Slashdot Mirror
Restaurateur Loses Copyright Suit To BMI
Frosty P writes: BMI claims Amici III in Linden, New York didn't have a license when it played four tunes in its eatery one night last year, including the beloved "Bennie and the Jets" and "Brown Sugar," winning $24,000 earlier this year, and over $8,200 in attorney's fees. Giovanni Lavorato, who has been in business for 25 years, says the disc DJ brought into the eatery paid a fee to play tunes. "It's ridiculous for me to pay somebody also," he said. "This is not a nightclub. This is not a disco joint . . . How many times do they want to get paid for the stupid music?"
. Stories like this one is why I will never feel bad about piracy.
Artists need to hop on the CC bandwagon. Things have changed drastically since the music industry started strangling them as well as consumers.
If we had a sizable pool of popular CC licensed music, this kind of thing would be less of an issue because establishments like this could simply use it instead. There are tons of new ways for artists to get paid via CC licensed music. Maybe we can brainstorm on ideas and models for this to become a reality? I'm thinking some sort of croudfunding model might be a good first step.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
If I buy a CD and play it in my home, how many others may be in the same room listening before I need to pay a fee?
If a company buys a CD and plays it at their place of business, who else may be in the room listening before they need to pay a fee?
I do not know the answer buy my personal opinion is "as many as I want" unless as a business the main reason why customers are paying me is to listen to those specific songs, in that case I am re-marketing them.
EXACTLY. What if the DJ had played the songs in a park? Would the city have to pay BMI's licensing shakedown fee?
sig: sauer
It sounds like BMI tried to be reasonable and get him to license the music but he ignored them. From his quotes it sounds like he probably pissed them off and they decided to go after him.
It's not like the license is all that expensive or hard to obtain or that services to pipe in music don't exist. I don't feel bad for this guy, likely all he needed to do is stop playing copyrighted stuff when he was made aware of the violation and then obtain a license as required if he needed to continue.... Or, BUY a music service for his business from somebody and let them keep up with the licenses.
I've been working on a "public" free holiday light display, I'll be playing copyrighted music, and even though it's only in the idea stage, I've already approached BMI about required license arrangements (which they claim is none). Their E-mail response will be printed and kept.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Former Restautantosaur here. These BMI/ASCAP people are thugs. They cold call random businesses, threatening potential legal penalties if you don't buy a blanket license. They basically say, 'if you don't buy a license now, one of our inspectors might come out to your shop, and if we hear any of our music playing we're gonna sue your ass.' Then they go after random people like the guy in the article 'to set an example.' Thugs, it's all extortion.
You need to meet the terms that BMI puts forth if you play their material. Their website deals with this issue and they CLEARLY tell you that it is the owner of the venue, not the DJ who is liable.
Yeah, and those boxes that pop up on computers CLEARLY tell you that the IRS is going arrest you if you don't call this number and give them your credit card. That doesn't make it true.
Or, for an example a little more on point with how BMI operates, police will often say something like "I'm going to need to come inside and look around". The implication is that they are legally allowed to enter simply by saying so, when this is completely untrue - they actually cannot come in at that point unless you signal your acceptance for them to enter. What happens is that 99% of people will step back and hold their door open for the officer after he says that, thus legally extending the officer an invitation to enter (even if the invitation was caused by an implied lie).
Sure the DJ may have claimed to have the licenses required, but the business owner is the one who is required to obtain the licenses.
BMI can state that the venue is responsible all they want, but if you read between the lines on what they actually say on their website, you can have DJs (or whoever) be responsible for the licensing, it's just that you may be liable if the DJ isn't properly licensed. If the terms of a contract with a DJ requires the DJ to be responsible for the music, then there's a good chance that's exactly how it will work - either by direct assignment of responsibility, or by being responsible for any damages the business incurs due to their negligence.
Simply put, BMI words their statement like this because they want to double-dip into the licensing revenue stream. Even if the DJ already has all the proper licenses to play it in whatever venue they want, BMI will use vague language about who needs the license and use scare tactics to try make venue owners pay again for licenses that have already been paid.