Springsteen Pissed At ASCAP For Implying He Instigated Lawsuit Against Pub; Demands His Name Removed
from the nice-one,-ASCAP dept
The antics of ASCAP get sadder and sadder with each month. In just the last year alone, the group has claimed that embedding videos from YouTube requires a performance license despite the fact that YouTube already pays them. It's also claimed that ringtones are a public performance as are the 30 second preview clips you hear on iTunes (yes, seriously, they want to be paid for those too). And, of course, every time we post about ASCAP we get people saying that we shouldn't pick on them because they represent the actual songwriters, unlike the RIAA. But the truth is that ASCAP rarely has the best interests of songwriters in mind, especially smaller ones who often get hurt by the way ASCAP determines payouts.And now it seems that even some of the big acts are getting quite pissed off at ASCAP. One of the key things that ASCAP has done for years, of course, is threaten venues for not paying a license to have music playing in the background. The end result actually harms many artists because venues stop playing music completely and shut down things like open mic nights, which are so critical for many up-and-coming musicians.
Every so often ASCAP goes to the point of suing, and in its latest lawsuit against Connolly's Pub in midtown Manhattan (actually a pretty good place), it named Bruce Springsteen as a plaintiff in the lawsuit, suggesting Springsteen was ripped off. That resulted in headlines, like the one from The Daily News pointing out that Springsteen himself was suing the pub. Of course, it was actually ASCAP, but the whole mess has The Boss so pissed off that he put out a statement slamming ASCAP and saying he wants nothing to do with the lawsuit and ASCAP never should have filed it in the first place:
ASCAP was solely responsible for naming Bruce Springsteen as a plaintiff in the lawsuit. Bruce Springsteen had no knowledge of this lawsuit, was not asked if he would participate as a named plaintiff, and would not have agreed to do so if he had been asked. Upon learning of this lawsuit this morning, Bruce Springsteen's representatives demanded the immediate removal of his name from the lawsuit.Yup, that ASCAP. All about helping the artists and creators, right? Except when they smear their name in lawsuits they want nothing to be a part of...
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: bruce springsteen, copyright, performance rights
Companies: ascap
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
A new term is born
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I think the real story is that the newspaper got it wrong.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That's silly. If he's the rights holder, then it's upon him to file the suit, which he didn't, ASCAP did. If he isn't the rights holder because ASCAP's constituency retains the rights, then he doesn't belong being named in the suit.
Either way, there's no reason for him to be listed if he isn't actively involved...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
It is complicated, but I think that they may be required to name the songwriter as a co-plantiff, or as a listed interested party. It's why I would want to see the original lawsuit, as the way the plantiffs are listed would be important.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2010/02/04/2010-02-04_the_boss_strikes_sour_note_with_m idtown_bar_and_sues_for_copyright_infringement_.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
perhaps i can get ASCAP out of the letters but no i dont see them there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://www.discogs.com/Bruce-Springsteen-And-The-E-Street-Band-Magic-Tour-Highlights/releas e/1414852
"Tracks 4 and 8 published by Bruce Springsteen (ASCAP)."
or maybe:
http://songwritershalloffame.org/songs/detailed/C179
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It is more or less a union for musicians.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Those are specific, live performances. Those arent the RECORDINGS that get played on radio or whatever that ASCAP typically collects a fee for. You really should understand the structure of the business before you try to blindly defend every single thing they do without question.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
http://www.slate.com/id/2244164/pagenum/all
Interesting that down near the bottom of the article it references a slew of similar past lawsuits.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Slate
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"I think there is more to this story"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The original document, the complaint, would provide valuable information in this regard.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This would undo the damage caused by the ascap and make them look like asses if they ever tried it again. It would also boost Springsteen's name.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
All this over 2700.00, and they really don't know who the band was? How do they even know if it was Springsteen's version of the song or someone elses?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Blatant attempt to justify Big Media behavior
Bwahahahaha! Do you even know what ASCAP DOES? They are a COLLECTION SOCIETY for PERFORMANCE FEES. They arent a "publisher" any more than YOU are. The artist certainly doesnt "sign their work" to them, that is the LABEL.
Jesus, how do you argue these points with a straight face when you dont even know the players? Oh thats right, you dont, you just automatically take the stance opposite that of ANY criticism of Big Media, regardless if its right, true, or even makes sense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Blatant attempt to justify Big Media behavior
My own business was extorted by them. They wanted almost $1000 per year because we played the radio. Don't forget that the radio station is paying them, too. We chose to go with a business satellite radio that includes the fee for substantially less...Wonder who has a hand in what back pocket? Oh yeah, and pay one agency and the other music licensing agencies will come running with their hands out, too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Blatant attempt to justify Big Media behavior
What is ASCAP?
