[masraum]

The missus and I had lunch today at PF Changs, and I heard 2 different Hall and Oats covers. I was wondering why they wouldn't have used the originals. Is it cheaper to have an unknown group pay a licensing fee and then pay them a lump sum than it would be to pay Hall and Oats royalties? I think I also heard "Under the Milky Way" by the Church, and I think it was the original.

I was wondering if it was a financial thing, or possibly just that they didn't want to sound too retro or old and so went with a fresh remake.

I guess an add-on to this question is how expensive is it to be able to legally cover someone elses' song? Is covering a Beatles or Stones song a lot more expensive than another smaller group? Do you just pay a one time fee or do you pay per play? I've always been curious about that stuff.