The Steel Guitar Forum

This is a combination of thoughts from two previous threads...one about Napster and one about why there is very little live music anymore.

It is a well known fact that clubs and private functions hire DJ's more than live bands. The DJ's take our jobs away by playing our music!

Shouldn't they be forced to pay royalties or some sort of fee for doing so? Related to this idea was the opinion of many that grabbing free music from Napster was similarly "stealing" from musicians.

I attended a party last week where a DJ was paid $300 for bringing a couple of speakers and playing some CD's for 3 hours. A whole generation of people are growing up on recorded music for entertainment instead of live music.

<SMALL>Shouldn't they be forced to pay royalties or some sort of fee for doing so?</SMALL>

I'm pretty sure that they're supposed to do that. How that gets enforced in practice (and how well) is something I'm not familiar with.

------------------
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons

The Disc Jockey's association (volunteer) does apply some of their membership fees to royalties.
I dont' know about the United States, but here in Canada, every establishment that features recorded music must pay into a fund
(recording artists and musicians?) which is applied to royalties.
Another positive step was a tax on blank cassette tapes, to help reimburse people for copying music.
-John

Over this side of the world it is a lot worse. This may be a slight diversion on the point being made, but as well as DJ's getting the most work here we have a lot of bands who play along to backing tracks and their philosophy is not just to play everything note for note, but to also sound exactly like the hit record, as if you would be listening to the CD. Their ambition seems to more or less be a DJ with a guitar and drums (sometimes) and flashing lights. They get work though so I suppose if there is demand good luck, but it makes you wonder.

I think "media performance royalties" are pretty much a joke. Only do they pay (most times) for use on syndicated (nationwide) TV. Radio-play royalties always were a joke. Only a small percentage of stations are log-onitored (and then, not regularly).

Donny your pretty much right on.I think most of the royalty money goes to the top 40,whats left gets to a few others.Not actual record sales I'm just talking radio.
Pat Jenkins would probally give us the best answer on this one. Ray

------------------
Steeling is still legal in Arizona

I believe in the free market system. The DJ's aren't STEELING our work, we let them have it by complacancy. If more bands were entertaining and versatile, the DJ's wouldn't have a job.

Wow..good point, John. Most bands are just jukeboxes with legs.
People do want to be entertained also.

John, you made a very good point. Singers are all over the place, but good, "entertaining" frontmen have all but disappeared! A good band without a good frontman is just music. But, a good band with a good frontman is entertainment. There's a big difference!

I have been lucky enough to work with some of the best frontmen.

Legalistically, they should have to pay through the club owners, but realistically it rarely (never) happens. Some very interesting reading on this and other royalty subjects can be found at BMI, Sesac, and Ascap websites. Local or house bands are covered in these regulations, but generally get the short end of the stick. To my long lost brother Ray, momma says she misses you ...Pat

Pat,tell momma I said hey Ray

------------------
Steeling is still legal in Arizona