EXHIBIT D BROADCAST MUSIC, INC., Mr. GEORGE A. HAMID, Jr., DEAR MR. HAMID: We acknowledge receipt of your letter of July 31, 1964, which was in response to our's of July 28, 1964. Our files show that the Atlantic City Steel Pier is licensed for the public performance of our copyrighted music. However, Convention Hall, Atlantic City, is not licensed by BMI. We therefore would appreciate hearing from you further in regard to the license agreement forms provided for the Beatles performance at Convention Hall on August 30, 1964. DEAR MR. COLTON: Thank you for your letter of August 5, indicating that the Atlantic City Steel Pier is authorized to perform your BMI music. The performance of the Beatles is being promoted and paid for by the Atlantic City Steel Pier so I am sure that covers the situation. Sincerely, ATLANTIC CITY STEEL PIER, EXHIBIT F BROADCAST MUSIC, INC., Mr. GEORGE A. HAMID, Jr., DEAR MR. HAMID: In my letter of August 5, 1964, I endeavored to clarify the situation regarding the forthcoming Beatles performance at Convention Hall, Atlantic City. Since I have received your letter of August 13, 1964, it is obvious that further clarification is necessary. The agreement we hold with Abel Holding Co., Inc., is limited specifically to the premises of the Atlantic City Steel Pier. If you will refer to your copy of your BMI license agreement dated September 28, 1960, you will note that such limitation is clearly defined and in no instance can be interpreted to include performances of our music in other premises. I am therefore repeating my request that you return the signed license agreement forms previously provided for the Beatles concert, August 30, 1964, to take place at Convention Hall, for which you are presently unlicensed. I trust we will hear from you again without undue delay so that we may provide you with the proper legal authorization to cover the public performance of the copyrighted music we control during the Beatles concert. Thank you for writing. Very truly yours, EUGENE COLTON, Regional Supervisor. Mr. EUGENE COLTON, Regional Supervisor, BMI, New York, N.Y. EXHIBIT G AUGUST 17, 1964. DEAR MR. COLTON: Your letter arrived in today's mail. I am hastening to reply because I am sure Mr. Hamid would like me to do so to inform you that he is presently in Elmira, N.Y., staging the Elmira Fair. He will be back the latter part of the week. DEAR MR. GABRIEL: In reference to your letter of October 21, we cannot accept the termination of your agreement on the basis of your letter. We have had a reasonable relationship during the period of this license and feel that we have conducted our operations in good faith. For you to expect us to pay 1 percent of the expenditures for services of performers and musicians on the Steel Pier would be unrealistic. First of all, many of the musicians and performers use no BMI music, or a minimum, while others may use more. Secondly, the number of BMI songs performed bears no releationship at all to the amount of money expended. For example: Bobby Darin might get $20,000 a week to sing eight songs while an unknown singer might sing the same eight songs and receive only $400. While songs are necessary for the performance, they do not create the talent price nor the box office value. As you well know, we could take the five most popular BMI numbers and announce on our marquee that they were going to be sung by a local chorus and the numbers themselves would not draw a scattering of people through our box office. Yet, we could take five far less popular songs and announce that they were going to be sung, in person, by Frank Sinatra and the public would swarm through our turnstiles. In summary, there is no logical relationship between the amount of money spent by us for talent and the license fee to be paid. As you can see, if we paid all licensing agencies a percentage of our talent cost, we would be unwise to buy expensive attractions. Without me doing the arithmetic for you, you can see the penalty that would be imposed upon us for buying expensive attractions, Further to the foregoing, you are aware, I am sure, that we buy many animal acts, many comedians who use either no music or an absolute minimum, and a large number of big sight acts in the acrobatic field. The values of these acts bear absolutely no relationship to the music licensing fee. I am sure that upon reflection and study, you will agree that such a licensing arrangement would be impractical for the Steel Pier. In view of our amicable relationship, I