Actually Dave, I am interested in your thoughts and how I can help convince artists like yourself that copyrights are in their best interests. And I agree to no fighting. I find it curious that musicians like yourself could feel threatened by copyright laws that are designed for our benefit as artists. The copyright laws and royalty systems I've reviewed and used are both fair and easy to follow, and my feeling is that a lot of rumors and bad information are making musicians too afraid to even check into them.

I don't know what "special license" is needed for commercial midi files since I never use them and only use my own files, but I suspect this is wrong. I believe that live performance fees covered in the BMI/ASCAP licensing that the lounges pay apply whether you used midi or not (in fact, I think this is the most appropriate and legal use for MIDI files no matter the source). The same fees cover the incidental music that is played on breaks. I'll look into any source you have that says otherwise.

The people who work as BMI/ASCAP agents are freelancers basically. They keep a record of the music that they hear as they bounce around from place to place and that is a big factor is how the royalties are distributed. Jimmy Buffett probably gets more royalty fees from bar surveys than Frank Zappa because his music is played more often in lounges, while the reverse may be true for alternative rock radio station royalties. So the system may not as out of touch with reality as you might think.

I suspect that the only time you might get a visit from BMI/ASCAP reps would be:
* if you produced and distributed cover albums
* if you are a concert promoter
* if you own a lounge or restaraunt
* if you distribute cover music from a website

I've never met a musician who has had a run-in with BMI/ASCAP reps otherwise. But I'm willing to.