[Fmpro] Euro Downloads Pay Song/Score equally, why not ASCAP?

[Mark Northam]

Hi Chris -

What you're saying is true. But the key issue is: regardless of whether a
broadcaster's license fee to ASCAP is high or low, the proportions remain
the same... A minute of score will always make 20% of what a minute of song
does, and a minute of CPA (commercial) music will always make 3% of what a
song does (assuming the CPA music is not a hit song, etc).

It's how ASCAP divides up the license fee that is the key issue here... And
from what I can see, the "Top 10" guys are probably so far in bed with ASCAP
(or BMI) and are so dependent on them for their income, that they wouldn't
dare endanger their income streams (plus whatever extra bonus perks they
might be getting) by taking a public stand against the obvious
discrimination the "rest of us" have to live with. I have heard direct
reports that there are massive cash & prizes available to the top guys in
this business from the PROs, and taking those extra incentives would
obviously make them far less likely to complain.

To be successful, this has to be a grass roots movement. The ASCAP Board
should be personally and very publicly shamed by what they do to composers,
which should be exposed very, very publicly. I see no other way to motivate
these people, who work in secret, to do the right thing. They obviously feel
the discrimination against score music is justified or they'd be making
waves now. I see no waves. I see a bunch of guys flying around the country
1st class, living it up, and continuing the kind of discrimination that
should have been stopped decades ago. I see a bunch of guys cowering behind
their closed board meeting doors, afraid to even let an independent
candidate get on the ballot, much less elected. And I see a bunch of guys
who, individually, cannot begin to publicly justify what they Board does,
other than by saying "because we've always done it this way." (Where in US
history have we heard that before?)

Bottom line: they're cowards. Plain and simple. And cowards fold if they're
confronted directly. Hence the secret board meetings, no more public Q&A at
ASCAP General Membership Meetings, etc. They're afraid to EVER be confronted
by a member who actually knows the right questions to ask - a member who
doesn't smile and swallow the pablum they churn out to make everyone think
they're so "transparent" and "fair". In reality, they are exactly the
opposite - their rules are among the most prejudicial in the world, and they
practice massive secrecy (not even the vote counts revealed!) on a regular
basis.

We simply must come up with the  right motivation to get these people to do
the right thing. They're too entrenched to be replaced, and they've already
shown how they will manipulate the membership and the election rules to
ensure their own survival as board members. We need a new approach to get
these people to start acting publicly, responsibly, and fairly.  Frankly, we
owe it to the next generation to help them break free of the chains of
prejudice and discrimination that composers are faced with at the PROs.

Best,

Mark Northam


On 7/17/07 10:23 AM, "Chris Alpiar" <chris at alpiar.com> wrote:

> On the different pay grade: Isn't the general idea that for broadcasting
> fees, a classical jazz or instrumental station wont pay the same monthly nut
> a top 40 or rock or R&B station would since they cant attract the same grade
> of advertisers? Again don't get me wrong brotha, I am totally wanting to
> find and help catalyze change in our industry so that its more fair for the
> people that work 10x as hard at their craft and job and who are getting paid
> less (us score composers). So I am not saying it should be what it is by any
> means just trying to clarify if that *is* the argument for justifying it?