This topic has been on the List Serve and I know we have some very smart people here in BGP land that can set us all straight. I think the issue is, is it legal to play music at the games when the artists are not getting royalties? I am the first to tell everyone I know almost nothing about this but my simple people understanding of music royalties was this issue applied to live music where groups are playing cover songs of popular artists and not recordings of the actual music but again I have no idea.

 

Anyone?

I'm 58 and I love Music, but if they play it so loud I just want to get up and go home. I usually try to find a seat away from the direct speakers. Its like the guy who says he was the first one to do the music with everyone saying "CHARGE". He says he needs to get paid for every team Pro and College that has used it. He is actually doing a lawsuit to every Pro and college team.

 

In referring to GURU's question, how can it be controlled, and I'm not very smart.

I don't know how it can be controlled. Personally, if the CD or music is bought, legally, off of iTunes and played through an MP3 player, I don't see how it could be considered illegal, even if a clip of a game with music in the background is posted on youtube. If the music execs find this to be illegal, then they are opening up a huge can of worms:

 

If these proves to be true, then the following must be an enfringement as well:

 

1) The playing of music at all sporting events (cheerleading competitions inlcuded)

2) Band competitions

3) The aspiring country music artists who posts his rendition of "Friends in Low Places" on youtube for the world to see.

4) High School dances

5) Music played in shopping mall stores

6) Proms

7) Bars and Club music played by a DJ

 

The list could go on and on, or am I way off base here?

There is a LOT of grey area when it comes to licensing and copyright infringement for music. I know, at least, that at Paul Brown Stadium, they pay for the licensing for the music that they play over their audio system (e.g. - "Bang On The Drum" by Todd Rundgren after touchdowns). This, surely, will remove you from any legal liability. I think the biggest problem inherent to the situation is the fact that people are paying for admittance to the venue. Therein, the venue owner makes profit based upon the services they offer - which you could easily argue includes the music being played at the event.

 

By that basis, you could make the argument that a stadium is no different than, say, a bar with a jukebox, requiring a cover to get in. ...you don't always go to a bar for the music, but listening to the music is one of the services offered by admission to the bar.

 

There is a precedent for jukebox owners being sued by Broadcast Music, Inc. (an organization that collects license fees on behalf of songwriters, composers, and music publishers and distributes the royalties appropriately) after the owners failed to license their jukeboxes. In the situation I'm referencing, specifically, jukebox owners were sued after the bar/restaurant owners were cleared by the courts because they signed a management contract with the jukebox company for them to manage the jukebox.

 

Long story short, there is some precedent where you could get in trouble, but it's a matter of whether or not the music industry is interested in trying to make the laws apply to the likes of a high school and their sports teams. Seeing as they have their hands pretty darn full with internet piracy, I don't see it being a big issue, but it could be an issue nonetheless.

The biggest portion of the grey area comes as a result of the Fair Use Doctrine. That doctrine says that there are four areas that need to be considered to determine when particular use or reproduction is fair:

 

"1. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes

2. The nature of the copyrighted work

3. The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole

4. The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work"

 

Based on the fourth point, you could argue that the use of the music at the stadium has no effect on the value of the copyrighted work (the music) and thereby the music industry has no argument that they have been wronged by its use, as long as it was purchased legally in the first place.

I can't answer the question regarding music in a stadium but I do know that Disney attorney's contacted our church regarding the showing of disney video's to our day care children. If there is more than 5 kids watching at once, our church has to purchase a licensing agreement/fee in order to continue the practice. In order to avoid any legal issues, we complied. Sad isn't it.

I did music with the Florence Freedom for parts of two summers and have done it for numerous sports here at NKU for a few years now. The only thing that I have been told was at the Freedom when I asked if we needed some kind of permission to play anything we wanted and I was told to play anything "clean or edited" I wanted and to not worry about musicians complaining cause they probably aren't going to be in-house to hear their song played anyway. (Note: Sorry for the long-winded sentence.)

Absolutely the school/stadium must pay a licensing fee to BMI/ASCAP or they are not legal. Whether those organizations will go after the schools is the question. They seem to randomly pick bars and make examples of them to keep everyone in line.

 

I use to play in the band at my church and I know that the church pays an annual licensing fee for the performance of the songs. Oh, and whether it's a band or a jukebox or mp3 - it doesn't matter - it's all considered a public performance.

They are going after schools and districts. It also affects the classroom. You cannot show the entire movie, only clips, unless the district has purchased the rights to show the film. It's just plain sad. I am sure AC/DC doesn't have enough money that they need the royalties from Po Dunk High School!?!?

Ryle plays music when the other team has the ball and it is really annoying. They need to get some new speakers because it sounded awful.

Do you ever stay on topic?

I have no problem with artists getting paid for what they produce. It's all relative - who's to judge how much is "enough"? What if your boss/company decided that they had paid you enough and shorted your paycheck after you had worked the hours?

 

I think it's the nature of music that the listener tends to take ownership of it - that and the fact that we have the illusion of "free" music through radio. It becomes very personal. Of course, it's very personal to the artist as well, emotionally and economically, the latter taken care of by BMI/ASCAP.

7) Bars and Club music played by a DJ

 

They are required to get music licensing rights awayway. Most of the time you will see the ASCAP logo on a door or something as you walk into the club.

Not my area of the law Ru and I have zero interest in researching it. I'd be very happy if all stadiums stopped playing music. I go to watch the game; not be entertained by music. In my opinion, if a player needs music to get ready to play the game or a fan needs music to watch the game, they aren't into the game of football anyway.

Please stick to the topic everyone and if there are other related topics anyone would like to discuss please start another thread.