A friend of mine who does a lot of Assisted Living/NH gigs got an 'agreement form' from one residence, stating the conditions which must be met, i.e. proper conduct, no foul language, respect the privacy of the residents, etc., etc., and he has no problem with that ... HOWEVER it also contained a clause stating that should there be any conflict with ASCAP, BMI, or other such music related agency, the musician will be liable for any fees that may be imposed!!!
Now, I full appreciate the fact that composers should get their due when others are performing their songs for a fee, BUT, should the performer be liable for it?
How could an establishment try to lay this on one performer who makes maybe $1200 a year from this place and then happens to get 'snagged' by ASCAP, BMI, or whomever ?!?

Have any of you run into this in the AL/NH circuit?

No way I'd sign that!

The burden legally as I understand it is on the facility, NOT the performer. I'm not sure its even a legally binding document as ASCAP/BMI doesn't sell a portable performance licence. They assess fees to a certain business at a certain address.

Performers pay when we record others works for profit.

Sounds like the AL is getting a little too cute for their own good.

And no, I wouldn't sign it either-regardless...

The venue is responsible for the use of copy written materials in their facilities. Rates are even set per number of seats, number of nights and total hours of music, etc.

The venue is trying to pull one.


R.

Ditto!

In Germany, too, the organizer of the event is responsible for the GEMA (copyright association) fee. The institute is obviously trying to shift their own responsibility and risk to the musician in contradiction to regulations. I hope most musician would refuse to sign an agreement like that.