Another reason not to cover Hendrix or Stevie Wonder

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

Pretty chilling - while I know there are several people here who don't care for bands doing covers anyway, this still seems pretty outrageous.

That said, if I ever find myself in a band covering, say, Fishing with the Skipper, or Teaspoon, I promise to buy the authors of said songs a beer .

Restaurant owner says songs may cost him his business

A performance of the Jimi Hendrix classic, "The Wind Cries Mary," may cost Michael Dorr his restaurant.

Dorr, the 37-year-old owner of Imbibe on Southeast Hawthorne Boulevard, has been slapped with a federal lawsuit by companies that own the rights to a trio of popular classics that were performed at Dorr's restaurant in 2005.

The songs at the center of the suit?

Other than the Hendrix song, the music companies say Stevie Wonder's "That Girl," and a 1971 tune, "Slippin' into Darkness."

Dorr says a rep from the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers paid an unannounced visit to his restaurant one night and heard covers of the songs performed by local band "Black Notes."

Because his place features local musicians and covers are rare, he didn't think he had to pay the musicians and publishers group an estimated $2,000 to cover performances of copyrighted tunes.

But the owners of the songs, including Wonder and Hendrix's estate, say he does.

Now they're suing Dorr for copyright infringement - and they're seeking payment of between $750 and $30,000 for each song, along with attorney fees.

"It's basically going to bankrupt me and put me out of business," Dorr said this morning. "I can't afford the lawyer and the fees. It's going to close me down."

The married father of two, who opened Imbibe a couple of years ago, said bands typically start playing after 10. But after Friday, the restaurant will do without live music because of the lawsuit.

"It's a total bummer," he said. "It's scary for me and my family. The restaurant business is hard and on top of other things, business is slow. This is the icing on the cake."

[edger]

This is absolutely fucking ridiculous! (In my subtle opinion anyways)....

[jayr]

Ahhhhh, imagine a world where cover songs are not allowed and bands have no choice but to write their own tunes. I would love that. No more "Mustang Sally" at the bar. Alot of working musicians who think the are gods gift to music would suddenly have to actually write their own songs!!

(I do however find the lawsuit absolutely ridiculous)

[zero]

Whatever. Do you really think that some Collingwood wannabe 'lose yer shoes' singer/songwriter hack is going to write something that rivals Stevie Wonder or Jimi Hendrix. It ain't happening. I have always been sort of hypocritical in these views. That on the one hand I think artists should create original music but that they should also play the covers I want to hear. Covers provide a good benchmark for assessing the chops of an artist or group, the artistic skill with which they treat the cover, and the emotional payoff associated with the investment a listener has made in the original.

The lawsuit? So fucking offensive and trite and ridiculous these 'song owners' (what the fuck is that all about, the guy who scammed the rights out of the song, the family member who by virtue of genealogy decides a great artists legacy - see the Hendrix family or Jeff Buckley's mom) should be skewered in the public eye. Of course they won't and will run this little guy out of business. I have had SOCAN fuckwads track me down the day of a show, where I was already losing buckets of money (Garth Hudson is the one I'm thinking of), for their fee. Like Robbie fucking Robertson needs another payday. Garth needed, well he got, the payday.

[allison]

Jesus zero-what was with opening your diatribe-which has valid points-with a personal attack? Are you trying to say if a musician can't write a certain calibre of song they should just play ones that are preapproved? Everybody starts there art form somewhere-its about growth not product.I expected better of you.So if you cant write a song zero approves of,I guess all you songwriter "hacks" should stay in your homes, where youll never be able to get feedback from an audience or add the dynamism of an audience to your music, and just sort of whither away.I personally would rather hear a band go for it and write something,anything original then play covers. That being said also think a great cover is an important part of a musicians repertoire-like zero said it's a barometer of technical skill-but probably only to nonmusicians.

Boo zero.

[p.p.]

I have had SOCAN fuckwads track me down the day of a show, where I was already losing buckets of money (Garth Hudson is the one I'm thinking of), for their fee. Like Robbie fuÇking Robertson needs another payday. Garth needed, well he got, the payday.

As far as I know and have experienced, the SOCAN fuckwads pay the artist who perform their own songs and if the artist is playing a cover, the royalties go to the songwriter of that cover. This actually allows bands like Jimmy Swift, Grand Theft Bus, Slammin Jack, BNB, etc..... to get paid a bit at the end of a tour for playing their own songs. And for this reason as well, it should be fine for bands to play covers. Some of the SOCAN money comes from bar owners and promoters paying their SOCAN fees. This is not a bad thing.

[shitidiot]

SOCAN and its American counterpart are there to help small or unknown bands/songwriters collect publication money. this is the law. if you use some ones music you should have to pay for it. not only do bars, band and promoter but doctor offices, malls, elevators... if you play music as a service and your making money you have to pay the song writer and publisher there set fee.

i think its around $16 a play for the radio.

can't remember other # right now.

if it wasn't for organizations like socan the small Canadian band would constantly get screw over by the cheap & croocked promoters, bar owner, radio stations.... I know its seems harsh for jimi or Stevie to do this but the laws apply to everyone and if you let one person get away with it then everyone will try to.

Edited October 16, 2006 by Guest

[tcurtis]

I'm not clear as to how this works in Canada. According to the SOCAN FAQ (http://www.socan.ca/jsp/en/about/faq/licensors.jsp:

Q: Shouldn't the bands and performers I hire pay the SOCAN fee?

A: No. As the owner or operator of a venue using any music, live or recorded, you are responsible for obtaining the appropriate SOCAN music licences, and paying the corresponding fees. As in any other business, the music creators and publishers deserve to get paid for their work.

So from this I gather that as a performer, I don't need to worry about paying money to SOCAN if I perform covers, because it's the responsibility of the establishment's owner to pay the SOCAN fee. Am I correct in this? What happens if a high school garage band performs at a community/school/other coffee house? If the venues they perform at haven't payed the fee, are liable?

[edger]

Hmmm... I guess I can't argue much with what either p.p or shitidiot has said. And truthfully I don't know a thing about SOCAN, but I can't imagine how boring things would get if grass-roots level bands had to pay a fee, or their pay for the night was reduced in order to cover the bar owner's fee (however nominal) every time the band played a cover. Something about that just dampers my spirit.

I am all for musicians being adequately compensated for sharing their art with the rest of us. But there is certainly a big difference between some band forking up a fee to cover a song at a large venue that makes them lots of money, and some poor bar band that has to divvy up a few hundred bucks (if they're lucky) amongst 3-6+ people...

[zero]

Yeah I really apologize that was uncalled for. I get so few opportunities to unbridle my rage these days it was just a fool's errand. Seriously sorry. There was a point in there but muddied by frustration elsewhere.

I know what Idiot's saying is sound what blows my mind is that they have detectives that like read listings, track down promoters etc. My experience was negative in that I was losing money hand over fist and had to field a call from some SOCAN detective wanting their cut of nothing. There is something to be said for promoters who aren't in it for the money who are already dealing with an overly litigious environment being priced out of business by whatever it might be visas, venues, insurance, socan fees, riders etc. Promoting is a bit of a fool's game unless it's all about the money.

[Esau.]

Pretty chilling - while I know there are several people here who don't care for bands doing covers anyway, this still seems pretty outrageous.

That said, if I ever find myself in a band covering, say, Fishing with the Skipper, or Teaspoon, I promise to buy the authors of said songs a beer .

Restaurant owner says songs may cost him his business

A performance of the Jimi Hendrix classic, "The Wind Cries Mary," may cost Michael Dorr his restaurant.

Dorr, the 37-year-old owner of Imbibe on Southeast Hawthorne Boulevard, has been slapped with a federal lawsuit by companies that own the rights to a trio of popular classics that were performed at Dorr's restaurant in 2005.

The songs at the center of the suit?

Other than the Hendrix song, the music companies say Stevie Wonder's "That Girl," and a 1971 tune, "Slippin' into Darkness."

Dorr says a rep from the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers paid an unannounced visit to his restaurant one night and heard covers of the songs performed by local band "Black Notes."

Because his place features local musicians and covers are rare, he didn't think he had to pay the musicians and publishers group an estimated $2,000 to cover performances of copyrighted tunes.

But the owners of the songs, including Wonder and Hendrix's estate, say he does.

Now they're suing Dorr for copyright infringement - and they're seeking payment of between $750 and $30,000 for each song, along with attorney fees.

"It's basically going to bankrupt me and put me out of business," Dorr said this morning. "I can't afford the lawyer and the fees. It's going to close me down."

The married father of two, who opened Imbibe a couple of years ago, said bands typically start playing after 10. But after Friday, the restaurant will do without live music because of the lawsuit.

"It's a total bummer," he said. "It's scary for me and my family. The restaurant business is hard and on top of other things, business is slow. This is the icing on the cake."

This is one (not all) of the reasons Doug Feaver will not allow his recordings to be shared anymore, that and I think he needs to copy-write alot of his own songs (I'm not 100% on that point though). and he's got a shitload. He still inquires about what I do/did with his recordings just about everytime I speak to him.

[shitidiot]

I know what Idiot's saying is sound what blows my mind is that they have detectives that like read listings, track down promoters etc. My experience was negative in that I was losing money hand over fist and had to field a call from some SOCAN detective wanting their cut of nothing. There is something to be said for promoters who aren't in it for the money who are already dealing with an overly litigious environment being priced out of business by whatever it might be visas, venues, insurance, socan fees, riders etc. Promoting is a bit of a fool's game unless it's all about the money.

SOCAN does not work independently. when you book a show the agent, manager, tour manager send the info to socan including song list, location promoter.... the whole music industry work together to make it work. as a promoter you should include the socan fee as one of your expensive. (roughly around $70 for 60min set) as for the promotion game, all that can be said is don't enter into contacts that you aren't 100% guarantee you can make your money back. the promoter is always the one that gets it up the ass. that's the way it works. if people don't show then it wasn't promoted properly that's the way its is.

as for band that play covers, i can't remember exactly but i think it's the responsibility of the promoter to pay socan. so if your band is the one putting on the concert your responsabil. if the bar/coffee shop/school is paying you to play then the are responsible.

quick note to bands. socan will pay you money for you playing live shows. look into it! all you have to do is fill out some paper work and they send you the check. i know some money is better then no money.

