ASCAP vs BMI vs SESAC vs GMR for bars

If you run a bar or restaurant, you have probably gotten a letter from at least one of the four US Performing Rights Organizations. Maybe two. Maybe all four. The question every owner asks is the same: do I really need to pay all of these, or can I pick one?

Short answer: you need all four. Long answer: here is exactly how they differ, what each one actually does, and why the four-bill structure is genuinely confusing instead of just a marketing problem.

ASCAP: the oldest and most regulated

ASCAP was founded in 1914 and is bound by a federal antitrust consent decree dating to 1941. They publish rate schedules tied to occupancy, music type and hours, and disputes go to a federal rate court. ASCAP letters tend to feel the most standardized because they are. Catalog includes a huge slice of pop, rock and country songwriters.

BMI: the largest catalog

BMI was founded in 1939 specifically to compete with ASCAP and they now represent over 1.4 million songwriters across more than 22 million works. BMI is also bound by a 1941 consent decree, so their rates are published. BMI is especially strong in country, hip-hop and a large share of contemporary pop. For most bars, the BMI bill is roughly comparable to ASCAP.

SESAC: smaller, invite-only, negotiated

SESAC was founded in 1930 and operates as a private for-profit company. They are not subject to a consent decree, so there is no public rate card and no rate court. SESAC quotes are negotiated. The catalog is smaller than ASCAP or BMI but unusually high-profile — Bob Dylan, Adele, Neil Diamond, R.E.M., plus a long list of film and TV composers.

GMR: newest, smallest, hardest to read

GMR was founded in 2013 by Irving Azoff. They represent only about 100 songwriters, but the catalog is exceptionally high-profile: Drake, Bruno Mars, John Lennon, Pearl Jam, the Eagles, Pharrell Williams. Like SESAC, GMR is not bound by a consent decree. Rates are negotiated. Their letters are usually the last to arrive, which makes them feel like a fourth surprise on top of an already-confusing process.

So why do you need all four?

Because PRO licenses do not overlap. Each PRO represents different songwriters. When you play a Spotify playlist in your bar, the songs on that playlist are split across all four PROs in proportions you cannot easily predict. Licensing only one covers maybe 30% of what is actually playing. The other 70% leaves you exposed to suit from the other three.

The cheap end-state is being licensed across all four at the right rate tier. The expensive end-state is paying any one of them and getting sued by another. That is the actual decision in front of you. If you want to see what your full PRO bill looks like across all four for your specific venue, run a free quote and we will show you the breakdown in about two minutes.

The four-letter problem

Even if you license all four PROs directly, you now have four renewal dates, four invoices, four portals, four different login credentials, and four chances to accidentally lapse on compliance. That fragmentation is the actual problem we built this company to fix — one agreement, one monthly payment, one point of contact that handles all correspondence with all four PROs on your behalf.

This page is general information, not legal advice. Consult an attorney for specifics about your situation.