Originally posted by The Pro:
Dead wrong. This is the way that generations of musicians, composers, artists and their representatives worked out to be paid for the use of their intellectual property. It's the way it is because a lot of musicians worked hard politically and made it possible to be paid for musical work in a variety of ways. Too easy and too often music is taken for granted, even by other musos. I find it incredible that some musicians can dismiss this fact so easily... we are the beneficiaries of this process as songwriters and recording artists. I am a member of BMI as well as a live performer - the people who work for me to collect music royalties aren't "stupid" or "vultures". It's hypocritical to make such judgmental statements without trying to understand what it's really all about.
I was not trying to downgrade the works of composers and songwriters. I think that songwriters and composers should be compensated for their works. However, what I was commenting on was the system that allows composers and songwriters to be compensated (if at all) for the live performance of their works. I was just trying to point out the effect such a system has on the performing arts and the establishments that try to encourage performers. I just think that who what and how they charge is too extreme.
I am not at all saying that the system should be abolished. Quite the opposite since the system I am critiquing is the very one I get compensated from for my compositions and songwriting.
I just think that it should better favor live performances or more specifically the establishments that try to encourage live performances.
Sometimes, dialog on topics like this is good so that a greater understanding of the effect on all concerned can be understood and hopefully make the system better. That is all I am trying to do.
Previous Topic
Index
