Lets just cut to the chase. I know you don't respect intellectual property rights and you think the law is bad. Got it. All I'm saying is that it is the friggin' LAW. There are good reasons for it that I have pointed out. And no one is being nazis by doing their legal jobs to collect royalties from those breaking the law. Most businesses understand that it is a part of doing business. Even when their entire fees are totaled, the expenses are negligible. Sometimes mom and pop establishments have a difficult time transitioning from a hobby business into a professional operation and don't understand the laws with regards to a lot of things. A restaurant grossing a million dollars a year can handle $2,000 PRO fees easily.
That is simply not true. I think the law is fine, I don't agree with the manner in which it is being enforced and I think ASCAP is out of control.
So is theft, piracy and illegal use of digital recordings, clearly. It's why disputes are settled in court. Courts have to be judicious with both sides and make rulings on disputed issues. But there is nothing inherently wrong or "nazi" about copyright law.
Again, not with the law but with the enforcement. It states in the article that an artist could perform his/her own music at will with no compensation required but that Ascap could still come in and demand payment. That amigo is wrong. Just like putting the clamps on a bunch of hicks from nowhere Mo. Playing to an audience of 75. Wow someone is getting screwed there but it ain't anyone on a major label. So settle down Hochstetter.
OK. We have established the the copyright law is OK and ASCAP has the right to administer the copyrights of its members. Very good. So now we are down to a certain ASCAP officials assessment of the situation versus the club's assessment of it. If the ASCAP official was wrong and improperly assessed their royalties owed, then the club should just have let ASCAP sue them instead of voluntarily stopping the performances. Errors can happen. Make ASCAP prove their case in court. If it was flimsy they might have dropped it . . . or the judge may rule against them. The worst that could happen would be for the judge to tell the club they had to pay 3/4 cent per customer to be within the law and they were no worse off. It's how we handle these things in America and the club failed to take advantage of it. They should have called a lawyer. Or perhaps they did, and were told that their case had little merit, and so they just dropped the music and now they bitch about their own decision.
Not when they clearly don't have the means to fight this type of battle. They couldn't afford the $1100 worth of fees, how are they going to pay an attorney for that type of case? They were bullied plain and simple and the saddest part is they were within the law because no covers were played.
They can take it to small claims court and make their own case. But any club that can't afford $1100 or a lawyer from time to time has far worse problems than this. Do you realize what kind of grosses go through successful clubs and restaurants? That is only their side of the story. The article didn't get any quotes from ASCAP. A judge would have decided who was telling the truth. ASCAP is only doing their job to tell them what they owe. Everything else is up to the club and the court to settle. If they can prove ASCAP made a mistake, then ASCAP will have to pay the court fees. If they can prove that ASCAP bullied them and harmed their business, then they can sue ASCAP.
What red doesn't understand or chooses to ignore is the fact that when a person or business of modest means is sued by a multi million or billion dollar business the little guy can't win. The big guys will bury them in paper filing motion after motion and to respond to each motion requires more and more of your hard earned money going to a bloodsucking attorney at a hourly rate of $100 if you can find one to work that cheap or maybe $300 an hour if you can't. The little guy is going to run out of money long before the big guy has to crack open an extra piggy bank. The best the little guy can hope for is that there is a default judgement against him and the big guys don't try to collect on the judgement.
