This article appears in today's local paper. Comments anyone?
PAPER The Ottawa Citizen
DATE Thursday, April 10, 2003
SECTION Business
HEADLINE Celtic culture's new cost: An Irish musician who sings
traditional Celtic tunes for free and the owner of a pub where he
sings them are outraged by a demand for royalties. Vito Pilieci
reports.
BYLINE Vito Pilieci
SOURCE The Ottawa Citizen
SUB HEAD Be Careful Where You Whistle
The Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada is demanding a group of Ottawa Celtic performers pay hundreds of dollars in royalties to hold their weekly jam sessions. "This is ridiculous," said Keven Dooley, arguing that he is simply trying to "express his culture. "I am not a professional musician." The society defends its position, saying it is responsible for collecting royalties on behalf of performing artists. Every Thursday for almost a year, Mr. Dooley and his son, Ciaran, have been strolling into Daniel O'Connell's Irish Pub on Wellington Street with their flutes, bodhrans and harps to meet friends and play the night away. The two join local musicians, some older than 80, who gather at the pub to play "true Irish" music. Many of the songs have been performed for centuries. On some nights there are as many as 12 people on stage, and none of the performers is paid. Any gratuities are donated to the Rideau Canal Celtic Cross Committee, an organization that wants to erect a memorial to Irishmen who died during the construction of the Rideau Canal.
But the letter from SOCAN, demanding that Mr. Dooley pay for performing live music at the bar, could put an abrupt end to their
weekly gathering. "They sent the letter to me at the establishment," Mr. Dooley said. "I picked it up off the owner's desk. It assumes I'm the owner of the pub, which I'm not, and it says I have to pay fees going back two years. The pub hasn't been there for two years; it has only been there for one." The letter demands Mr. Dooley pay three per cent of all money paid to all performers at the pub, with a minimum fee of $80. "It irritates me more than anything," said Enrico Balestra, co-owner of the pub. "It's a small percentage, but it's a big deal. "It's our first year in business and we are lucky enough to be over zero."
Mr. Balestra said he will not cancel the weekly sessions. Instead, he questioned why SOCAN would try to silence something that helps young musicians to get their start. "If they are going to take that away from us, then it's a pretty weak culture we live in," he said. "You're destroying everything." Mr. Dooley's group regularly welcomes aspiring Celtic musicians and offers them performance tips.
SOCAN spokeswoman Diane Samec said the Toronto agency regularly monitors functions, newspapers and other information sources to identify establishments that should be licensed by SOCAN. Ms. Samec said that if a jam session consists of copyrighted works, the venue would require a licence. "It is the world's repertoire of music that we license," she said. "If there is music being performed in a public venue, it is possible that they are required to have a licence for a particular tariff." SOCAN said Mr. Dooley has not contacted it to plead his case. The agency said it is possible it has made a mistake by sending the letter to Mr. Dooley, since it should have gone to the pub's owner. If no one contacts the agency, Ms. Samec said a representative from SOCAN will be sent to the pub to sort out licensing details.
Re: SOCAN wants licence fees from Ottawa ITM Session
I may have a simplistic attitude to such matters but for the life of me I can't see how copyright can be involved in live extempore playings of traditional music which mostly started off not being written down, the composers are mostly unknown (and those who are weren't generally bothered with the concept of copyright - one or two exceptions of course), the names of the tunes are often indeterminate, and no two playings are ever identical. What concerns me is that such ideas may make their way seriously across the Atlantic in due course. They'll probably be welcomed joyously by the politicians behind the PEL Bill.
Trevor
Re: SOCAN wants licence fees from Ottawa ITM Session
The fees are the obligation of the pub owner. Most pub owners offer weekly sessions because they enjoy the music and the craic. However they also expect that the sessions will draw customers and increase business.
Any venue that offers live music (even canned music, for that matter) is required to pay an annual liscensing fee to cover royalties. The fact that most of the music is public domain doesn't matter. The first time someone performs a copyrighted tune/song the royalties, and fee, are due.
Don't get me wrong. I'm opposed to the policy. But it is an accepted policy in the entertainment/hospitality business and has been for many decades. It is wasted emotional effort to get worked up about it. Just pay the $80 for the year and get on with the music.
I used to do a session where the owners had the musicians pass the hat once a year to pay the fee. I found that to be appaulling. It's not as if the musicians aren't offering a valuable service to the owners. The owners pay the fee!! It's just one of the costs of doing business.
Re: SOCAN wants licence fees from Ottawa ITM Session
Well, you have to point out to the SOCAN contact person that the music played at your session is mostly (>90%) traditional, i.e. not part of "SOCAN's repertoire". At least in Sweden this gives a lower fee, usually about 10% of the full fee. Give SOCAN a call. These letters from copyright organisations are usually quite threatful, but the people there are usually nice to talk to on the phone, and usually understand what you mean.