[StoneMtn]

Sounds familiar...

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

Maybe the trick then is to butcher the tunes so badly nobody would ever confuse them with the originals.

[StoneMtn]

... something I hear you've mastered DEM

[bradm]

This is one (not all) of the reasons Doug Feaver will not allow his recordings to be shared anymore, that and I think he needs to copy-write alot of his own songs (I'm not 100% on that point though).

As far as I know, you hold the copyright on something you've created the moment you create it; no extra step (e.g., "registration") is required. Doug doesn't need to "copyright" his songs, as he already holds the right(s) to make copies of them.

Aloha,

Brad

[StoneMtn]

true; 100%.

[Esau.]

As far as I know, you hold the copyright on something you've created the moment you create it; no extra step (e.g., "registration") is required. Doug doesn't need to "copyright" his songs, as he already holds the right(s) to make copies of them.

Aloha,

Brad

Thanks Brad, like I mentioned, I wasn't a 100% on that point, I know one of Doug's concerns was/is that his recordings hit the web & next thing he knows someone else is using one of his songs without permission or as their own. He's already went through this issue of someone in northern Ontario (I forget the city right now) claiming one of his songs as their own. Which, according to him is a problem seeing as in all these years (20+ years playing) he's never recorded an album.

[zero]

I saw a group called Fame Fame the other night, actually best thought of as a film maker's collective. They blatantly (very blatantly) use clips from classic films like Temple of Doom, Star Wars, Deerhunter as well as countless pieces of clear intellectual property. When asked afterward if they identified with Negativland (or Plunderphonics for another equivalent) they said not at all. They are not making some statement about intellectual property, the exact line from Jubal Brown one of the film maker's is 'that's done'. That is to say that these filmic images are so thoroughly in the public realm that they have no qualms whatsoever about 'stealing' from them readily. The 'samples' are still readily identifiable, as opposed to say DJ Shadow's Endtroducing where they are so mashed up it's unrecognizable and hence undeclarable, they really just don't give a shit. Their art is recontextualizing these clips and making the experience so immersive (seriously fucking intense and even horrific at points) such that there is ideally no distinction between the spectator and the spectation. Impossible in video but noble. Just another take on intellectual property today.

[StoneMtn]

Thanks Brad, like I mentioned, I wasn't a 100% on that point, I know one of Doug's concerns was/is that his recordings hit the web & next thing he knows someone else is using one of his songs without permission or as their own. He's already went through this issue of someone in northern Ontario (I forget the city right now) claiming one of his songs as their own. Which, according to him is a problem seeing as in all these years (20+ years playing) he's never recorded an album.

That, of course, is the practical problem to policing your copyright. If you have no resources and someone infringes your copyright, it's hard to take them to court. If you actually register your copyright with the Copyright Office, though, then there is a presumption that you hold the copyright, unless someone proves otherwise.

Now, again, the corollary to that (and this would be a real nightmare for Doug Feaver) is that someone else could actually register copyright in your (copyrighted) work. At that point, there would be a legal presumption that they held copyright in the work, unless you can show that you created the work and didn't transfer ownership of the copyright to them.

So, the point is that Doug Feaver has practically as much concern over his work being stolen, despite the fact that he holds copyright, as he would if he did not; if he does not register his copyright with CIPO.

Oh, and my disclaimer that amuses many of you so much...

The above is not legal advice. If you need legal advice, contact a duly qualified lawyer in your jurisdiction.

[bokonon]

All cover bands should have at least one Stevie tune in the repertoire. Suing be damned!

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

The above is not legal advice. If you need legal advice, contact a duly qualified lawyer in your jurisdiction.

Hey, wait a minute, you are now in our jurisdiction!

One angle on copyright I quite like is to send yourself a recording of your own material via registered mail, and leave it unopened until you should ever have to deal with a challenge; it won't help with older material, but new stuff ought to be sewn up tight.

What do you think, intrajurisdictional caveman?

[StoneMtn]

I knew that would be the next question, actually ... aka The Poorperson's Copyright.

If you do that, what you've done is created really good evidence that you held the earliest copy of a work. That would be a great piece of evidence to bring to a hearing if someone else claimed copyright over your work.

And, re the intrajurisdictional thing ... I am actually practicing here, now, but I can't give legal advice on a general set of comments. I need very specific facts, and I would never do anything like that here. Instead, however, I am willing to convey trite legal principles, but with the understanding that if a person has an actual legal problem, they cannot rely on a quick online public post as advice on their very specific problem. (Dumbass.)

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

Aw, I like being a dumbass - that way I get to blame my problems on anybody but myself .

So, SM, whaddya think - my buddies and I have this plan to knock over vending machines, since the money can never be traced....

[StoneMtn]

(Dumbass.)