And by the same token, what would "major corporation X" have to say when I send a bill for the past several years of advertising for them?
They will say they didn't ask you to play their music, and in fact they don't want you to play their music unless you get a license and pay them. The music belongs to them, and you're stealing it. In order for you to send a bill, you need a willing buyer and willing seller. That didn't happen. You just took their music and put it on your radio station.
I'm not saying I agree with any of this, but that is the mindset of these folks. A lot of Part 15 broadcasters have received letters from BMI and ASCAP, and some stations have been forced to shut down. Go to the Part 15 message board. Search the web for "ellen lawsuit." Read what the major labels are doing to the Ellen DeGenerous TV show. They are suing her because she played music on her TV show, and didn't get it licensed from the labels.
Seriously: Check with a lawyer. You're breaking the law.
I collected the music by buying it,
over the years. What about used records? I still paid for them. This is no downloaded collection.
I seriously doubt the Brunswick, Balke, and Collender company is going spring forth from the grave, demanding royalties from a 1925 record.
But thats not what I was specifically referring to. I'm talking about actual commercials, spots, advertisiments for businesses.
Some are long defunct, some are still in business selling the same products.
The get real, valuable exposure for their current products today, in the here and now.
It would seem they are due a bill for ad time. If properly paid for, it would easily pay royalty obligations so I could send a check to the music companies,
but then, they STILL won't be paying any money to the estate of Hasil Adkins, TV Slim, Louie Prima, any of the little punk bands, independent bands that never went on big labels, or ME for MY original recordings. They'd send it all to big artists who have lawyers.
As long as this inequity remains, they are derelict and immoral.
What about VOXX records, whose label clearly states, " Any unauthorized playing, copying, hiring, lending, hiring or airplay of this record would be appreciated."
As long as the labels and artists are not concerned with making proper ayments to ALL the artists whose works air on my station, they are bereft of any
moral ground to even ASK for payments. Is the concern that someone is running tape recorder and won't be motivated to go out and purchase the recording?
That was the concern in 1974, when labels began to demand that stations cease playing complete album sides.
So today they'd be worried that someone would be taping an AM radio station, saving music to a private collection, and cutting into their business?
What about music simply NOT available for purchase? It's ridiculous to suggest that if a recording is so commercially unviable as to be ignored and unavailable,
that it cannot be played because there's no mechanism to pay somebody for the airing of the recording.
I have number of live recordings by long-gone bands, people I know here in Chicago. They're HAPPY to know their works are getting exposure,
and are more concerned that people get to enjoy their work, whether or not they get paid. They never got rich, or even made enough money when the bands were in existence to ever get past the cassette distribution method. ASCAP and BMI aren't looking out for them.
If radio/music royalty "laws" were applied to normal human sexual morals, only prostitution would be legal, and even sexual relations within marriage would be illegal because no one is getting PAID
for it. This is beyond immoral.
By remaining steadfastly non-commercial I will remain true to the art of music radio.
Naturally I hope someone likes the music enough to go buy recordings that are available, that's why the whole issue of royalties is upside down.
Stations should be paid for promoting
artists, creating demand that would otherwise not exist.