This week in Melodies, I will be focusing on laws that affect the way I will conduct my light club and restaurant, Melodies From Heaven.  After doing considerable research, I came across three articles that touched the heart and soul of doing business in the hospitality/entertainment industry.  In the article, Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Restaurants and Bars Are Being Sued For “Illegally Playing Licensed Music”, by Major Protective-Rights Organizations, Ohio businesses were being sued for violations to the copyrights laws for playing copyrighted music without a license.  In this article, Broadcast Music Inc., (BMI) has sued bars and restaurants for a total of 898.8 million dollars in revenue (DaytonaDailyNews, 2012).  The question is what happened?  Why have so many businesses been caught with their pants down?    According to Tracy Reilly, a law Professor at the University of Dayton who teaches on intellectual property, violations of this type are commonly policed (DaytonDailyNews, 2012).   So why didn’t the owner of Pub at the Greene in Beavercreek, Ohio have to pay 30,000 to BMI after four violations, Jen’s Bar and Grill have to pay, 68,000 for 17 violations, and countless others if the copyright laws are regularly policed?  According to BMI, they try to work with businesses and give them time to pay fees before they file a lawsuit.  But still, businesses are failing to comply.  According to Richard Boucher, an attorney for one of the bars that got sued by BMI, the formula for licensing is that a business has to pay about $5 for each occupant (DaytonDailyNews, 2012).  If a business has a maximum occupancy of 200, then they would have to pay 1,000 a year.  So why not pay for the license instead of pay a fine for each infraction, plus attorney fees and court costs?  Reilly claims that business owners have a sense of entitlement by which they believe they shouldn’t have to pay.  The problem is that they don’t have the right. Copyright law states it is the exclusive right of the copyright holder. Non-exempt entities have a legal obligation to obtain and/or pay for permission to play in public “live” performances of copyrighted music – including radio, TV, bands, and karaoke (DaytonDailyNews, 2012).  Despite the law, many restaurants and bars are still being fined.  Sharon Morgan, President of the Miami Valley Restaurant Association says she understands why they don’t pay.  She said they don’t know who to pay and who not to.  She said it is very, very confusing (Dayton DailyNews, 2012).

According to the article, a representative goes to the establishment and records songs being played. The information is relayed back to the attorney who follows up to try and collect blanket licensing fees.  If that doesn’t work, then BMI files the lawsuit.  In my opinion, I can’t see how this process would be confusing at all. As a business owner, one should seek out information about licenses before forming the business and pay them ahead of time.  One should get licensed, period, especially if you have been cited by one of three organizations that license music and collect royalties, BMI, the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP), and the Society of European Stage Authors and Composers (SESAC).  Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

The second article deals with laws related to noise level in music venues.  The article, Occupational noise exposure and regulatory adherence in music venues in the United Kingdom by Christopher Barlow and Francisco Castilla-Sanchez, deals with noise at work legislation in the United Kingdom.  In a music industry, noise is a desired part of business.  It was not regulated in the UK until April of 2008(Barlow& Castilla-Sanchez, 2012).  It became regulated under the Noise at Work Regulation 2005.  This meant that employers of bars, orchestras, nightclubs, etc., had to abide by the same rules (based on ISO 9612:2009) for controlling noise as other industries. This meant that employers would have to regulate the exposure to noise by their workers as well.  In the entertainment industry this posed a dilemma.  Usually the more louder the music, the more fun people have at concerts, bars and other live venues.  The researchers wanted to find out to what extent were the employers complying with the regulations since there was little incentive to comply.  They studied four public music venues where live or recorded music was played.

            “ In Europe, noise exposure for any given time uses the long-term average    measure LA EQ (sometimes expressed as dBA Leq) that is used to calculate a “personal daily noise exposure, or L ex 8h which normalizes the exposure to an 8 hour working day. According to the regulations, if an employee works in an environment where he or she is expose to a L (EX8H) that exceeds the             lower exposure level of 80 dBA the employer is obligated to provide regulatory demands. These include optional noise protection, a range of monitoring devices including audiometry, and training in noise risk for employees. If the average sound level exceeds the “upper exposure action level” of 85 dBA, it is mandatory for the employer to provide protection and to ensure that protection is worn, (ibid) as well as to use other controls to minimize exposure –for instance using engineering solutions and administrative options such as variation in working patterns. The mandatory upper limit for noise exposure of an employee (the exposure limit value or ELV) is 87 dBA LEX 8H. This must take into account the effects of any controls such as use of hearing protection. Monitoring must be undertaken if the workplace is likely to exceed the lower action level (Barlow & Castilla-Sanchez, 2012).

The results of the study found that 70 % of the venues had exceeded the daily noise levels set by law.  Use of hearing protections as warranted by the regulations was rare.  Understanding of the hazards of noise was rare.  It is obvious that at these levels the hearing of employees will be damaged and that regulations were not being followed.  I am not surprised at the results.  This is a case that demonstrates that when public attitudes are at odds with regulation, it will be an uphill battle in changing behavior in an industry that relies on loud noise as the music industry does.  No matter if a law is passed to protect health, people will find a way to skirt the law if they feel it interferes with their unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

The last article, involves a case of trademark infringement.  The article, Louis Vuitton Wins Counterfeit Bag Lawsuit by Stephen Rabiner, Esq. In this case, two Chinese business owners, Zheng and Bei, were accused of manufacturing and importing fake Louis Vuitton handbags.  The court ruled that they and two other American companies had in fact violated trademark law.  As a result the court will probably outlaw goods from being imported to America.  Valerie Sonnier, Louis Vuitton’s global intellectual property director alluded that the law will cover all infringement products- not those made by Zheng and Bei (Rabiner, 2012).

If so, this could be the beginning of the end for those companies who profit from selling knock off luxury goods and for those who sells items similar to name brand items.  This order is likely to cause customs problems for those who deal in these products and lead to other lawsuits for other brand name items.

In my opinion, I think this would be good for legitimate businesses and new start- ups that want to launch their own brand name luxury fashion line.  It is not fair to take someone else’s creative ingenuity and use it like it was your own for material gain. 

References

Barlow, C, and Castillo-Sanchez, F., (2012). Occupational noise exposure and regulatory adherence in music venues in the United Kingdom.  School of Technology Maritime and Technology Faculty Southhampton Solent University, East park Terrance, Southhampton-United Kingdom, SO14ORD, UK

Govaki, Mark (2012, Oct 31). Area bars sued for lack of music licenses. Retrieved from http://www.daytonadailynews.com/news/news/crime-law/area-bars-sued-for-lack-of music-licenses/nSsqX/

Rabiner, S., (2012, April 19). Louis Vuitton Wins Counterfeit Bag Lawsuit. Retrieved from http://www.blog.findlaw.com

2012, Nov 1.  Hospitality Industry Legal Risks. Retrieved from http://www.hospitalityrisksolutions.com