This is what it says in SOCAN's licensing tariffs (note carefully that is says "works in SOCAN’s repertoire"):
"For a licence to perform, by means of performers in person, at
any time and as often as desired in 1998, any or all of the works
in SOCAN’s repertoire, in cabarets, cafes, clubs, cocktail bars,
dining rooms, lounges, restaurants, roadhouses, taverns and
similar establishments, the fee payable by the establishment shall be 3 per cent of the compensation for entertainment paid in the year covered by the licence, with a minimum licence fee of
$80 per year."
Re: SOCAN wants licence fees from Ottawa ITM Session
I'm with Norbeck. The fee isn't something you as a performer should have to worry about. SOCAN is a pretty handy organization for writers and performers in that a composer (in theory) gets paid a small fee every time their song gets played. The money comes from clubs, radio stations, etc. paying licence fees. 80 bucks isn't really that big a deal in terms of the operating cost of a pub, but it's the pub owners problem, not yours. SOCAN, if they have any justification at all for trying to collect, would say that since the music is bringing in paying customers and the bar is making money, they should pay a fraction of the profits to the composers of the music.
That said, I can't see how traditional songs and tunes fit into this picture. Especially since the composers or performers registered with SOCAN get paid when the cover charge is six bucks or more. I'd say the pub owner (not you, because it really isn't your problem) should explain to SOCAN that since there is no cover, no musicians are making money, and the repertoire is public domain (most of it anyway) they should let your session be. If it doesn't work and the pub owner refuses to pay the fee, find another pub or play in someone's living room. If you really love that pub and don't want to leave, put out a tip jar discreetly somewhere with that article taped to it. It shouldn't take long to raise the cash from the pub's clientele.
I don't think it's worth being angry about. The benefits of SOCAN (for pros and composers) outweigh the costs.
Re: SOCAN wants licence fees from Ottawa ITM Session
I am intrigued by the last sentence of the article which makes mention of a SOCAN representitive going down to the pub to seek redress--wouldn't that be like riding in to the camp of the Fianna and tweaking the beard of one of Finn's men?
SOCAN wants licence fees from Ottawa ITM Session
SOCAN wants licence fees from Ottawa ITM Session
This article appears in today's local paper. Comments anyone?
PAPER The Ottawa Citizen
DATE Thursday, April 10, 2003
SECTION Business
HEADLINE Celtic culture's new cost: An Irish musician who sings
traditional Celtic tunes for free and the owner of a pub where he
sings them are outraged by a demand for royalties. Vito Pilieci
reports.
BYLINE Vito Pilieci
SOURCE The Ottawa Citizen
SUB HEAD Be Careful Where You Whistle
The Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada is demanding a group of Ottawa Celtic performers pay hundreds of dollars in royalties to hold their weekly jam sessions. "This is ridiculous," said Keven Dooley, arguing that he is simply trying to "express his culture. "I am not a professional musician." The society defends its position, saying it is responsible for collecting royalties on behalf of performing artists. Every Thursday for almost a year, Mr. Dooley and his son, Ciaran, have been strolling into Daniel O'Connell's Irish Pub on Wellington Street with their flutes, bodhrans and harps to meet friends and play the night away. The two join local musicians, some older than 80, who gather at the pub to play "true Irish" music. Many of the songs have been performed for centuries. On some nights there are as many as 12 people on stage, and none of the performers is paid. Any gratuities are donated to the Rideau Canal Celtic Cross Committee, an organization that wants to erect a memorial to Irishmen who died during the construction of the Rideau Canal.
But the letter from SOCAN, demanding that Mr. Dooley pay for performing live music at the bar, could put an abrupt end to their
weekly gathering. "They sent the letter to me at the establishment," Mr. Dooley said. "I picked it up off the owner's desk. It assumes I'm the owner of the pub, which I'm not, and it says I have to pay fees going back two years. The pub hasn't been there for two years; it has only been there for one." The letter demands Mr. Dooley pay three per cent of all money paid to all performers at the pub, with a minimum fee of $80. "It irritates me more than anything," said Enrico Balestra, co-owner of the pub. "It's a small percentage, but it's a big deal. "It's our first year in business and we are lucky enough to be over zero."
Mr. Balestra said he will not cancel the weekly sessions. Instead, he questioned why SOCAN would try to silence something that helps young musicians to get their start. "If they are going to take that away from us, then it's a pretty weak culture we live in," he said. "You're destroying everything." Mr. Dooley's group regularly welcomes aspiring Celtic musicians and offers them performance tips.
SOCAN spokeswoman Diane Samec said the Toronto agency regularly monitors functions, newspapers and other information sources to identify establishments that should be licensed by SOCAN. Ms. Samec said that if a jam session consists of copyrighted works, the venue would require a licence. "It is the world's repertoire of music that we license," she said. "If there is music being performed in a public venue, it is possible that they are required to have a licence for a particular tariff." SOCAN said Mr. Dooley has not contacted it to plead his case. The agency said it is possible it has made a mistake by sending the letter to Mr. Dooley, since it should have gone to the pub's owner. If no one contacts the agency, Ms. Samec said a representative from SOCAN will be sent to the pub to sort out licensing details.
