logo
Restaurants, bars consider turning off music as licensing fees skyrocket

Restaurants, bars consider turning off music as licensing fees skyrocket

Ever since operetta composer Victor Herbert sued Shanley's restaurant in New York in 1917 to force it to pay for playing his song on a player-piano, songwriters and music publishers have depended on Performing Rights Organizations to make sure they get compensated.
For much of the last century, three organizations dominated the industry, a relatively staid and unglamorous corner of the music scene that remained largely unchanged throughout the eras of radio, records and CDs. But the rise of streaming has led to a surge in revenue and spawned a handful of new organizations looking to cash in.
Now there are at least half a dozen PROs in the US, representing different songwriters and publishers, each demanding that bars, restaurants, hotels and other venues pay a fee or risk being sued.
Businesses say the rising licensing costs have become overwhelming, and some question whether it's even worth playing music at all. The House Judiciary Committee last fall asked the Copyright Office to investigate the current system and consider potential reforms. In February, the Office opened an inquiry and received thousands of comments from businesses and songwriters.
'The growing proliferation of PROs and their lack of transparency have made it increasingly difficult to offer music in our establishments,' hundreds of small businesses from across the country wrote to the Copyright Office in a joint letter. 'The issue is not that small businesses are unwilling to pay for music,' they wrote, adding that the current system is unfair and untenable. 'Small businesses can be left feeling like PROs have them over the proverbial barrel.'
Creating a welcoming ambiance in a restaurant or yoga studio isn't as simple as putting on a Spotify playlist. Streaming has unleashed trillions of songs and every one must be licensed and have royalties paid to the songwriter whenever any track is played in public. Violations can cost up to $150,000 per infringement.
This booming market for music publishing has led to a windfall for the two major PROs. ASCAP, founded in 1914, and BMI, established in 1939, together represent more than 90% of musical compositions in the US today with talent lists covering Taylor Swift, Olivia Rodrigo, Jay-Z, Lady Gaga and Eminem, to name a few. SESAC, founded in 1931, rounds out the original three and operates on an invite-only basis.
The American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP,) the oldest and, as a nonprofit, the only PRO to publicly share data on its collections and payout, has seen revenue jump to $1.8 billion in 2024 from $935 million in 2010. Broadcast Music Inc. (BMI), in its last public report as a nonprofit in 2022, showed record revenue of $1.6 billion, with 48% of that from digital sources.
This kind of growth hasn't gone unnoticed. In just over the last 12 years, three new PROs have emerged. Legendary music manager Irving Azoff founded Global Music Rights in 2013, offering 'boutique services' and royalty transparency, building a stable of more than 160 high-profile songwriters like Bad Bunny and Bruce Springsteen.
AllTrack, founded in 2017, caters to smaller, independent songwriters. Pro Music Rights launched in 2018 and says it represents more than 2.5 million musical works, including AI-created music.
Many songs today are composed by several songwriters, each of whom could be affiliated with a different PRO. Therefore, to legally play those songs, establishments must pay for a license from each PRO. Most PROs offer blanket licensing agreements, meaning that they provide access to their entire repertoires for one fee. And while that gives a particular venue a wide range of musical freedom, it also means bars and restaurants are paying for thousands of songs they may never play or are essentially paying twice, in instances where a song with multiple writers is represented by more than one PRO.
The National Restaurant Association said its members pay an average of $4,500 per year to license music, or 0.5% of the average US small restaurant's total annual sales.
'This may not seem like a large amount, but for an industry that runs on an average pre-tax margin of 3%-5%, this cost is significant, especially since operators don't clearly understand what they get for this particular investment aside from avoiding the very legitimate threat of a business-ending lawsuit,' the association wrote in public comments to the Copyright Office.
The American Hotel & Lodging Association said the mushrooming number of PROs has led to 'significant increases in both financial and administrative burdens.' It gave an example of one 'major global hotel chain' that reported the cost per hotel for PRO license fees rose by about 200% from 2021-2025, with some hotels seeing increases of 400% or more. A large hotel that hosts occasional live music events could be paying a single PRO $5,000 to $20,000 a year. If it's paying all of the major PROs, it could be incurring as much as $80,000 in fees, according to the association.
BMI said its licensing fees have remained 'relatively steady over the years' and are based on objective criteria that apply equally to all similar businesses. Fees for individual bars and restaurants start at just over $1 a day, according to BMI. Other factors that go into licensing fees include the occupancy rate, and the type of music being played — live, DJed or recorded, for example.
In the 1917 Supreme Court case that delivered Herbert his victory over Shanley's, Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote: 'If music did not pay, it would be given up.' He wasn't only referring to the songwriters, but also to the venues themselves and addressing whether music helped generate revenue. The ruling was a win for Herbert personally but also for ASCAP, which he had helped found, and established the royalty payment system that's largely still in use today.
A spokesperson for ASCAP said an increase in fees paid to songwriters by venues is an appropriate and inevitable outcome of a growing market. The organization's musical repertoires have grown exponentially over the years to include tens of millions of works, giving music users more music and more choice, the spokesperson said. ASCAP says about 90 cents of every dollar it collects from licensees is made available for distribution to its members as royalties.