believe we would be well off to continue it on the past pleasant basis. Sincerely yours, ABEL HOLDING CO., INC. EXHIBIT I UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF Civil Action File No. 977-64 SUMMONS BROADCAST MUSIC, INC., ARC MUSIC CORP., NORTHERN SONGS, LTD., ROBERT MELLIN, INC., PROGRESSIVE MUSIC PUBLISHING CO., INC., BILLACE MUSIC CO., VENICE MUSIC CORP., LUDIX PUBLISHING CO., INC., and Ray MAXWELL MUSIC PUB. Co., PLAINTIFF, V. WARHI REALTY COMPANY, INC., A CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY AND THE CITY OF ATLANTIC CITY, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANTS To the above-named Defendants: You are hereby summoned and required to serve upon Lloyd, Horn, Megargee & Steedle, plaintiff's attorneys, whose address is 1421 Atlantic Avenue, Atlantic City, N.J., an answer to the complaint which is herewith served upon you, within 20 days after service of this summons upon you, exclusive of the day of service. If you fail to do so, judgment by default will be taken against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. MICHAEL KELLER, Jr., [SEAL OF COURT] Clerk of Court. LOUIS A. GIORGI, Deputy Clerk. Date: October 27, 1964. Note. This summons is issued pursuant to Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. EXHIBIT J AS AND FOR A THIRD CLAIM 24. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 through 5, inclusive, of this complaint. 25. Prior to the 25th day of June 1964, John Lennon and Paul McCartney, who then were and ever since have been citizens of England, originated, created, wrote, and composed an original musical composition entitled "A Hard Day's Night." 26. Said musical composition contains a large amount of material wholly original and is copyrightable subject matter under the laws of the United States. 27. Between the 25th day of June 1964, and the 13th day of July 1964, plaintiff Northern Songs, Ltd., complied in all respects with Title 17, U.S.C., and all other laws governing copyright and secured the exclusive rights and privileges in and to the copyright of said musical composition and received from the Register of Copyrights a certificate of registration, identified as follows: Class Ef, No. 29204. 28. Since June 25, 1964, all copies of said musical composition published by plaintiff Northern Songs, Ltd., or under its authority or Mr. GEORGE HAMID, Jr., EXHIBIT K LONG BEACH AUDITORIUM, ARENA & STADIUM, DEAR GEORGE: I read your letters in Amusement Business and felt that I should advise you that BMI has threatened suit against World Wide Attractions, Inc., of Los Angeles, which is Hal Zeiger's promotion corporation, and the Long Beach Arena, for the appearance of the Ray Charles Orchestra in the arena last September. Being a municipal operation, we turned all our correspondence over to our city attorney. As of this writing, we have received no further correspondence from the Los Angeles BMI office. BMI likewise contacted the Community Concert Association of Long Beach, regarding the payment of the 1-percent fee for Mantovani's orchestra which played here as a part of the association's subscription series. As I understand, this was turned back by the local association to Columbia Artists Management for disposition. However, I have heard nothing more on this. According to the BMI representative who talked to us originally, the collection of the fee was a decision made by the new president of BMI. I advised him verbally that if such a course were undertaken with all promoters, that BMI would be a party to putting concerts out of business, as many promoters would be happy to make 1 percent on some of their promotions. Having been the assistant manager at the National Dairy Cattle Congress, under Mr. Estel for some 10 years, I can see how this will have a very direct effect on the National Association of Fair Managers, and I assume that Frank Kingman would certainly have this on his agenda at the annual meeting this December. I am alerting the executive secretary of the International Association of Auditorium Managers regarding this situation and am sure that it will be discussed at our convention which will be held next July. Sincerely, WIN F. HANSSEN, Manager. EXHIBIT L U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY Civil Action No. 97764 BROADCAST MUSIC, INC., ET AL., PLAINTIFFS, vs. WARHI REALTY CO., INC., ET AL., DEFENDANTS STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING TIME WITHIN WHICH TO ANSWER Subject to approval of