Do you think this is going a little too far?

http://www.wxii12.com/news/24167582/detail.html

Never heard of this club but Mt. Airy is just a little north of where I live. Seems like there is a lot of red tape required to cover a song. I would have never guessed the the venue would be responsible for what a live act played.

I can see asking for some compensation if anyone records and makes money directly off of that recording but I never thought that covering a song live required any rights. IMO, the original artist would sell more copies of their songs if someone heard them live and liked them.

That's bizarre. I have no idea what an establishment needs to have licensed to have live bands, and why is it the establishment and not the band?

Does the establishment need to review a potential entertainers song list to ensure they have received separate licensing for each of them?? Does the entertainer have to review the establishment's approved list and choose only songs from that?

WTF? I suppose the DJ's are next. Will it be soon illegal to play music out loud without giving ASCAP it's share? Can I let my friend listen to my record without penalty, or will he need to buy his own?

Originally Posted by: RazboThat's bizarre. I have no idea what an establishment needs to have licensed to have live bands, and why is it the establishment and not the band?

It does seem odd to most people because it is rarely discussed much less enforced. But, it is (& has been for years) part of copyright & licensing law:

http://www.ascap.com/licensing/licensingfaq.html

That page clarifies many other details about playing for personal use, etc.

Originally Posted by: CSchlegel
That page clarifies many other details about playing for personal use, etc.

That was eye-opening. I guess item 12 is why most people would not be aware of licensing issues for bar gigs and whatnot.

12. Aren't musicians, entertainers and DJ's responsible for obtaining permission for music they perform?

Some people mistakenly assume that musicians and entertainers must obtain licenses to perform copyrighted music or that businesses where music is performed can shift their responsibility to musicians or entertainers. The law says all who participate in, or are responsible for, performances of music are legally responsible. Since it is the business owner who obtains the ultimate benefit from the performance, it is the business owner who obtains the license. Music license fees are one of the many costs of doing business.

It makes sense, I guess. Although the article KFS1972 posted seems to suggest individual songs were not licensed when the ASCAP site indicates that it's kind of a blanket license to avoid this song by song, artist by artist quagmire.