'Licensees are seeking more regulation of PROs because they want to pay songwriters less,' ASCAP Chief Executive Officer Elizabeth Matthews said in a statement to Bloomberg. 'If transparency, efficiency and innovation are the goals, more free market competition among PROs is the answer— not unnecessary government intervention.'
Songwriters depend on PROs for their livelihoods, especially in the streaming era. Many individual songwriters wrote to the Copyright Office in defense of the PRO system, expressing concern that government regulation would only diminish their hard-won earnings.
'Every royalty payment I receive represents not just compensation for my work, but my ability to continue creating music that enhances these very businesses,' wrote Joseph Trapanese, a composer who has created scores for film and TV.
Performance royalties make up about half of total publishing revenue, which is collected by PROs and dispersed to songwriters, according to the National Music Publishers' Association. Last year, only about 5% of songwriters' earnings came from bars, restaurants and other venues, a figure that is 'significantly undervalued,' according to NMPA executive vice president and General Counsel Danielle Aguirre.
'There is a substantial opportunity for growth here,' she said, speaking at the group's annual meeting in June.
The organization set a goal to significantly increase that money over the next year, likely by enforcing licensing requirements.
Several establishment owners equated the PRO's efforts to collect fees to a mob-like shakedown, citing aggressive on-site confrontations and threatening letters.
BMI said it spends a lot of time trying to educate business owners on the value that music brings to their establishment, federal copyright law requirements and the importance of maintaining a music license.
Lawsuits are always a last resort, a spokesperson said, which is why BMI spends sometimes years on educational outreach. If those efforts are ignored, however, an in-person visit might occur, and BMI may take legal action.
Despite their differences, songwriters and businesses agree that the current system is opaque and bureaucratic and could serve both sides better.
Businesses complain about the lack of a comprehensive database of songs and the fact that there is no easy system for reporting which songs they've played. Meanwhile, songwriters claim that the sheer volume of music and businesses throughout the US makes it hard to track where and when their work is played and to know whether they've been properly compensated.
'What's really being called to question is, is this system working accurately—is the money that should be finding its way to the songwriters' pockets finding its way in an efficient manner?' said George Howard, a professor at Berklee College of Music. 'And the answer is 'no.' There's no excuse for that with the level of technology we have today.'
BMI and ASCAP joined forces in 2020 to launch Songview, a free digital database showing copyright ownership and administration shares for more than 20 million works. The two PROs are exploring including GMR and SESAC, which would add even more songs to the platform.
Some of the complaints about the PRO licensing system go back decades. Michael Dorf, a producer and founder of the legendary Manhattan music club The Knitting Factory, has faced off with PROs numerous times over his 30-some years as a venue operator. In the 1990s, he signed singer-songwriters who performed at his club to his publishing company and submitted their setlists to the PROs, assuming he and his acts would reap the resulting royalties from their performances.
'We didn't receive one penny,' Dorf, who's also the founder and Chief Executive Officer of City Winery, said in an interview. 'To me, there is a cost of doing business, and we want to have the artists and the songwriters properly paid – we love that. What's simply frustrating is to pay money and know it's not going to the reason why it's being collected.'
Caleb Shreve, a songwriter and producer who's worked with the likes of Jennifer Lopez and is also CEO at Killphonic Rights, a rights collection organization, said he hears music he has produced 'all the time in yoga spots and bars, and I've never seen them on publishing statements.' Many songwriters are convinced the current system favors the biggest artists at the expense of middle-tier and emerging songwriters. Because of the blanket licensing system, BMI and ASCAP don't track individual song use by those licensees and instead rely on proxy data, like what's popular on the radio or through streaming platforms, to divvy up those collected fees.
Sometimes radio hits mimic what's played in an arena, restaurant or bar, but not always.
ASCAP said it tracks trillions of performances every year across all media platforms and only uses sample surveys or proxy data when obtaining actual performance data isn't feasible or is cost prohibitive.
Technology could be a way to solve the current issues without regulation. London-based Audoo is one company leading the way.
Founded by musician Ryan Edwards in 2018 after he heard his music being played in a department store and discovered he wasn't getting paid for it, the growing startup uses proprietary listening devices it places in cafes, gyms and other public venues to recognize and log songs. It uploads the data to the cloud, ensuring every artist — not just the chart toppers — receives compensation for their work.
The company has attracted investment from music icons including Elton John and Adele, and its devices are used by PROs in the UK and Australia. It made its first foray into the US earlier this year, placing listening devices in about 180 establishments around the Denver area in a test run.The collected data underscored that what's played in public places doesn't necessarily mirror what's on the popular playlists or radio and streaming platforms. Edwards likens the idea of using proxies to political polling — directionally helpful but not precise.
Audoo found that 77,000 unique tracks were played around Denver over two months, split among 26,000 artists, according to data viewed by Bloomberg News. On average, only 6.6% of the top-40 songs played in the venues also appeared on Billboard's top radio-play chart.
In markets where Audoo has partnered with venues, Edwards said business owners have been proud to support particular songwriters and the music business writ large.
'All of a sudden it went from a push-and-pull of, 'Why do I owe you money?' to, 'Ok, I can understand music is funding the people who create,'' Edwards said.
Carman and Soni write for Bloomberg.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Deerhoof to Remove Music From Spotify
Deerhoof to Remove Music From Spotify

