An interesting story about the hunters of BMI

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/08/magazine/08music-t.html?_r=1

What will be the next story about?

Thanks. Fantastic article. Gives me quite a bit of hope for the future of the music business. Change in this case may actually create a healthier economic climate for musicians and songwriters.
Best,
Steve C.

It appears to me that the BMI's licensing and collection is a double-edged sword killing those that perform and play other people's music in a venue, e.g., a churches, coffee houses, night clubs, and schools. The BMI is set up to protect Lady Gaga, Willie Nelson, Metallica, and Kanye West while striking down the places and people that allow open mics, cover bands, and karaokes with exorbitant fees and lawsuits. The result is the death of local venues and entertainment in preference for coliseum acts.

The article describes the BMI lawyer as a hunter but I don't see much of a difference from a mob enforcer who demands protection fees from a club owner. They also probably charge all the artist too for their shakedown services. The artists may get a smaller than expected check for said protection services and the non-coliseum acts who perform in small, local venues can't perform in a local bar because the place can't afford to stay in business because of exorbitant, unreasonable BMI licensing schemes.

The BMI's absurd licensing schemes kill Peter quickly and Paul slowly!

http://www.bmi.com/newmedia/entry/533605

Musical compositions, like other intellectual property, belong to their creators. U.S. Copyright Law grants certain exclusive rights to copyright owners, including the right to publicly perform and the right to authorize others to publicly perform the work. Web Sites that publicly perform music must obtain a license from the copyright owner or their representative. Songwriters and publishers affiliate with a performing rights organization like BMI which, on behalf of these affiliated writers and publishers, provides license agreements for all types of businesses. With more than 400,000, composers and music publishers and a repertoire of more than 6.5 million musical works, a BMI license is an economical and efficient way to obtain the right to publicly perform BMI music.

I really doubt that websites are hunted down by BMI like the owners of a coffee shop.

BMI was designed as a way to economically and efficient way to obtain the privilege to publicly perform BMI music, but I doubt that's how it works today.
Do the artists get a fair percentage of the money BMI's agents collect?
Is it fair to charge a venue that hosts a local act that's a tribute to Led Zeppelin but also the obscure artists that have little or no following?
If owned such a business, I wouldn't mind paying for the license to play the music that I play. But, to use TR's example, if I never play Lady Gaga, should she benefit from my getting permission to play Led Zeppelin?