It's a shame that people still buy into the "helping the artist" crock , when there is a shit-ton of anecdotal evidence against these organizations.
I know that "anecdotal" evidence from the web seems kind of sketchy but the articles are all eerily similar.In the comments below the articles people share negative anecdotes about ASCAP/BMI's misdeeds. In the comment sections there's usually one or two trolls who I'm sure as shit are some were hired by someone. I can't think of any normal person(or everyday asshole) who would think a club owner should be sued 14 grand because a band played a tom petty cover.
I read the comment board on one of the articles here where an anonymous coward/troll basically admitted he was defending an extortion racket. One guy asked why a venue should pay licensing fees for songs which the venue never played. The reply was along the lines of "what does (x amount of dollars) mean to you?", "What kind of credible music venue can't pay (x amount of dollars)?"...as though a venue is obliged to pay a single fucking penny before the collecting agency has even seen/heard any copyright infringement take place.
The trolls accused the guy who wrote the article of slander, and yellow journalism, but never really refuted any of the content. They didn't even deny that BMI feels entitled to money because they assume that a venue is playing their songs.
Is there such thing as ASCAP/BMI forum trolls, or am I just paranoid?
Kudos on your recent articles on PRO's. Maybe even more fascinating than the articles themselves were the comments-the comments made by the pro-ascap people/hired trolls. I spent the day looking for similar articles all over the net, out of curiosity and sheer boredom.
I observed a couple of different types of copyright Nazi's.
There's the ones that are half full of used car salesman humor, half full of dad-analogies: "ya couldn't just take one of the ranchers cows"(or some other crap that I paraphrased)
And then there were the vindictive creeps: "This guy White apparently thinks he's one tough guy...that he could give 'em some biker attitude and the problem go away...now he is going to lose his bar!"Guy wouldn't pay fee according to (Voice of Reason)
And then there were the arguments/assertion (mostly paraphrased here:
That an AC/DC cover band is stealing the real AC/DC's livelihood....ya know, the "paycheck" they would have earned playing that gig at that one dive bar. No one will want to see AC/DC now!They already saw the third rate knock-off. Who can tell the difference?
The reason they ask for a blanket fee without hearing the venue playing any licensed songs is because they can't be around to make sure that infringement doesn't take place, but of course, it will inevitably happen and if the venue doesn’t pay the fee then they will be sued into oblivion.
Small coffee shops(coffee shops come up a lot) are trying to screw songwriters out of their money(or will, or might have already).
……I was absolutely disgusted by how predatory these organizations came across. Here’s a neat summary:
“somewhere, someplace, someone might be making money off of my work in a really indirect way.” or “Some guy might like a song they play on the stereo at this one place and they might return the next night which means that increases the business of that place, which means
“They’re Profiting Off My Work!”
Of course that’s if the guy became a regular customer because they played that one song, ya don’t know for sure but that’s a remote possibility, and because there’s a remote possibility that song drummed up some business, and increased the owners profits, then I want a piece of the action!”
Do you think having an extortion racket work on the artists behalf will earn them a following or even a decent living? Do you think threatening music venues will make them increase in number? Would music even be worth it anymore?