Yahoo

time5 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Deerhoof to Remove Music From Spotify

All products featured on Pitchfork are independently selected by Pitchfork editors. However, when you buy something through our retail links, Condé Nast may earn an affiliate commission. Deerhoof's Satomi Mutsuzaki, July 2024 (C Brandon/Redferns) Indie-rock stalwarts Deerhoof will be removing their music from Spotify. ''Daniel Ek uses $700 million of his Spotify fortune to become chairman of AI battle tech company' was not a headline we enjoyed reading this week,' the band wrote in a statement shared online. 'We don't want our music killing people. We don't want our success being tied to AI battle tech.' Along with being the the co-founder and chief executive of Spotify, Daniel Ek is the founder of an investment fund called Prima Materia. It was reported earlier this month that Prima Materia led a new round of investment in Helsing, a defense company that sells software that uses artificial intelligence (AI) to inform military decisions. Prima Materia has been investing in Helsing since 2021, and the new round of funding amounts to 600 million euros ($693.6 million). Helsing currently operates in the United Kingdom, Germany, and France. Beyond the opposition to Ek and Prima Materia's investments, Deerhoof criticized Spotify's utility for artists and status as a music-discovery platform. 'Spotify is flushing itself down the toilet,' the band said. 'Eventually artists will want to leave this already widely hated data-mining scam masquerading as a 'music company.' It's creepy for users and crappy for artists. Music-making lasts forever but this or that digital get-rich-quick scheme is sure to become obsolete.' Deerhoof continued: 'One of the claims often made about Spotify is that it theoretically makes one's music discoverable by anyone who signs up, no matter how remote they may be from the self-proclaimed centers of hipness. But just because someone is far from Western gatekeepers does not mean they lack culture, or need to hear our band. Deerhoof is a small mom and pop operation, and know when enough is enough. We aren't capitalists, and don't wish to take over the world. Especially if the price of 'discoverability' is letting oligarchs fill the globe with computerized weaponry, we're going to pass on the supposed benefits.' Deerhoof closed their statement by acknowledging that their disappearance from Spotify will not be immediate. 'We aren't sure exactly how soon the takedowns can happen, but it will be as soon as possible,' they wrote. 'We want to thank our various labels for their support on this tricky decision. The grunt work of pulling content off of Spotify is something they're now tasked with, and they are sharing the financial hit. We know we are asking them to make a sacrifice, and it means a lot to us.' Joyful Noise Recordings, the label behind numerous Deerhoof releases, shared a statement in support of Deerhoof's decision to leave Spotify. 'Since the dawn of streaming, independent artists and labels have essentially been forced to participate alongside various streaming entities in order to survive, entities that are often funded by sources that do not align with our values,' the label wrote. 'As an independent record label, we serve the artist,' Joyful Noise continued. 'It is ultimately their decision to present their material on whichever platforms they choose. It is with this in mind that we hold no judgement towards any artist that wishes to keep their music on the platform.' The label concluded: 'However, we encourage any true music lover to buy directly from artists or the label as much as possible. This ensures financial sustainability for the artist and independent label community that supports them.' Deerhoof, who recently released the new album Noble and Godlike in Ruin, join Neil Young, Joni Mitchell, and Crosby, Stills & Nash as artists who have pulled music from Spotify in recent