ASCAP Fees for Winery

[Big Band Guitar]

I don't know about now but back in the 70's the investigators got to keep half of what they collected.

[jim1960]

Originally Posted by Osage

They do this so that they can find venues that aren't registered with them and squeeze them for money.

Originally Posted by Maryc-k

They hire collection agents. The “enforcers” are indeed indecent contractors working on “commission.”

Originally Posted by dnf777

It is a bully tactic, and its real.

Originally Posted by Osage

Yep. The PRO's are essentially the mob.

Originally Posted by Godfather

This whole thing sounds like the “MOB” squeezing “Protection” money from small local businesses back in the day.

Originally Posted by PassingThru

Seems to work like the protection racket where they come make you an offer you can't refuse.

Originally Posted by Guitars44me

This is such a protection racket.

Originally Posted by Steve DeRosa

Seated at a table directly next to the stage was one of the "organization" sharks, with a clipboard containing a yellow legal pad (where he recorded the title of every song performed) and a packet of what I presume were application materials...

Originally Posted by woodbox

I know of three establishments.. a BBQ joint, a casual restaurant/bar, and a wine bar that served light food items..
that all put a stop to music due to ASCAP and/or BMI intimidation tactics.
Each of these places wanted nothing to do with paying the fees, regardless of the amount, due the aggressive/adversarial nature of the representatives.

The hyperbole being employed to make this argument is so far over the top. Likening PROs to the mob is ridiculous. The PROs aren't breaking kneecaps, they're not firebombing venues, they're not sending out hit-men to rub anyone out. They're simply expecting venues to comply with the law. If the encounter gets ugly, that's most likely because the venue balked at paying and thought they could get away with simply ignoring their responsibility to obtain a legally required licensing contract for the music they're using to enhance the customer experience.

Let me say that again... the venue owner was ignoring their responsibility. There's no other reason for the interaction to get ugly.

Once the venue refuses to pay the licensing fee, the PROs have not only the right, they have a duty to their membership to gather evidence to take into court and force the venue to adhere to the law. The penalties assessed aren't "bully tactics," they're the consequences the law allows in cases where the venue owners refuse to do what is required to provide music to their customers. Those consequences exist to discourage venues from operating illegally. What so many of you are describing as a "racket" is not only how musicians get paid for the use of their intellectual property, it's the law.

It is the responsibility of venue owners to understand music licensing. I do understand that some may go into that business ignorant of the law but once the law has been explained to them, the venue owners have a responsibility (there's that word again) to comply with the law and not engage in some protracted resistance. To comply is simple... you write a check. For those that don't comply, there will be consequences for those actions. Yes, you may be visited by people who put the evidence in front of you and explain how costly the fines could be should the owner engage in future resistance and illegality and be taken into court. But the venue will only wind up in court if they continue to balk at paying ...and if they do wind up in court, the venue is most likely going to lose more money than they'd lose had they simply complied in the first place (the law allows the PROs to sue for $750 for every song played out of compliance). The PROs know what evidence is needed to build a winning case and the law on this stuff is pretty black and white. There's little hope for a venue to prevail.