Adele, Bon Jovi, Dave Grohl Deny Copyright Permission to Karaoke Companies…

At the 2013 Karaoke Cloud Music City Summit on Thursday, June 20, a list of songwriters who refuse to license their works for karaoke singers was released.

karaokecloud

Exact reasons are unclear as to why Adele, Bon Jovi, Justin Timberlake, and Dave Grohl are a few of many on this “no-fly list” to deny copyright laws to karaoke companies.

Joe Vangieri, CEO of Digitrax Entertainment, one of the largest karaoke companies, made a good point: “One might think that a songwriter would remember what brought them fame and fortune… But perhaps some of these individuals have forgotten what caused them to fall in love with music in the first place.”

 

The US is the only country in the world with a copyright law that prevents karaoke companies from producing songs without special permission from the songwriter, according to Karaoke Cloud.

13 Responses

  1. wallow-T

    Non-snark: that’s odd. Legally, what is the difference between a karaoke presentation, and an instrumental Muzak-like arrangement of a hit melody? (As a tyke, I used to delight in pointing out all the Beatles tunes on the Muzak to my rock-hating father.)

    Reply
    • Anonymous

      The difference is that Muzak is a compulsory license and karaoke requires a video synchronization license.

      I have to say, I’ve never been to a karaoke show in a bar that didn’t include at least most of these artists in their library. Lots of folk breaking the law out there.

      Reply
      • BigBangKaraoke

        Most Karaoke Jockeys who have these artist have songs that were produced pre Karaoke No-Fly List and since we have not been told to remove songs that were SYNC licensed and produced before the the NFL. Since these songs were paid for by us sometimes on discs (both Various Artist and Single Artist) that cost $40+ for manufactures like Sound Choice or Digital Download from Legal Sites like Karaoke-Version or Sunfly.com for $3 to $5 a song. Since we paid to use these songs until we are told explicitly that the licenses have been revoked and we have to pull the music then we are going to continue to use them. The day that happens I am going to be demanding my money back for everyone of these tracks that I LEGALLY bought from the Artists and Songwriters cause that Hundreds of dollars taken out of my pockets and catalog!!!!

        Reply
  2. GGG

    Reasons are definitely not unclear as to why Dave Grohl would be against this. Dude’s been on a crusade against things that insult his integrity for years.

    Not saying he’s right or wrong, just pointing it out.

    Reply
  3. excuses from capitalists (!)

    Fuck karaoke companies. We are real artists.

    If you want music in your venue, pay real musicians.

    Otherwise, fuck off and learn to play an instrument yourself if you are so smart and cozy.

    Reply
    • Marmuro

      That is really stupid. People OWN music and that’s how it’s been forever. Rights for public performance should be paid at any level and I support that all the way, but you can’t ask bars or joints to put live music as a business model.

      Reply
    • Anonymous

      This is the dumbest I’ve ever read. People sing karaoke because they love to sing or just to have fun and socialize. They don’t need to learn to play an instrument and they don’t do it for money otherwise they would do just what you’re saying, moron. Sorry karaoke singers aren’t “real artists”, but most aren’t trying to be either. Why in the hell should it matter to a “real artists” anyways? Let your hair down, Nancy, and remember the reason you became a “professional” in the first place.

      Reply
  4. hippydog

    Quote “US Copyright Law prevents American karaoke companies from producing songs without special permission from the songwriter – but karaoke companies anywhere else in the world don’t need that special permission”
    Completely untrue..

    They need them in canada too.. copywrite law is no different here in that aspect..

    Only difference might be is that we have copywrite collectives that actually have rates setup all ready for this, and most labels are a part of it.. IE: it might be easier to get a license/permission

    BUT,

    it aint always cheaper.. check out how many large karoake production companies are in Canada VS the USA? not a lot.. The mass produced cheap karaoke doesnt happen much as its not cost effective..

    if the USA doesnt have an equivelant to something like the AVLA, thats not the fault of the copywrite law.. it just means its probably not worth it to have a dedicated collective for it..

    man.. I hate it when companies out right lie about stuff like this 🙁

    Reply
    • Get a grip, hippydog

      It’s hard to take someone writing seriously on the subject when they can’t even spell “copyright”, but there’s nothing untrue in the statement you quoted.

      The fact there’s no copyright collective for karaoke rights in the USA *is the entire point*, which is why special permission must be sought from each songwriter. In the USA, it’s a “video sync” license, not a “karaoke” license, and has entirely different rules.

      Your comment about how many karaoke companies are in the US as opposed to Canada is nothing but a straw man. The fact the US companies have to research and seek licenses from every songwriter adds more to the cost of recording the music, so it will *always* be more expensive to produce karaoke in the USA – as long as the competitive imbalance exists.

      What evidence do you have that in the USA “its probably not worth it to have a dedicated collective for it”, because that’s flat out wrong as well. Before ABKCO v Stellar declared karaoke to require a video sync license in the US, the Harry Fox Agency acted as the collective for karaoke, and did quite well by it.

      Legitimate and legal karaoke producers in the USA totally respect the rights of the songwriters and publishers to restrict the use of their intellectual works at their own discretion – that’s what freedom is all about, anyway.

      The problem comes when Canadians and other foreign nationals are able to license these works (through whatever means) then sell those works back into the USA (usually via the internet). It’s an unfair competitive advantage, and its being perpetrated on American companies who only want the ability to compete on a level playing field.

      In the future, before you accuse someone of lying, perhaps it would be wise to check the actual facts.