years. Young, who has long criticized digital streaming platforms for audio-fidelity reasons, pulled his catalog from Spotify in 2022 in opposition to the platform's then-exclusive deal with podcaster Joe Rogan. At the time, he said that Rogan was spreading misinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic. He returned his music to Spotify in 2024 after Rogan's Spotify exclusivity ended and his podcast became available on competing platforms from Apple and Amazon. Joni Mitchell pulled her music from Spotify in solidarity with Neil Young, as did Graham Nash. Mitchell returned to Spotify in 2024, while Nash and his band Crosby, Stills & Nash's boycott lasted a handful of months. protested Spotify around the same time as Neil Young, too, but she returned to the platform in 2023. All products featured on Pitchfork are independently selected by Pitchfork editors. However, when you buy something through our retail links, Condé Nast may earn an affiliate commission. Will Neil Young and Joni Mitchell's Departure Spark a Bigger Spotify Exodus? They've started a widespread conversation about Spotify by doing something most musicians can't. Originally Appeared on Pitchfork Solve the daily Crossword

Xiu Xiu to Pull Music From Spotify
Xiu Xiu to Pull Music From Spotify

Yahoo

time5 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Xiu Xiu to Pull Music From Spotify

All products featured on Pitchfork are independently selected by Pitchfork editors. However, when you buy something through our retail links, Condé Nast may earn an affiliate commission. Xiu Xiu's Angela Seo and Jamie Stewart, January 2011 (Jordi Vidal/Redferns) Xiu Xiu are planning to remove their music from Spotify. 'It is taking longer than we had hoped due to procedurally complications but will be completed soon,' the band cautioned in a statement. 'Thanks for the support and patience.' Through a representative Xiu Xiu's Jamie Stewart told Pitchfork that they and their bandmates 'have been working on this for about a month, and the hope is that almost everything will be off next week.' They also said that Polyvinyl, Kill Rock Stars, and Graveface have been 'supportive' in helping the band get its music off Spotify. Explaining why they are trying to get their music off of Spotify, Xiu Xiu wrote: 'Spotify uses music money to invest in AI war drones.' Xiu Xiu are referring to investments made by Prima Materia, an investment fund that was founded by Spotify co-founder and chief executive Daniel Ek. It was reported in June that Prima Materia led a new round of investment in Helsing, a defense company that sells software that uses artificial intelligence (AI) to inform military decisions. Prima Materia has been investing in Helsing since 2021, and the new round of funding amounts to 600 million euros ($693.6 million). Helsing currently operates in the United Kingdom, Germany, and France. When asked if Xiu Xiu plan to pull music from additional streamers, Stewart said: 'We are removing our music from Spotify specifically and encouraging people to cancel their subscriptions because of their investment in AI war drones. Although the financial practices of all streaming services is acutely anti-musician, the actions of Spotify to use the profits they made from essentially stealing music in order to murder people to make even more money is almost beyond comprehension.' Last month, Deerhoof announced their intention of taking music off of Spotify. They also cited Prima Materia's investments as a major reason in leaving the digital streaming platform. All products featured on Pitchfork are independently selected by Pitchfork editors. However, when you buy something through our retail links, Condé Nast may earn an affiliate commission. Will Neil Young and Joni Mitchell's Departure Spark a Bigger Spotify Exodus? They've started a widespread conversation about Spotify by doing something most musicians can't. Originally Appeared on Pitchfork Solve the daily Crossword

