a Cabaret license in order to operate with entertainment.  I believe the Cabaret license includes some type of arrangement regarding copyright, not sure. but I do know the cities are pretty strict about the venues having the Cabaret license. The issue of copyright is not just "you got paid to play, therefore you owe ".  It does not matter if you get paid or not, a violation is a violation. An owner of a club can play a CD or have a DJ play a cd as long as the cd is not being distributed or recorded. That is still private use. Youtube is a different story since by default, it is distributed world-wide by virtue of internet. All that said, I am not a lawyer, I play covers all the time in clubs and I dont have an ounce of guilt. At some point I either bought a sheet music or a cd from the publishers, or I give credit to the artist,  so it is not like I ripped anyone off.     

I bet those clubs where you play all have an ASCAP license. Even though you do your "rendition" of the song, it's still the song (more than 5 notes). When they go to house music during your break that is where they should have a license because those are records. The Cabaret License comes from the City.

We're going to be jamming at a bar this very afternoon and I'll check because they do go to house between groups.

[kriatina]

I have heard it rumoured that in order to avoid any such problems many musicians arrange teensy little changes which they call "variations on a theme...of..." ...and then they name or they don't name the original composer of the piece.

I have also heard it rumoured that some modern composers do the same thing (with or without mentioning the original composer of a piece), whilst combing sources for an "inspiration on a theme..." ...and then they compose a "brand new piece" which often sounds eerily familiar to music lovers.

I don't know how true that is ? Does anyone know ?


Thanks from Kristina.

I was informed about the above mentioned rumours by a professional violinist
and I wonder if there is an answer to this question ?

Thanks from Kristina.

[oxy60]

I was informed about the above mentioned rumours by a professional violinist
and I wonder if there is an answer to this question ?

Thanks from Kristina.

Knowing the answers to music copyrights are as important as learning the play a C scale.

There is a 5 note rule that defines whether you have played the song. Teeny weeny changes may not be enough.

Best, go the ASCAP website and read up. All your questions will be answered.