      Reply
      • BigBangKaraoke

        Just to let you know as a Canadian Karaoke Jockey who uses Legally Sourced Music… Canada shares the same or mostly same Copyright laws as the US as well as The Digital Millennium Copyright Agreement!!!

        Oh and by the way THERE ARE NO Canadian karaoke producers, we had 2 in the early 2000’s but they only produced tracks by Canadian artists (under license) but unfortunately they went out of business a few years after starting production….

        Reply
  5. Farley

    And, by the way, congratulations to newbie Priscilla Kim for an interesting, comment provoking article.

    Reply
  6. Karaoke Niagara

    From my research “Correct me if i’m wrong”

    1) The “Venue” pays Socan fees so DJ’s / KJ’s can perform and promote artists music.
    2) If I want to convert my Original “MUSIC” cd’s (Not Karaoke) to my hard drive I just Pay for the Standard “All-in-One” Licence through Connect (http://www.connectmusic.ca/disc-jockeys/dj-licence-application/standard-all-in-one-licence.aspx)
    3) If I want to use Karaoke songs on my hard drive, I just contact the “Karaoke Company” and purchase the correct format i will use. Example: MP3+G format for computer DJ. (No additional licensing required)

    This is too easy.

    Reply
    • BigBangKaroake

      ***caps lock is on just to distinguish between Karaoke Niagara and my reply please do not misconstrue caps as yelling***

      1) The “Venue” pays Socan fees so DJ’s / KJ’s can perform and promote artists music.
      YES THIS IS TRUE THOUGH YOU HAVE TO BE CAREFUL SOME VENUES DO NOT HAVE PROPER LICENSING THOUGH MOSTLY CAUSE THEY THINK THAT THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH IT…

      2) If I want to convert my Original “MUSIC” cd’s (Not Karaoke) to my hard drive I just Pay for the Standard “All-in-One” Licence through Connect (http://www.connectmusic.ca/disc-jockeys/dj-licence-application/standard-all-in-one-licence.aspx)
      OK WELL LOOKS LIKE i AM GETTING OUT OF DJING… USED TO BE THE SOCAN LICENSE WAS GOOD ENOUGH BECAUSE YOU PURCHASED THE DISC THEN HAD THE RIGHT TO MEDIA SHIFT IT TO WHATEVER FORMAT YOU WANTED (THIS CONNECT LICENSE ONLY ALLOWS FOR COMPRESSION TO MP3 BUT NOT ANYTHING THAT CAN COMPRESS IT MORE TO SAVE DRIVE SPACE.) THIS WAS COVERED UNDER FAIR USE FOR PRIVATE AND THEN THE VENUES SOCAN LICENSE COVERS THE PERFORMANCE. THE SAME COULD BE SAID FOR BANDS WHO PURCHASE THE SHEET MUSIC WHICH IS SOLD FOR PRIVATE USE ONLY BUT USE IN VENUE FOR THE BAND IS COVERED UNDER SOCAN.
      THIS SEEMS TO BE YET ANOTHER CASH GRAB FEE TO DRIVE THE PRE-RECORDED MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY INTO THE GROUND LIKE THESE NO-FLY ARTIST LISTS WHICH APPARENTLY THERE IS ALSO UNDER THIS LICENSE http://connectmusic.ca/media/1012/restr.%20artist%20audio%20video%20-%20april%202013.pdf FOR THE DJ NO FLY LIST AND http://connectmusic.ca/media/2920/restr.%20artist%20audio%20video%20mss%20hd%20comp%20&%20av%20jukebox%20-%20april%202013.pdf FOR THE JUKEBOX NO FLY… REALLY A NO FLY FOR JUKEBOXES!?!?!?! DO ARTISTS/SONGWRITERS NOT GET HOW MUSIC WORKS!?!?!?

      THIS LICENSE MAKES IT SO I HAVE TO RAISE MY FEES AND YET WHAT i HAVE TO CHARGE NOW NO ONE WANTS TO PAY BECAUSE THEY CAN HIRE A PIRATE FOR 1/8TH OF THE FEE I NEED TO CHARGE TO JUST COVER MY COSTS OF BEING LEGAL…

      IT REALLY SEEMS THAT THE RECORDING INDUSTRY AND ARTISTS ARE REALLY LOOKING TO SCREW THEMSELVES DOWN THE LINE…

      3) If I want to use Karaoke songs on my hard drive, I just contact the “Karaoke Company” and purchase the correct format i will use. Example: MP3+G format for computer DJ. (No additional licensing required)
      TRUE AND MOST KARAOKE TRACK PRODUCERS ALLOW MEDIA SHIFTING FROM ONE FORMAT TO ANOTHER SUCH AS CD+G TO MP3+G UNDER WHAT IS CALLED 1:1 COMPLACENCY MEANING YOU HAVE TO HAVE 1 ORIGINAL LEGAL COPY FOR EVERY MEDIA SHIFTED COPY WITHOUT ANY PAYING ANY ADDITIONAL FEES. YOU DON’T HAVE TO CONTACT THE PRODUCER TO OBTAIN ANY SPECIAL PERMISSIONS TO DO SO THEY ONLY TIMES YOU NEED TO DO SO IS IF YOU WANT TO OBTAIN A CERTIFICATION WITH THE PRODUCERS THAT OFFER CERTIFICATION IE. SOUND CHOICE OR KARAOKE ANTI PIRACY UK (KAPA-UK) FOR UK KAROAKE JOCKEYS

      This is too easy.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Verify Your Humanity *