Karaoke Forums

Have you confirmed that by anyone but Kurt? Even though that sounds like Nigel's "modus operandi" no one around Richmond will confirm or deny your allegation.

Go ask Loneavenger.

_________________
Dave's not here.

Confirmed by Thunder, LoneAvenger etc.

_________________
The Line Array Experiment is over. Nothing to see here. Move along.

Oke doky?

_________________
No venue to big or too small. From your den to the local club or event, we have the music most requested. Great sounding system!

The problem is that for PUBLIC PERFORMANCE of copyright material, the cover artist does not recieve royalties from ASCAP/BMI so I assume the royalties/copyright for PUBLIC PERFORMANCE all go to the original artist (if under CR). Yes the cover band has rights for the version, but unless that verision is different enough artistically (in the eyes of a court) it is not going to be considered a different song for that royalty path of Commercial Use. Cover bands have to pay ASCAP/BMI for their commercial use of songs(through the venue), but do not get paid anything from ASCAP/BMI for the songs unless they are substantially changed.

You seem to be mistaking copyright license for performance license.
A cover band does not have to pay to play, this is the venues responsibility - performance (ie ASCAP/BMI). Which is basically a blanket license that gets collected & distributed to the members that belong to those license agencies.
A cover band WOULD have to pay to record for distribution - copyright. But they would no more own the original song, they would be able to copyright their version/performance. As far as getting paid to perform it, the cover band wouldn't recieve any royalties regardless of how different it was. This would still go to the original artist.

_________________
LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!

The distinction would be for cases involving substantial changes to a song. For example if Wierd AL Yancovic did a parody of a song, then it is my understanding that ASCAP/BMI could collect royalties for both Wierd AL and the original artist of the song. In such a case both artists would get some share of the royalties for PUBLIC PERFORMANCE (for example if a DJ played the song in a club).

But the whole idea of a performance license is a portion of the copyright that is enforced by a system managed by ASCAP/BMI.

Weird Al would collect a portion of the publishing for his lyrics only, the musical composition would still go to the original writer under which that portion of the license belongs. There are 3 parts to a published song - lyrics, music and melody (I believe, can't remember for sure on the last one). So in reality 3 different people can have rights to one song. So if Weird Al did his version lyrically, but the music and melody remains, the holders to the latter two would still get their share but Al would receive a third for his part.

_________________
LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!

having been served with the "intent to sue" paperwork in the first round of suits in Florida and been thru the entire audit process. I can assure everyone that the process is not a difficult one and well worth the time and effort. We are preparing for our Stellar audit sometime next month and have received them from SC(2x once by SKYPE and once at SC) and CB. i will repeat to anyone that will listen IF you are legit(1-1) as for your audits before you are named.....If not get legal or get out

_________________
"Integrity is choosing your thoughts, words and actions based on your principles and values rather than for your personal gain."
Unknown
"if a man has integrity, nothing else matters, If a man has no integrity, nothing else matters."
Lee McGuffey