THE EVOLUTION OF MUSIC LICENSING:
POINT BY POINT

Music Licensing has come a long way from where it started in the U.S. Congress more than seven years ago. We successfully fought many of its more onerous provisions. Here is a brief overview of the original demands contained in the so-called "Fairness in Music Licensing" bill, compared with the final provisions of the "Fairness in Music Licensing" Amendment attached to the "Sony Bono Term Extension" Bill passed by Congress and signed into law by President Clinton.

ORIGINAL MUSIC LICENSING DEMAND	FINAL PROVISIONS IN BILL
Complete and total exemption for the use of radio and TV music for bars, restaurants and retail stores. They would pay nothing to songwriters, composers and music publishers for copyrighted music played over radio and television in their places of business.	Exemption from payment for radio and TV music for eating and drinking establishments of less than 3,750 gross square feet, and for retail businesses of less than 2,000 square feet, plus additional equipment exemption for some larger establishments. Medium to larger establishments are still required to pay for music licenses.
Total blockade of the much-needed "Copyright Term Extension" provisions, even at the risk of valuable copyrights passing into the public domain.	Passage of the "Copyright Term Extension" legislation.
Mandatory arbitration of music licensing rate disputes in which ASCAP customers choose to challenge the rates charged for music licenses. This provision would drag ASCAP into thousands of arbitrations for "general" licensees across the United States. ASCAP would have to prove its fees were reasonable in each arbitration!	No arbitration clause. Instead, rate proceedings for "general" licensees may be brought in only 12 locations around the country. The user has the burden of proving that ASCAP's fees are unreasonable. This fair and reasonable system allows ASCAP's customers to challenge rates if they choose to do so without ASCAP's members footing the bill for thousands of potential arbitration procedures across the country.
Permitting a business owner accused of copyright infringement (even willful infringement) to avoid Federal Court action by asserting that music license rates are unfair, and opting for arbitration instead. This would have enabled a copyright infringer to avoid the payment of statutory damages for the use of an ASCAP members' musical property as required by law.	Provision dropped from final bill as signed into law.
Ending the longstanding principle of "vicarious liability", where event organizers and landlords can be held liable for copyright infringements at events they control. For example, if a trade show participant is using copyrighted music illegally, ASCAP's members or another copyright owner can sue the trade show operator who is in control of the trade show or convention. (They may not choose to sue the trade show participant, who could be gone in a few days.) This impractical provision would have cost songwriters, composers and music publishers enormously, by preventing them from being able to take legal action against the parties who really benefit economically when their music is used without permission of the copyright owner.	Provision dropped from final bill as signed into law.
Complete exemption from music licensing fees for the appliance section of department stores, permitting copyrighted music to be played for free throughout the store.	Exemption for the appliance section is limited only to the appliance section and only for demonstration of the appliances. This provision is similar in scope to the current exemption in the copyright law, which allows a record section to play records, tapes or CDS for demonstration purposes without payment to copyright holders. This new appliance store standard is much more reasonable than allowing an entire store to use music for free...especially as ASCAP never sought to license such uses.
Complete exemption from music licensing fees for agricultural fairs and conventions, regardless of how large (or profitable) they might be.	Provision dropped from final bill as signed into law.
A large reduction in Radio "Per Program" music license fees for the use of ASCAP member's music for non-music-intensive radio stations, such as news/talk radio, and especially, for-profit religious radio stations. This new type of music license would have greatly reduced ASCAP income for Gospel, Contemporary Christian, and other religious songwriters, composers and music publishers. It would also have a negative impact on all ASCAP writers and publishers whose work is heard on radio stations of any format.	Provision dropped from final bill as signed into law after ASCAP came to an agreement with the National Religious Broadcasters.
On-line access to the ASCAP repertory. This provision never made sense. ASCAP already provides this service through the ASCAP Website. [See ACE Title Search]	Provision dropped from final bill as signed into law.