Taylor Swift joins BMI to sue Idaho bar

Status
Not open for further replies.
KeninDC said:
I hope they shut that Idaho honkeytonk down.

Drunkards, sinners, and thieves - the lot of them.

Ken
Click to expand...



Yea EVERYONE at a bar is a drunk, sinner, and thief...............brilliant!
Quotes like that make Taylor Swift look like a Mensa member in comparison.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by KeninDC View Post
"I hope they shut that Idaho honkeytonk down.

Drunkards, sinners, and thieves - the lot of them.

Ken"
------------------------------------------------------------------
"Yea EVERYONE at a bar is a drunk, sinner, and thief...............brilliant!
Quotes like that make Taylor Swift look like a Mensa member in comparison."
====================================================
i think (and hope) he was being sarcastic or facetious.:scratch2::D
 
I never understood how this system works. Isn't playing this music in a public place giving the album exposure so people hear it and then buy it. I seriously doubt someone is going to say "no, I am not going to buy that Taylor Swift album because rather than hear it in the comfort of my own home, I can hear it in a loud, smoky bar drinking a $7 drink with a crappy sound system and bad acoustics."

As far as karaoke goes, does anybody remember the public domain karaoke machine from Mystery Science Theater 3000. "What party is complete without the immortal lines of Ba Ba Black Sheep. Impress your friends with your very own rendition of Ave Maria."
 
If you play music in any public establishment (bar, restaurant, theater, aerobics class, stadium, etc.) you better have an ASCAP, BMI, and even a SESAC license for same. You must pay to play in a public setting. Even radio and TV broadcasters must pay for these rights. That's life!
 
As usual, a little research shows that this story is noting but BS:

BMI director Jerry W. Bailey issued the following statement: “The story originated with TMZ, which took gross creative liberty with the facts. BMI filed a routine lawsuit against a bar for not licensing music over a span of several years. (We file dozens of such lawsuits every year) On the two nights we surveyed music in the bar, there were ten songs we selected to include in the copyright infringement suit (because they were among the titles our researcher happened to hear). One was a Taylor Swift song. Our 400,000 copyright owners sign all the necessary contracts for such lawsuits when they initially join BMI. Other than by the sheer chance that Taylor owned one of the songs heard on the night our researcher visited the establishment, she personally has no direct participation in this copyright infringement suit.”
 
There was a time when the troubadour played for his/her meals and was glad to get that.
Somebody's gotta pay the marketers. Without that, Ms. Swift and her ilk would be slinging burgers at " your place here"
 
Last edited:
We were all sitting around the cake singing "Happy Birthday" to my five year old son when suddenly the door was smashed in and these ASCAP thugs hurled us all against the wall and asked us if we had a license to sing the "Happy Birthday" song to our son. Obviously we didn't and we were all sued on the spot. Finally, we had to make up our own feeble birthday song that we now sing with much embarrassment at each birthday party. These are sad times...
 
chadnliz said:
Yea EVERYONE at a bar is a drunk, sinner, and thief...............brilliant!
Quotes like that make Taylor Swift look like a Mensa member in comparison.
Click to expand...

UM . . I think that was a remark made in jest, you know exaggeration for the sake of humor.

Regards,

D-Ray
 
Maybe too much but here it goes

Yes, this is but a symptom of the state we're in. It's all a scam. The blurring between legitimate law and union / corporate self righteousness and pissing upon we the people has stolen our governmental system and turned it into a mechanism to deceptively enslave us. We do their work, they pay us money, and then take it right back. Ever notice how just about everything in life involves the dollar. They have made us dependant on it. The dollar is our master’s intervention in every exchange we negotiate. We are sissy to the federal reserve and the world bank. The have their police and their army’s to keep it that way. It don’t trickle down, just up. The RIAA and what not are just one little tool they have to pick pocket more of our life’s labor and fleeting time in this world. Vultures. We are sleeping fools who blindly tolerate this rapping of humanity. We are identified as consumers, tax payers, labor, serial numbers and prisoners. Where is free will? Where is the individual? The people, the citizens? Where is self governance? (read: self discipline and awareness)
 
Aw FER CHRISSAKE! This was happening in my own town and I knew nothing about it until I saw it here at AK. Well, I don't have anything more to add to the discussion as you all have expressed every thought I may have come up with. At least I won't lose sleep worrying about being litigated upon when I play stuff for friends at my next Shop Party. Oh, and greetings to Marantz7t15 up north and Divotdog down south!
 
butch4695 said:
Was the music downloaded illegally or what ? How were they playing the music ? I don`t understand . Can`t you buy a CD and play it in your establishment ?
Click to expand...
You really don't own the cd. You pay for the right to play it for personal use only. At least that is what I've read before.
Major music labels are so f'n stupid. I've been done with them for years.
Thank God for small indie labels who actually care about the customer.
 
I saw Taylor Swift hosting Saturday Night Live a few weeks ago (seems she's on television a lot), and thought she was pretty good as guest host, except for the singing part. I'm not even going to criticize the songs, but what's with the voice ??? Weak.

I feel she should be paying the public to listen to her, not the other way around.
 
Last edited:
merrylander said:
Hmm, anyone notice ASCAP = ass hat
Click to expand...
ass_hat.jpg


Couldn't resist.
 
Bigerik said:
As usual, a little research shows that this story is noting but BS:

BMI director Jerry W. Bailey issued the following statement: “The story originated with TMZ, which took gross creative liberty with the facts. BMI filed a routine lawsuit against a bar for not licensing music over a span of several years. (We file dozens of such lawsuits every year) On the two nights we surveyed music in the bar, there were ten songs we selected to include in the copyright infringement suit (because they were among the titles our researcher happened to hear). One was a Taylor Swift song. Our 400,000 copyright owners sign all the necessary contracts for such lawsuits when they initially join BMI. Other than by the sheer chance that Taylor owned one of the songs heard on the night our researcher visited the establishment, she personally has no direct participation in this copyright infringement suit.”
Click to expand...

And the funny thing is, the manners of most of the posters in this thread are disgraceful. I didn't see one single apology for casting aspersions on her character. FWIW - artists don't get a choice when it comes to copyright issues etc - their contracts force them into it. Now, if you had the chance of a huge recording contract, would you honestly knock it back over something like that in the contract?

The bar deserves what it got. Copyright is part of civil law, they broke it, they deserve to get punished. I don't have any pity for law breakers.

I'm no fan of the RIAA, and I'm no fan of copyright extensions like the RIAA has gotten out of the corrupt US senators over the past 10 years, but when the government is owned by big business, I doubt that the general public will get any real rights. If you don't like copyright, don't bash the artist, bash the big companies that lobby for copyright changes, and the government for allowing it to happen. Extending copyright is not in the best interest of the general public. Current copyright periods make a mockery of the original reason d'etre for copyright imho.

Dave
 
Perhaps this has been previously beaten to death, but it seems to me there is a pretty clear distinction between a commercial performance (playing the music in a situation where the music helps the business draw customers and make money) vs. playing the tunes for group of people in your garage or livingroom in a non-profit situation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom