Generally speaking, if a venue/person held a PPL licence and was paying royalties via PRS (for instance) then they should be able to play what they like (within reason). But it really depends on the individual band and how they distribute their music and who owns what rights to it. Of course, I'm only referring to the UK, not some dodgy 'American soil' in Cuba where the legality of public performance is the least of the judicial quandaries...
I suspect Skinny Puppy are suing on the basis that no public performance licence has been paid, and therefore neither have any royalties due. I'd say they have a decent case, but might find it difficult to explain how royalties work out to $666k...
Do bands have a legal right to say where their music gets played?
outside of tv/films etc?
read a few comments
mostly people arguing about a new version of Slashdot, contained this classic:
"Seems like it is designed for the sort of people who are afraid of "ugly numbers" and can't handle technical information unlike real slashdotters."
woah, this wasn't a reply to NickDS
SEAN!
they've invoiced for $666,000
i daresay the point isn't that they're trying to get paid
Not as far as I know
Generally speaking, if a venue/person held a PPL licence and was paying royalties via PRS (for instance) then they should be able to play what they like (within reason). But it really depends on the individual band and how they distribute their music and who owns what rights to it. Of course, I'm only referring to the UK, not some dodgy 'American soil' in Cuba where the legality of public performance is the least of the judicial quandaries...
I suspect Skinny Puppy are suing on the basis that no public performance licence has been paid, and therefore neither have any royalties due. I'd say they have a decent case, but might find it difficult to explain how royalties work out to $666k...