From: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org (ecto-digest) To: ecto-digest@smoe.org Subject: ecto-digest V12 #270 Reply-To: ecto@smoe.org Sender: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk ecto-digest Wednesday, October 11 2006 Volume 12 : Number 270 To unsubscribe: e-mail ecto-digest-request@smoe.org and put the word unsubscribe in the message body. Today's Subjects: ----------------- Today's your birthday, friends... [Mike Matthews ] Re: Copyright insanity ["Kat Crowder" ] Re: Copyright insanity [meredith ] Re: Copyright insanity ["Ken Blake" ] Re: Copyright insanity [Neile Graham ] Re: Copyright insanity [neal copperman ] Re: Copyright insanity [alan ] Re: Copyright insanity [jjhanson@att.net] More on Copyright insanity [jjhanson@att.net] Re: Copyright insanity ["F.J.Fornorn" ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 03:00:02 -0400 (EDT) From: Mike Matthews Subject: Today's your birthday, friends... i*i*i*i*i*i i*i*i*i*i*i *************** *****HAPPY********* **************BIRTHDAY********* *************************************************** *************************************************************************** ****************** Michael C. Berch (mcb@postmodern.com) ****************** ********************* Chris Gagnon (no Email address) ********************* *************************************************************************** -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Michael C. Berch Wed October 10 1956 No parking Chris Gagnon Sat October 10 1970 Libra Wolfgang Drotschmann Thu October 13 1966 Waage Gracescape Fri October 13 1967 unbalanced Brian Bloom Tue October 14 1969 spam Erik N. Johnson Tue October 16 1962 Handle with Care Kim Klouda Tue October 17 1967 Libra Anthony Amato Sat October 20 1973 Libra Suzanne DeCory Tue October 22 1968 Balancing Libra Dave Steiner Sat October 24 1959 Scorpio Tara MacLean Thu October 25 1973 Scorpio Elin Sjoelie Fri October 25 1974 Scorpio Jessica Koeppel Wed October 29 1969 Scorpio Kat Crowder Sat November 01 1969 Bunnies Katie Dougiamas Sat November 02 1974 Scorpio Anthony Horan Fri November 04 1966 Positive Michael Sullivan Mon November 05 1962 Scorpio Anna Pryde Wed November 05 1975 Scorpio Sun; Sagittarius Moon; Pisces Rising Jens Brage Sun November 08 1964 Scorpio Rising Lynn Garrett Sat November 08 1958 Scorpio Sam Murgie Fri November 08 1957 Scorpio Rachel Kramer Bussel Mon November 10 1975 Scorpio Neb Rodgers Tue November 10 1959 Space Available - Inquire Within - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 10:13:36 -0500 (CDT) From: "Kat Crowder" Subject: Re: Copyright insanity I don't really understand about the permit requirement. Is that this part: "Because his place features local musicians and covers are rare, he didn't think he had to pay the musicians and publishers group an estimated $2,000 to cover performances of copyrighted tunes. " ? I didn't realize there was a general permit for these. Is this the same sort of permit that a restaurant would have to get to be able to sing Happy Birthday? On Mon, October 9, 2006 11:41 pm, Troy J Shadbolt wrote: > well it does suck, but ASCAP and BMI are just doing what they get paid > to do- enforcing copyright. > > the owner admits he knew about the permit requirement (which he could > have easily written off his taxes) but chose not to get one because of > the misplaced belief that "covers were rare". every little coffee shop > in the San Francisco area has BMI, ASCAP or both permits. The ones that > don't have a sign posted and a notice in their contracts stating that > covers registered with "x" may not be performed within the venue. > > this wasn't RIAA (the record companies) this was the publishers. > > > -troy > > > > On Oct 9, 2006, at 8:31 PM, Ken Blake wrote: > >> Here's a story of a restaurant owner getting sued because a band did >> some covers there. >> >> http://www.blogs.oregonlive.com/oregonian/newsupdates/default.asp? >> item=214112 >> >> I just don't get this. It makes me wonder if the RIAA's real goal is >> to get people to stop listening to music altogether. Not unlike the >> blue meanies in Yellow Submarine. >> >> Ken >> >> > --- > troy j shadbolt > www.voyuz.net > - -- The ability to quote is a serviceable substitute for wit. -- Somerset Maugham ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 12:33:56 -0400 From: meredith Subject: Re: Copyright insanity Hi, Kat Crowder wrote: > I didn't realize there was a general permit for these. Is this the same > sort of permit that a restaurant would have to get to be able to sing > Happy Birthday? Yes. If the composer(s) of a song are registered with ASCAP/BMI, then they receive royalty payments based on public performances of their songs, whether in recorded form (i.e. if a restaurant has the radio playing over its speakers in the dining area) or in live performance. Any public venue that either plays recorded music in its public