King Gizzard & the Lizard Wizard Leave Spotify
King Gizzard & the Lizard Wizard Leave Spotify

Yahoo

time5 hours ago

  • Yahoo

King Gizzard & the Lizard Wizard Leave Spotify

All products featured on Pitchfork are independently selected by Pitchfork editors. However, when you buy something through our retail links, Condé Nast may earn an affiliate commission. King Gizzard & the Lizard Wizard's Stu Mackenzie, May 2025 (Pedro Gomes/Redferns) King Gizzard & the Lizard Wizard release a ton of music, but you won't be able to hear it if you're exclusively a Spotify listener. The prolific Australian rock band has pulled nearly its entire catalog off the streaming platform without much warning or fanfare. King Gizzard & the Lizard Wizard first signaled their departure by saying 'fuck Spotify' while promoting a new demo collection that's exclusive to Bandcamp. They later explained, in an Instagram story, that they oppose military investments made by Spotify co-founder and chief executive Daniel Ek's investment fund Prima Materia. See their full statement below. King Gizzard & the Lizard Wizard's departure comes after Deerhoof and Xiu Xiu also signaled intent to leave Spotify, with both acts also citing their opposition to the Prima Materia investments. When announcing their Spotify departures, Deerhoof and Xiu Xiu cautioned that it would take time to get their music off the platform, mostly due to label deals and other contractual complications. King Gizzard & the Lizard Wizard are not tasked with the same issues, however, as they've always shared music through their own labels, Flightless, KGLW, and (P)Doom. The only project King Gizzard & the Lizard Wizard have ever released exclusively through an outside label is 2022's Satanic Slumber Party, a collaborative EP with fellow Australian rockers Tropical Fuck Storm that was issued via Joyful Noise Recordings. As of publication, it's the lone project left on King Gizzard & the Lizard Wizard's Spotify page. When reached by Pitchfork, Joyful Noise's label manager, Jake Saunders, explained that the Satanic Slumber Party EP was part of a deal with Tropical Fuck Storm, and the label will proceed however both bands would like. 'If they ask us to take it down, we will,' he wrote via email. 'We serve the artist, and it's their right to decide what platforms to sell their music on.' Saunders continued, 'We are grateful for artists like King Gizz, Thor Harris, Xiu Xiu, Adam Harding/Dumb Numbers, and Deerhoof for putting their foot down. We are living among giants.' He also wrote: 'Labels and artists that are still developing their live show and don't fit the algorithmic mold are essentially being held hostage by Spotify. No disrespect to King Gizz, but they are a successful touring band with the ability to take a stand. Their Spotify royalties are likely a drop in the bucket compared to what they can make on the road. Joyful Noise has a healthy webstore and a Bernie Sanders–esque subscription model that allows us to release not-so-Spotify-friendly bands. Yet, for developing artists and labels, Spotify is held as a priority across several sectors of the industry. Our only hope is that Spotify becomes so uncool that people start to discover music elsewhere, hopefully on a platform that isn't run by someone giving millions to the military industrial complex.' Spotify has faced increased scrutiny in recent months due to investments made by Ek's Prima Materia. The investment fund is heavily involved with Helsing, a defense company that sells software that uses artificial intelligence (AI) to inform military decisions. Prima Materia has been investing in Helsing since 2021, and the firm recently led a new round of funding that put another 600 million euros ($693.6 million) toward the defense company. King Gizzard & the Lizard Wizard: Hello friends A PSA to those unaware: Spotify CEO Daniel Ek invests millions in AI military drone technology We just removed our music from the platform Can we put pressure on these Dr. Evil tech bros to do better? Join us on another platform 🕊️ Originally Appeared on Pitchfork Solve the daily Crossword

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store