the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto that the time within which the defendants may answer or otherwise plead be and same is hereby extended to December 19, 1964. LLOYD, HORN, MEGARGEE & STEEDLE, By LEONARD C. HORN, A Member of the Firm. SAMUEL KALIKMAN, Attorney for Defendant, Warhi Realty Co., Inc. IT IS SO ORDERED this - day of November, 1964. Chief Judge, U.S. District Court. EXHIBIT M MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION BY BMI IN ITS LICENSING POLICY IN THE ENTERTAINMENT RISK FIELD In current and future music licensing negotiations, it is imperative that BMI treat the risk-taking operator, who is engaged in the sale of entertainment, on a ticket purchase basis, in an entirely different manner from its treatment of entrepreneurs who are in more advantageous situations. For example: In the consideration of music licensing negotiations and ultimate format, it is imperative that BMI treat the risk-taking operator, who is directly engaged in the entertainment business, for profit, in an entirely different manner than those entrepreneurs in the entertainment world who are in more advantageous positions. For example: A. The radio and TV business sells advertising time to vast commercial financial empires. The programing is simply bait. Entertainment itself is actually given away. B. The casino operator in Las Vegas is in reality merchandising food, drink and gambling. The entertainment is only a lure to attract numbers of people into the establishment for other revenue producing purposes. C. The hotel operator in Miami uses entertainment simply to sell rooms, food, drink and publicize his premises. D. Even the cabaret operator rarely charges a cover. His entertainment is the device by which he sells food and drink. E. The college concert is staged to a ready-made audience with no rent, virtually no advertising cost, no ticket selling cost and most important of all— no chance of loss. Even on the rare occasions where a concert does not meet its cost, the university has a fund that can be drawn against. Contrast this with the operator who is engaged in the business of actually staging and selling entertainment from which he must attempt to make his livelihood. A. He depends almost solely on the revenue that ticket sales bring for his revenue. B. From this income he must pay the entertainers prices which are not consistent with those paid in the pre-Las Vegas and pretelevision days. Today the name artist who can draw enough people to make it worthwhile demands from 50 percent to 70 percent of the gross ticket sales. C. He must advertise and promote in a competitive market. D. He must pay for the cost of tickets and the cost of selling tickets, almost always using a union ticket box. E. He must pay rent. F. He must pay all costs within the building, including union stagehands and very often union standby musicians. G. His chance of profit is questionable. Countless such operators have gone out of business. A simple budget on a 60-percent attraction in a major city grossing $10,000 would be as follows: If this operator had to pay 1 percent of the gross for music rights, he would actually be paying 121⁄2 percent of his profit. At an $8,000 gross, such an operator would find it hard to break even. H. Such an operator is in the business of selling entertainment and producing it. He takes an enormous risk of losing money as often as he makes it. The questions then which should, in all fairness, be asked are: 1. Is the operator in the business of selling entertainment? 2. Does he pay normal business expenses as outlined in item G above? 3. Does he run the risk of financial loss? 4. Does he have a readymade market? 5. Does he have substantial auxiliary income of which the entertainment is only a part? 6. Can the operator pass on his extra costs to (a) Advertisers? (b) Gambling patrons? (c) Hotel patrons? Examination of these criteria should indicate the very clear cut need for special consideration for the profit and/or loss true entertainment operator. EXHIBIT N AGREEMENT between AMERICAN SOCIETY OF COMPOSERS, AUTHORS, AND PUBLISHERS (hereinafter styled "Society"), and ABEL HOLDING CO., INC. (hereinafter styled "Licensee"), as follows: 1. Society grants and Licensee accepts for a period of one performance August 30, 1964, a license to publicly perform at Beatles Concert, Convention Hall, Atlantic City, New Jersey, 08401, and not elsewhere, non-dramatic renditions of the separate musical compositions copyrighted by members of the Society. |