spaces or hosts live music performances where songs written by ASCAP/BMI artists are played is required to pay fees to ASCAP/BMI so the royalties can be paid. There are a few exceptions (e.g. BMI waives the bulk of its fees if a venue's performances are to benefit charity), but not many. The fee scale can be a pretty large financial burden on smaller venues. This is why some venues have huge signs posted on the side of the stage area saying NO COVER SONGS. :} - -- =============================================== Meredith Tarr New Haven, CT USA mailto:meth@smoe.org http://www.smoe.org/meth =============================================== hear at the HOMe House Concert Series http://hom.smoe.org =============================================== ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 12:47:01 -0500 From: "Ken Blake" Subject: Re: Copyright insanity Meth, You've done living room concerts, do you have to be concerned about this? Say you get Happy to play at your place and she does her David Bowie cover, is it your responsibility to make sure that ASCAP/BMI are paid? Why wouldn't this burden fall on the musician who choose to play the cover and is also the one who knows the song isn't theirs. What happens when a band is hired for a wedding gig? They certainly aren't being paid to play their own music. Who's responsible for making sure the right organizations are paid? The musicians? The bride's parents who presumably are paying the band? Or the owners of the reception location? It seems more logical to me that the musicians are the ones who should be liable. Ken On 10/10/06, meredith wrote: > Hi, > > Kat Crowder wrote: > > I didn't realize there was a general permit for these. Is this the same > > sort of permit that a restaurant would have to get to be able to sing > > Happy Birthday? > > Yes. If the composer(s) of a song are registered with ASCAP/BMI, then > they receive royalty payments based on public performances of their > songs, whether in recorded form (i.e. if a restaurant has the radio > playing over its speakers in the dining area) or in live performance. > Any public venue that either plays recorded music in its public spaces > or hosts live music performances where songs written by ASCAP/BMI > artists are played is required to pay fees to ASCAP/BMI so the royalties > can be paid. > > There are a few exceptions (e.g. BMI waives the bulk of its fees if a > venue's performances are to benefit charity), but not many. The fee > scale can be a pretty large financial burden on smaller venues. This is > why some venues have huge signs posted on the side of the stage area > saying NO COVER SONGS. :} ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 10:58:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Neile Graham Subject: Re: Copyright insanity It all has to do with the nature of "public". Living room concerts and weddings are private ventures, places that regularly hold concerts are not. - --Neile On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, Ken Blake wrote: > Meth, > > You've done living room concerts, do you have to be concerned about this? > Say you get Happy to play at your place and she does her David Bowie cover, > is it your responsibility to make sure that ASCAP/BMI are paid? Why wouldn't > this burden fall on the musician who choose to play the cover and is also the > one who knows the song isn't theirs. > > What happens when a band is hired for a wedding gig? They certainly > aren't being paid to play their own music. Who's responsible for making sure > the right organizations are paid? The musicians? The bride's parents who > presumably are paying the band? Or the owners of the reception location? > It seems more logical to me that the musicians are the ones who should be > liable. > > Ken > > On 10/10/06, meredith wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Kat Crowder wrote: > > > I didn't realize there was a general permit for these. Is this the same > > > sort of permit that a restaurant would have to get to be able to sing > > > Happy Birthday? > > > > Yes. If the composer(s) of a song are registered with ASCAP/BMI, then > > they receive royalty payments based on public performances of their > > songs, whether in recorded form (i.e. if a restaurant has the radio > > playing over its speakers in the dining area) or in live performance. > > Any public venue that either plays recorded music in its public spaces > > or hosts live music performances where songs written by ASCAP/BMI > > artists are played is required to pay fees to ASCAP/BMI so the royalties > > can be paid. > > > > There are a few exceptions (e.g. BMI waives the bulk of its fees if a > > venue's performances are to benefit charity), but not many. The fee > > scale can be a pretty large financial burden on smaller venues. This is > > why some venues have huge signs posted on the side of the stage area > > saying NO COVER