Re: Religious Exemption

From: Bob Stock <bstock[_at_]ucla.edu>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 97 07:02:04 PDT

On Thu, 24 Apr 1997, Matthew Watters <watters[_at_]prtaxp.unl.edu> wrote:
>
> Is ASCAP collecting royalties for performances of the *sound
> recording* (for which there *is* no performance right--see,
> especially, 17 U.S.C. sec. 114(d)) or is it collecting the
> royalties for the performance of the musical work *incorporated
> into* the sound recording?

The latter. "ASCAP is the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers, a membership association of over 68,000 composers, songwriters, lyricists and music publishers. ASCAP's function is to protect the rights of its members by licensing and paying royalties for the public performances of their copyrighted works."

   http://www.ascap.com/

> While the result is the same (a royalty paid for the "performance"
> of a sound recording), and the distinction between musical work and
> sound recording may be small in most cases, there *is* a
> distinction.

Well, the distinction you mention, and I omit, may be a distinction, but the result is *not* the same. The royalties ASCAP collects are *distributed* to the owners who are its members. I doubt they think that just because in theory a royalty is paid when both the work and the sound recording are performed, that this means the resultant royalty payment is the same.

---

Bob Stock <bstock[_at_]ucla.edu>
2L - UCLA School of Law
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/1206/

---

Received on Fri Apr 25 1997 - 14:15:04 GMT