Believe it or not, ASCAP actually sends people to public places such as restaurants, bars and retail shops and if they hear music that is protected by copyright and the proprietor is not paying the necessary royalty, he can get assessed a fine and even be sued. I believe businesses have actually been shut down over this.
As well, if I invite you over to a barbeque at my house and I play a Steely Dan record for you or even if I'm rolling down a public street playing it in my car with the windows rolled down, I am legally obliged to pay public performance royalties.
My point is that so long as the necessary royalties are paid for public performance, and they may be hefty if you are playing at a rally with 15,000 people, you are allowed to play the music regardless of the fact that the owner of the music may disagree with you politically.
I'm glad that Trump is taking a stand on this.
I find that highly doubtful.
Regards,
Did a little research on this:
A Trump spokesperson confirms that the business mogul has paid the required fees to license Adele’s music for his rallies. It’s actually likely that his camp secured a blanket license with ASCAP and BMI to play any and all songs that are governed by those music organizations.
There is ongoing debate about this:
There is a line, however. Trump, and every candidate, would need an additional license to use the artist in question’s music for campaign commercials or video. But since that’s not the issue at hand here, there’s little Adele can do. The situation is reminiscent of one Trump faced last year when his own friend, Steven Tyler, sent a cease-and-desist letter over the Republican contender’s use of “Dream On.” The Aerosmith frontman’s attorney was later forced to acknowledge, “The Trump organization obtained public performance licenses from both ASCAP and BMI which cannot decline a public performance license even when a songwriter may not approve of the use.” - http://www.gossipcop.com/donald-trump-right-adele-songs-permission-music-license-objection/
In creating these blanket licenses, PRO’s are protecting the only right copy right law promises to protect in the interest of musicians; the economic right the musician owns to earn compensation for the playing of their music. The right which is not protected by this tandem of copyright law and the blanket license is the moral rig ht of a musician to object to a particular use of their work. 5.. as a more popular alternative to copyright law claims, some musicians have brought trademark claims as a means to close the gap left by copyright law. More: http://scholarship.shu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1277&context=student_scholarship
But consider the paradox. Liberals and certain courts assert that a Christian baker can be heavily fined for refusing to sell a specially created work of art due to his objections to the content and purpose of it, but the same type of liberals support a liberal musician refusing to allow their work of art from being used due to their objections to purpose of it. Likewise in the case of musicians or other artists for hire being compelled to make a work of art promoting what they object to.
So you can play a record of someone for yourself and your family at your home, but you can’t play it if someone is visiting? That doesn’t make sense. I thought you could play what you wanted in your home? Even if guests are there?
And virtually not a dime of that money is paid to the artists who were actually played in that building.
There is no "playlist log", no audits of the music, strictly "are any ASCAP artists played".
It's a shakedown racket. Pay your protection fee to the muscle (and they are big guys) or face consequences.
If so, then I would like to see Sarah Palin play Barracuda, pay the royalties, and tell the Wilson sisters to go pound Seattle sand.
As well, if I invite you over to a barbeque at my house and I play a Steely Dan record for you or even if I’m rolling down a public street playing it in my car with the windows rolled down, I am legally obliged to pay public performance royalties.
Not correct. If you bought the Steely Dan record you PAID royalties and you can use it for private use. You can NOT charge people for the BBQ and play the song.
Honkytonks all over the country are obligated to pay a monthly fee. Most don’t.