[FreeTally]

It is my understanding that bars that feature live music are now being sued by the RIAA. For royalities? Now I do not understand how this can be. A bar hires a band (for a lot of money) the band plays, the band get's paid and later the bar is sued! Can you explain this. thanks

I think you may be referring to isolated cases where the RIAA has attempted to sue bars who hire cover bands. I think technically, by the letter of the law, you or I can not set up at "Joe's Bar" and play Guns N Roses or Beatles tunes without the RIAA's permission. Of course, there are doznes or more bars in almost every major/minor city who have acts three or more times a week - and of course, they play cover tunes. This is how all bands start.

I may be wrong about what they are trying to file suit over. Its sounds silly that the RIAA would do this considering that "cover bands" have been around since the beginning of music.

I am not familar with any of these suits. It may actually be that they are trying to stop "Tribute" bands, who dress up like the performer, and do all of their songs. There are actually a few well known "tribute" bands that tour on a regional or national basis. Im not sure if these bands get "permission" or what.

[jpsb]

That is exactly what they (RIAA) are doing. They go to bars demanding thousands of dollars in royalties, if the bar doesn't pay up, they sue. Conpletely turned me against the music industry. If they are going to sue anyone they should sue the band playing songs the RIAA feels it owns. They only sue the bars because that know the bar either pays or the bar is closed and sold. Bunch of blood sucking creeps, another instance of lawers screwing over the public to make a few bucks.

Once we are finished with terrorists I think a war against lawers would be a good idea.