SONGS. :} > > - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- neile@drizzle.com / neile@sff.net .... http://www.sff.net/people/neile Editor, The Ectophiles' Guide to Good Music . http://www.ectoguide.org Workshop Administrator, Clarion West ...... http://www.clarionwest.org ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 12:53:30 -0600 From: neal copperman Subject: Re: Copyright insanity Living room concerts straddle a line though. If you do them every month, are you a place that regularly holds concerts? A lot of it comes down to how it is run and promoted too. If you want to call yourself a private venture, you should actually look private. (Fliers and calendar listings would be a violation of that concept.) neal . At 10:58 AM -0700 10/10/06, Neile Graham wrote: >It all has to do with the nature of "public". Living room concerts and >weddings are private ventures, places that regularly hold concerts are >not. > >--Neile > >On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, Ken Blake wrote: > >> Meth, >> >> You've done living room concerts, do you have to be concerned about this? >> Say you get Happy to play at your place and she does her David Bowie cover, >> is it your responsibility to make sure that ASCAP/BMI are paid? >>Why wouldn't >> this burden fall on the musician who choose to play the cover and >>is also the >> one who knows the song isn't theirs. >> >> What happens when a band is hired for a wedding gig? They certainly >> aren't being paid to play their own music. Who's responsible for >>making sure >> the right organizations are paid? The musicians? The bride's parents who >> presumably are paying the band? Or the owners of the reception location? >> It seems more logical to me that the musicians are the ones who should be >> liable. >> >> Ken >> >> On 10/10/06, meredith wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > Kat Crowder wrote: >> > > I didn't realize there was a general permit for these. Is this the same >> > > sort of permit that a restaurant would have to get to be able to sing >> > > Happy Birthday? >> > >> > Yes. If the composer(s) of a song are registered with ASCAP/BMI, then >> > they receive royalty payments based on public performances of their >> > songs, whether in recorded form (i.e. if a restaurant has the radio >> > playing over its speakers in the dining area) or in live performance. >> > Any public venue that either plays recorded music in its public spaces >> > or hosts live music performances where songs written by ASCAP/BMI >> > artists are played is required to pay fees to ASCAP/BMI so the royalties >> > can be paid. >> > >> > There are a few exceptions (e.g. BMI waives the bulk of its fees if a >> > venue's performances are to benefit charity), but not many. The fee >> > scale can be a pretty large financial burden on smaller venues. This is >> > why some venues have huge signs posted on the side of the stage area >> > saying NO COVER SONGS. :} >> >> > >-- >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >neile@drizzle.com / neile@sff.net .... http://www.sff.net/people/neile >Editor, The Ectophiles' Guide to Good Music . http://www.ectoguide.org >Workshop Administrator, Clarion West ...... http://www.clarionwest.org ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 13:35:23 -0700 (PDT) From: alan Subject: Re: Copyright insanity On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, neal copperman wrote: > Living room concerts straddle a line though. If you do them every month, are > you a place that regularly holds concerts? > > A lot of it comes down to how it is run and promoted too. If you want to > call yourself a private venture, you should actually look private. (Fliers > and calendar listings would be a violation of that concept.) The question is "do they know who they are?" and "Can they squash you like a bug?". If the answer it "yes" to the first, then it will be "yes" to the second. Size does not matter, only absolute control and obedience. > > neal > > . > > At 10:58 AM -0700 10/10/06, Neile Graham wrote: >> It all has to do with the nature of "public". Living room concerts and >> weddings are private ventures, places that regularly hold concerts are >> not. >> >> --Neile >> >> On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, Ken Blake wrote: >> >>> Meth, >>> >>> You've done living room concerts, do you have to be concerned about this? >>> Say you get Happy to play at your place and she does her David Bowie >>> cover, >>> is it your responsibility to make sure that ASCAP/BMI are paid? Why >>> wouldn't >>> this burden fall on the musician who choose to play the cover and is also >>> the >>> one who knows the song isn't theirs. >>> >>> What happens when a band is hired for a wedding gig? They certainly >>> aren't being paid to play their own music. Who's responsible for making >>> sure >>> the right organizations are paid? The musicians? The bride's parents >>> who >>> presumably are