ASCAP is a membership association of more than 370,000 U.S. composers, songwriters, lyricists, and music publishers of every kind of music. Through agreements with affiliated international societies, ASCAP also represents hundreds of thousands of music creators worldwide. ASCAP is the only U.S. performing rights organization created and controlled by composers, songwriters and music publishers, with a Board of Directors elected by and from the membership.
ASCAP protects the rights of its members by licensing and distributing royalties for the non-dramatic public performances of their copyrighted works. ASCAP's licensees encompass all who want to perform copyrighted music publicly. ASCAP makes giving and obtaining permission to perform music simple for both creators and users of music.
A performance rights collection agency, who works for the writers, performers, and publishers to collect various usage rights fees.
Of course, you could have just done like me and gone to their website to get that definition.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Blatant attempt to justify Big Media behavior
Of course, you could have just done like me and gone to their website to get that definition."
I did. Thats how I verified that YOU WERE WRONG, about all of it.
They do NOT have the right to sue on behalf of artists... THEY DONT REPRESENT THEM. They collect PERFORMANCE FEES. They are not their "representative" in legal matters. This is an agreement between those who DO represent the Artists, and ASCAP. They overstepped their bounds in their greed. You were wrong. Again. Suck it up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Blatant attempt to justify Big Media behavior
How ever will you forgive me? Do you need me to kick your dog for you or something?
Remember: "Tracks 4 and 8 published by Bruce Springsteen (ASCAP)."
Have a nice day!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Blatant attempt to justify Big Media behavior
And, no, they can't read what's on the screen....don't be silly. I'm reading the comments section aloud to them.
What? Yes, of course my dogs understand English. Don't yours?
They also smoke....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Blatant attempt to justify Big Media behavior
try spraying water on them, it usually puts them out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Blatant attempt to justify Big Media behavior
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
poor bruce
if they treated me that way i might be inclined to get nastey about stuff but here we have a proper musician stating NOT ME MAN
BRUCE gets it , hes one of my dads favorites and unfortunately my dad doesn't know that ever time he buys one of bruces in Canada BRUCE IS GETTING RIPPED OFF.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
and i gatehr ASCAP and CRIA also steal money form artists in canada
QUICK go talk to your friends get there side
/me starts passing th eHOME made NON 17$ movie theatre popcorn
YUP tell us the truth anti mike we believe you ...honest
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"readers write" form p2pnet
some self professed writer that no one cares about....
makes ya wonder why p2pnet is closing up , it became like the anti mike show er readers write show.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
and yea sprinstein really could do something here
MY father being out of the country will be upset to hear that one as hes a firm believer in getting the artists he likes some doh.
PERHAPS if Bruce is smart he could setup a site in Canada and sell his entire collection via a website. I'LL BUY ONE COPY no matter your cost for my dad. SAD when millions of copies in Canada are effectively counterfeit. WONDER would ACTA prevent this behavior? more questions no answers on that NOT SECRET DEMOCRATIC treaty we are going to get rammed at us.
In fact if bruce were smarter he'd get a multitude of artists together and offer that pub and any pub a deal.
put some cdrs in the club, and show tour dates of the real band that another band covers...
BRUCE has always made more touring hes the perfect example of well i aint making nothing form cdrs ill tour.
hes old enough to almost be most of yours grandfather AND STILL tours and puts on a damn decent show.
always impressed .....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
well matt
over the long run.
they'd prolly do each tune real cheap and you could hten say have that satellite subscription still for 6 months of the year for variety.
ya know i'll be you culd also find a lot a people like i dunno bands like http://www.myspace.com/costanzas
who might do some stuff real cheap. and i mean they actually give the music away and use it as promo for touring.
also remember that most abnds are capable of making other genres a music and might also help you get in touch with others of like mind. IF YOUR using free and open music then ASCAP ( ASSHAT ) can't charge you. and its easy to get a 80$ computer to mix up tunes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: well matt
In other words, is it even possible to opt out, or is all performance subject to these clowns?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: well matt
I was just reading through their Articles of Association and it looks like it clearly defines a process for opting IN. It's difficult to surmise whether or not that is in order to collect royalties, or for membership at all. The headers and title of the document suggest that it's for membership at all....
http://www.ascap.com/reference/articles.pdf
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TAM: "A performance rights collection agency, who works for the writers, performers, and publishers to collect various usage rights fees."
So you agree, that's good.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]