# Posted on April 10th 2003 by ian clark
Re: SOCAN wants licence fees from Ottawa ITM Session
I may have a simplistic attitude to such matters but for the life of me I can't see how copyright can be involved in live extempore playings of traditional music which mostly started off not being written down, the composers are mostly unknown (and those who are weren't generally bothered with the concept of copyright - one or two exceptions of course), the names of the tunes are often indeterminate, and no two playings are ever identical. What concerns me is that such ideas may make their way seriously across the Atlantic in due course. They'll probably be welcomed joyously by the politicians behind the PEL Bill.
Trevor
# Posted on April 10th 2003 by Trevor Jennings
Re: SOCAN wants licence fees from Ottawa ITM Session
I don
# Posted on April 10th 2003 by crannog
Re: SOCAN wants licence fees from Ottawa ITM Session
Tell them you perform your own arrangements and would they please get on with collecting your royalties.
# Posted on April 10th 2003 by geoffwright
Re: SOCAN wants licence fees from Ottawa ITM Session
The fees are the obligation of the pub owner. Most pub owners offer weekly sessions because they enjoy the music and the craic. However they also expect that the sessions will draw customers and increase business.
Any venue that offers live music (even canned music, for that matter) is required to pay an annual liscensing fee to cover royalties. The fact that most of the music is public domain doesn't matter. The first time someone performs a copyrighted tune/song the royalties, and fee, are due.
Don't get me wrong. I'm opposed to the policy. But it is an accepted policy in the entertainment/hospitality business and has been for many decades. It is wasted emotional effort to get worked up about it. Just pay the $80 for the year and get on with the music.
I used to do a session where the owners had the musicians pass the hat once a year to pay the fee. I found that to be appaulling. It's not as if the musicians aren't offering a valuable service to the owners. The owners pay the fee!! It's just one of the costs of doing business.
# Posted on April 11th 2003 by Tusong200
Re: SOCAN wants licence fees from Ottawa ITM Session
Well, you have to point out to the SOCAN contact person that the music played at your session is mostly (>90%) traditional, i.e. not part of "SOCAN's repertoire". At least in Sweden this gives a lower fee, usually about 10% of the full fee. Give SOCAN a call. These letters from copyright organisations are usually quite threatful, but the people there are usually nice to talk to on the phone, and usually understand what you mean.
This is what it says in SOCAN's licensing tariffs (note carefully that is says "works in SOCAN’s repertoire"):
"For a licence to perform, by means of performers in person, at
any time and as often as desired in 1998, any or all of the works
in SOCAN’s repertoire, in cabarets, cafes, clubs, cocktail bars,
dining rooms, lounges, restaurants, roadhouses, taverns and
similar establishments, the fee payable by the establishment shall be 3 per cent of the compensation for entertainment paid in the year covered by the licence, with a minimum licence fee of
$80 per year."
# Posted on April 13th 2003 by hnorbeck
Re: SOCAN wants licence fees from Ottawa ITM Session
I'm with Norbeck. The fee isn't something you as a performer should have to worry about. SOCAN is a pretty handy organization for writers and performers in that a composer (in theory) gets paid a small fee every time their song gets played. The money comes from clubs, radio stations, etc. paying licence fees. 80 bucks isn't really that big a deal in terms of the operating cost of a pub, but it's the pub owners problem, not yours. SOCAN, if they have any justification at all for trying to collect, would say that since the music is bringing in paying customers and the bar is making money, they should pay a fraction of the profits to the composers of the music.
That said, I can't see how traditional songs and tunes fit into this picture. Especially since the composers or performers registered with SOCAN get paid when the cover charge is six bucks or more. I'd say the pub owner (not you, because it really isn't your problem) should explain to SOCAN that since there is no cover, no musicians are making money, and the repertoire is public domain (most of it anyway) they should let your session be. If it doesn't work and the pub owner refuses to pay the fee, find another pub or play in someone's living room. If you really love that pub and don't want to leave, put out a tip jar discreetly somewhere with that article taped to it. It shouldn't take long to raise the cash from the pub's clientele.
I don't think it's worth being angry about. The benefits of SOCAN (for pros and composers) outweigh the costs.
# Posted on April 13th 2003 by Kerri Brown
Re: SOCAN wants licence fees from Ottawa ITM Session
I am intrigued by the last sentence of the article which makes mention of a SOCAN representitive going down to the pub to seek redress--wouldn't that be like riding in to the camp of the Fianna and tweaking the beard of one of Finn's men?
# Posted on April 15th 2003 by Gerry and Sasha