Before you call the PRO back

A one-page order of operations for a music-licensing letter or call — ASCAP · BMI · SESAC · GMR

The letter is real and lawful — and it is not a same-day emergency. A PRO collects the public-performance royalties federal law reserves to songwriters (17 U.S.C. §106(4)), acting as the owners' agent. Contact runs over months, not hours. You have time to respond correctly: use it to verify, not to react — and not to ignore.

  1. 1Verify the sender and confirm the claim is yours. Confirm through the PRO's own website phone number, not only the letter's. Letters reach former owners, prior tenants, and closed entities — if the business named isn't yours as it exists now, that's a written factual response with documentation, not a bill. Ask that everything further be put in writing.
  2. 2Pin down exactly what is being claimed. Which PRO and catalog · what music use it asserts (live, recorded/streamed, TV, karaoke) · what period and dollar figure. No single license covers all four PROs. Answer accurately, in writing, only about what you can confirm.
  3. 3Test the one exemption before you assume you owe. Only a broadcast radio or TV signal can qualify (17 U.S.C. §110(5)(B)) — size limits, no cover charge, no re-transmission. Streaming, playlists, background-music services, live music, and karaoke are outside it at any size. Most venues are not exempt. Run the screener on the site before relying on it — a wrong claim costs double the fees for up to 3 prior years (§504(d)).
  4. 4Weigh the real options. Exempt on solid grounds → document your setup in writing first. Owe → license and right-size within the rate structure (ASCAP/BMI have a court-set-rate backstop; SESAC/GMR are private agreement). Claim wrong → correct it in writing, with documentation.
  5. 5Respond — deliberately. A licensing letter answered in writing, on your timeline, with verified facts, is a manageable outcome reached calmly — the gap between a license (hundreds to low thousands a year) and a judgment ($750–$30,000 per work, §504(c)) is the reason the order matters.

The four moves that make it worse

  • Ignoring it. The contact doesn't expire; ignored letters became the record that ended in judgment in BMI v. Evie's Tavern — owner personally liable.
  • Admitting facts carelessly on a call. Off-the-cuff statements become evidence. Verify first; respond accurately in writing.
  • Claiming the exemption without grounds. §504(d): double the license fees, up to 3 prior years, on top of damages.
  • Treating the anger as a plan. The feeling doesn't change the statute or the exposure.

Stop and call a lawyer if

  • A lawsuit has been filed and served, or a complaint is attached — court deadlines are short and missing them forfeits defenses.
  • The letter is on law-firm letterhead with a specific response deadline.
  • A settlement figure is on the table you can't evaluate against your actual use.
  • Personal liability is in play — for an owner-operator it often is.

Why deliberate beats fast: the downside of getting this wrong is many times the cost of getting it right. That asymmetry — not fear — is the reason to verify and check before any payment or any refusal.