paying the band? Or the owners of the reception location? >>> It seems more logical to me that the musicians are the ones who should be >>> liable. >>> >>> Ken >>> >>> On 10/10/06, meredith wrote: >>> > Hi, >>> > >>> > Kat Crowder wrote: >>> > > I didn't realize there was a general permit for these. Is this the >>> same >>> > > sort of permit that a restaurant would have to get to be able to sing >>> > > Happy Birthday? >>> > >>> > Yes. If the composer(s) of a song are registered with ASCAP/BMI, then >>> > they receive royalty payments based on public performances of their >>> > songs, whether in recorded form (i.e. if a restaurant has the radio >>> > playing over its speakers in the dining area) or in live performance. >>> > Any public venue that either plays recorded music in its public spaces >>> > or hosts live music performances where songs written by ASCAP/BMI >>> > artists are played is required to pay fees to ASCAP/BMI so the >>> royalties >>> > can be paid. >>> > >>> > There are a few exceptions (e.g. BMI waives the bulk of its fees if a >>> > venue's performances are to benefit charity), but not many. The fee >>> > scale can be a pretty large financial burden on smaller venues. This >>> is >>> > why some venues have huge signs posted on the side of the stage area >>> > saying NO COVER SONGS. :} >>> >>> >> >> -- >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> neile@drizzle.com / neile@sff.net .... http://www.sff.net/people/neile >> Editor, The Ectophiles' Guide to Good Music . http://www.ectoguide.org >> Workshop Administrator, Clarion West ...... http://www.clarionwest.org > - -- "Oh, Joel Miller, you've just found the marble in the oatmeal. You're a lucky, lucky, lucky little boy. 'Cause you know why? You get to drink from... the FIRE HOOOOOSE!" - The Stanley Spudoski guide to mailing list administration ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 21:07:27 +0000 From: jjhanson@att.net Subject: Re: Copyright insanity According to one website, it also depends on who makes money from the event. For example, a DJ who hires himself out to weddings and plays copyrighted material needs a license. A dance organization that holds square dances and plays copyrighted material needs a license, even if they hire a DJ who already has a license. If you're having a private party or wedding, and have a band play, you do not need a license. A coffeehouse that holds regular entertainment to draw in business (whether or not they charge specifically for the music) needs to have a license. This also applies to restaurants/coffeehouses that play recorded music to create a mood/ set the environment (such as Starbucks). House concerts typically don't make any money from the events and they could probably be excluded--but a lot of it depends on the agents who are trying to collect the fees. The agents respresenting the Performing Arts Organizations (BMI, ASCAP, etc.) are assigned regions, so it depends on the agent who's trying to make a case. If they see that you regularly are doing shows with performers, they may try to tell you that you need a license. I've known some presenters that regularly get letters from agencies saying they need to get a license, but they typically ignore them and the agent eventually goes away/gives up. Other agents will back down once they realize you are a house concert and do not collect money, however some agents have been very nasty, persistent, and a few house concerts have stopped presenting as a result. As with many things with house concerts, it's typically not an issue--until it is--until either an agent contacts you and tries to get you to pay, or a neighbor complains about you running a business in your home, etc.... Jeff - -------------- Original message from neal copperman : -------------- > Living room concerts straddle a line though. If you do them every > month, are you a place that regularly holds concerts? > > A lot of it comes down to how it is run and promoted too. If you > want to call yourself a private venture, you should actually look > private. (Fliers and calendar listings would be a violation of that > concept.) > > neal > > . > > At 10:58 AM -0700 10/10/06, Neile Graham wrote: > >It all has to do with the nature of "public". Living room concerts and > >weddings are private ventures, places that regularly hold concerts are > >not. > > > >--Neile > > > >On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, Ken Blake wrote: > > > >> Meth, > >> > >> You've done living room concerts, do you have to be concerned about this? > >> Say you get Happy to play at your place and she does her David Bowie cover, > >> is it your responsibility to make sure that ASCAP/BMI are paid? > >>Why wouldn't > >> this burden fall on the musician who choose to play the cover and > >>is also the > >> one who knows the song isn't theirs. > >> > >> What happens when a band is hired for a wedding gig? They certainly > >> aren't being