Luke would get a lot less money from a live performance of Kesha then he would from her releasing an album, because most of the money goes to the instruments/equipment etc.

Um.

All of Kesha's songs produced by her first, and finalised by Luke. That's how Luke works.
Kesha comes up with the melodies and actual songs, she sends it off to Luke and he produces it as long as he accepts it.

It's explained in her documentary. So when she released the video for Dirty Love, the version without Luke's production, she can because she came up with everything and has the rights for everything, he just has the rights over the final version and the rest of her career relating to her recording contract.

He gets no pay checks or recognition when she performs alternate versions of the songs he produced.

Which is why she released Dirty Love without Luke's production in the first place.
And why all the songs she's performed do NOT represent Luke's production.

Also, where does anyone get the idea that if you perform a song, people get pay checks?

Do you think Madonna paid David Bowie's people money to perform Rebel Rebel? This whole "get pay checks to perform" was thrown about when Madonna performed BTW on the MDNA tour, but there's no substance.

People perform covers all the time and don't get pay checks. You can literally perform a song no matter what anywhere, and as long as you don't sell a recording of the performance, it's fine. And it has to be a significant recording.

Madonna was able to sell MDNA Live DVD/CD's with BTW on there and not even credit Gaga, because of the fact it was not a significant recording.

The only way Luke gets a paycheck out of this is if Kesha performs one of her songs with his production backtrack.

Kesha always performs with a live band. You don't get a royalty paycheck if someone performs a song you produced that doesn't have your production on it, like...

Though considering he has a monopoly on her finances, I wouldn't be surprised if he's found a way to take a cut out of her management company. It would make sense, considering Vector Management (the company that represents her, ironically hired by Luke) is suing him as well.

Public performances of copyrighted music at live music venues, require payment.

The exceptions can include such things as churches and non-profit educational venues.
In the end, the price is included in venue hire and gets passed on to the concert goer as part of the ticket price.

She's a great fit for coachella but im wondering what shell perform

I hope its one of those experimental indie stuff that leaked a while back

So would she be allowed to perform new music cause she never has before and she has done about 10-15 shows in the past 2 years.

In before its yeast infection :biblio;

Happy for her!

Apparently she's not even on the list to perform, I saw list floating around which didn't have her name as a guest or performer. She's probably going there just to attend it like all the past years.

This argument annoys me because (A) it is her music, regardless of the fact that he helped produced it (B) she needs to make a living and other than doing covers shes legally not allowed to perform any new material she makes. literally any new material she comes up with. (C) shes allowed to work with other producers but it all has to go through luke. who refuses to greenlight anything she makes outside of her work with him. why do you think lip$ha with the flaming lips never happened? shes always been allowed to work with other producers. shes still held down by luke though.

I don't understand this. shes a surprise performer? Is she a main act? Is she just making an appearance? Why wouldnt they put her name on the bill then? This doesnt make any sense. What is she even going to perform? Its like shes been on the warrior tour for the past 4 years, she never changes up her setlists or costuming. If this is actually true and pans out then I hope she comes up with a fresh way to present this same material.

Shes not even allowed to perform new material actually.