[llevrok]

If a tune is sold to and marketed by a record company with royalties paid to the artists, what “right” do they have to sue? (could the Hendrix estate sue Muzak?)

[sofaman]

llev!!! How are ya, mate?

[mountainbunny]

IIRC, there are different sorts of music rights. There are performance rights, publication rights, etc. The different rights can be retained by artists or sold.

So, the answer seems to be, “it depends”.

This is Wikipedia, so take it with a shaker of salt, but I think this begins to explain things pretty well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Related_rights

[VideoDoctor]

Music used at a convention is almost always used in conjunction with is known as a "sync license".

It can also fall under the same regs & rules as a disco, restaurant or bar jukebox, etc.. with the exception that the convention was broadcast to the public.

The point: I don't think the Wilson sisters really have any right to refuse anybody the RE-PLAYING of their recorded music. They own the song but NOT the recording. The recording is owned by the record company who makes money through sales and licensing.

[dan1123]

If a tune is sold to and marketed by a record company with royalties paid to the artists, what “right” do they have to sue? (could the Hendrix estate sue Muzak?)

Yeah, I believe Epic Records owns the copyright, not Ann or Nancy.