paid to play their own music. Who's responsible for > >>making sure > >> the right organizations are paid? The musicians? The bride's parents who > >> presumably are paying the band? Or the owners of the reception location? > >> It seems more logical to me that the musicians are the ones who should be > >> liable. > >> > >> Ken > >> > >> On 10/10/06, meredith wrote: > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > Kat Crowder wrote: > >> > > I didn't realize there was a general permit for these. Is this the same > >> > > sort of permit that a restaurant would have to get to be able to sing > >> > > Happy Birthday? > >> > > >> > Yes. If the composer(s) of a song are registered with ASCAP/BMI, then > >> > they receive royalty payments based on public performances of their > >> > songs, whether in recorded form (i.e. if a restaurant has the radio > >> > playing over its speakers in the dining area) or in live performance. > >> > Any public venue that either plays recorded music in its public spaces > >> > or hosts live music performances where songs written by ASCAP/BMI > >> > artists are played is required to pay fees to ASCAP/BMI so the royalties > >> > can be paid. > >> > > >> > There are a few exceptions (e.g. BMI waives the bulk of its fees if a > >> > venue's performances are to benefit charity), but not many. The fee > >> > scale can be a pretty large financial burden on smaller venues. This is > >> > why some venues have huge signs posted on the side of the stage area > >> > saying NO COVER SONGS. :} > >> > >> > > > >-- > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >neile@drizzle.com / neile@sff.net .... http://www.sff.net/people/neile > >Editor, The Ectophiles' Guide to Good Music . http://www.ectoguide.org > >Workshop Administrator, Clarion West ...... http://www.clarionwest.org ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 21:35:09 +0000 From: jjhanson@att.net Subject: More on Copyright insanity The following website has sample contracts with one of the performing rights organizations (BMI) that gives an idea of the wide variety of businesses that "should" be paying these organizations licensing fees. http://bmi.com/licensing/forms/index_gl.asp House concerts are not specifically addressed, but if a licensing agent were to try collect from a house concert they would probably put in the Musical Events - Presenter/Promoter umbrella and, if they were to be assessed, the house concert promoters would have to pay roughly .03% of contributions for each show (for concerts/events with less than 10,000 seats), or a $15 fee per show ($15 used for benefits or no-charge events, with less than 250 seats.) But that is only for one of the 3 main performing rights organizations (the others being ASCAP and SESAC - also SOCAN a Canadian organization). To really be covered you'd have to have licensing agreements with all these organizations. Some house concerts and coffee shops try to get around this by asking performers not to do any covers of songs they do not own the rights to. But that is almost impossible to defend/track--particularly if you present music regularly. Jeff - -------------- Original message from alan : -------------- > On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, neal copperman wrote: > > > Living room concerts straddle a line though. If you do them every month, are > > you a place that regularly holds concerts? > > > > A lot of it comes down to how it is run and promoted too. If you want to > > call yourself a private venture, you should actually look private. (Fliers > > and calendar listings would be a violation of that concept.) > > The question is "do they know who they are?" and "Can they squash you like > a bug?". If the answer it "yes" to the first, then it will be "yes" to > the second. Size does not matter, only absolute control and obedience. > > > > > neal > > > > . > > > > At 10:58 AM -0700 10/10/06, Neile Graham wrote: > >> It all has to do with the nature of "public". Living room concerts and > >> weddings are private ventures, places that regularly hold concerts are > >> not. > >> > >> --Neile > >> > >> On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, Ken Blake wrote: > >> > >>> Meth, > >>> > >>> You've done living room concerts, do you have to be concerned about this? > >>> Say you get Happy to play at your place and she does her David Bowie > >>> cover, > >>> is it your responsibility to make sure that ASCAP/BMI are paid? Why > >>> wouldn't > >>> this burden fall on the musician who choose to play the cover and is also > >>> the > >>> one who knows the song isn't theirs. > >>> > >>> What happens when a band is hired for a wedding gig? They certainly > >>> aren't being paid to play their own music. Who's responsible for making > >>> sure > >>> the right organizations are paid? The musicians? The bride's parents > >>> who > >>> presumably are paying the band? Or the owners of the reception location? > >>> It seems more logical to me that the musicians are the ones who should be > >>> liable. > >>> > >>> Ken > >>> > >>> On 10/10/06, meredith wrote: > >>> > Hi, > >>> > > >>> > Kat Crowder wrote: > >>> > > I didn't realize there was a general permit for these. Is this the > >>> same > >>> > > sort of permit that a restaurant would have to get to be able to sing > >>> > > Happy Birthday? > >>> > > >>> > Yes. If the composer(s) of a song are registered with ASCAP/BMI, then > >>> > they receive royalty payments based on public performances of their > >>> > songs, whether in recorded form (i.e. if a restaurant has the radio > >>> > playing over its speakers in the dining area) or in live performance. > >>> > Any public venue that either plays recorded music in its public spaces > >>> > or hosts live music performances where songs written by ASCAP/BMI > >>> > artists are played is required to pay fees to ASCAP/BMI so the > >>> royalties > >>> > can be paid. > >>> > > >>> > There are a few exceptions (e.g. BMI waives the bulk of its fees if a > >>> > venue's performances are to benefit charity), but not many. The fee > >>> > scale can be a pretty large financial burden on smaller venues. This > >>> is > >>> > why some venues have huge signs posted on the side of the stage area > >>> > saying NO COVER SONGS. :} > >>> > >>> > >> > >> -- > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> neile@drizzle.com / neile@sff.net .... http://www.sff.net/people/neile > >> Editor, The Ectophiles' Guide to Good Music . http://www.ectoguide.org > >> Workshop Administrator, Clarion West ...... http://www.clarionwest.org > > > > -- > "Oh, Joel Miller, you've just found the marble in the oatmeal. You're a > lucky, lucky, lucky little boy. 'Cause you know why? You get to drink > from... the FIRE HOOOOOSE!" > - The Stanley Spudoski guide to mailing list administration ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 22:25:53 -0400 From: "F.J.Fornorn" Subject: Re: Copyright insanity I don't think the public/private distinction is even in play anymore. I know that photographers are advised to pursue a license for the music they play in their own studio, not to mention the hassles if the client wants, say, a DVD of pictures with background music. It's more like this: if there is any chance of money changing hands around this music, we (BMI etc) *must* get our cut. Funny this should come up coincident with the Tower records thread. Tower blames music downloading. I am sure this is quite true, what we're seeing is a shift in the whole business model, and if you ask me, it's probably about time. The RIAA and their aggressive lawsuits against 12 year olds and their parents, this recent BMI/ASCAP aggressiveness, the failure of large chains like Tower all have one thing in common: the parties complaining the loudest have all historically been highly profitable middlemen in the music biz. Now with the internet we have a wide opening for commerce directly between the artist and the listener, leaving the middlemen out completely. Or be replaced by new middlemen like iTunes that can profit via volume and breadth of catalog, rather than depend on exclusivity, payola, or brute force marketing like the old days. I think they're scared spitless. But it also just might be proper comeuppance for all the years of abuse of songwriter's rights and agent/producer usurpation. Unfortunately it is affecting the little guys, ie the struggling musician/employees as mentioned before; I have also seen the few remaining small record stores taking cuts as well. On the other hand, I enjoy online shopping quite a bit: previewing is easier and more personal; its easier to follow references to related artists. Plus it gets harder and harder for me to remember what I have already bought or not, at least online I can stop and check my library to make sure I don't inadvertently buy duplicates! On the license issue, I know it has forced one of my favorite local cafes to stop hosting live music since they can't afford it without introducing a cover charge, and everyone knows the people in this town are too cheap to pay it. The photographer business model may be a more effective approach for musicians these days. They freelance: they do their thing (the performance), they sell what they can (the songs/albums). If and when they achieve mass appeal there are agents and publishing houses that can help forward their work, but that happens after the fact rather than before as has been done in the music biz. That means the agents and publishers have to really compete and do something mutually beneficial for the artist. And the artist can and should make sure they never relinquish complete copyright control. That way the artist/ composer is the final, appropriate arbiter of who can use or cover their work, not a bunch of 3rd party suits. ------------------------------ End of ecto-digest V12 #270 ***************************