Press "Enter" to skip to content

Category: collective management

Public comment by SAG-AFTRA on collective rights managements rules review

The Consent Decrees are outdated and in relation to the current digital landscape, diminishing the artists’ ability to exploit their works. First, the Consent Decrees mandate that both PROs unequivocally grant a license to any user who submits an application, granting immediate access to the PRO’s entire repertoire upon application without first having to negotiate economic terms of the license or make any payment.

Comments closed

Retrospective: Collective rights management in the Digital Single Market – summary of responses to technical review

The Directive’s main objective is to ensure that collective management organisations (“CMOs”) act in the best interests of the rightholders they represent. The Directive sets out the standards that CMOs must meet to ensure that they act in the best interests of the rightholders they represent. It establishes some fundamental protections for rightholders, including those who are not members of CMOs. These include detailed requirements for the way in which rights revenues are collected and paid, how the monies are handled, and how deductions are made.

Comments closed

Public comment by National Religious Broadcasting Music License Committee concerning review of rules on collective rights management

Consent Decrees remain essential to foster competitive market pricing for music performance rights. SESAC exercises substantial market power as a licensing collective and should be subject to regulation comparable to that to which ASCAP and BMI are subject. Copyright law principles and market structure coalesce to eliminate competition in the marketplace for music performance rights. These combined factors give the PROs enormous market power insulated from competitive forces.

Comments closed

The public comment by Music Manager’s Forum on collective rights management rules review

The CMOs should have the ability alone or in association with other rights administration entities (such as the pre-existing Harry Fox agency) to bundle the performing and the mechanical right for blanket licensing to music users in a transparent manner using common unique works identifiers for the musical compositions to promote transparency and facilitate accurate data matching.

Comments closed

Bart Herbison’s public comment on collective rights management rules review

The Consent Decrees are not only outdated, they are obsolete. With new delivery systems for music emerging almost daily, the only possible way to keep pace is in the marketplace. Allowing the marketplace to develop new and innovative music licensing and collection models is the path to establishing true competition.

Comments closed

CTIA’s public comment on collective rights management rules review

The market for music performance rights is not competitive and the Consent Decrees continue today to serve important pro-competitive purposes. Direct licensing is an important check on performance rights organization (“PRO”) market power under the Consent Decrees, but it cannot replace the Consent Decrees due to the high market concentration of the major music publishers and the lack of competition among them.

Comments closed

It was proposed to shift Russian private copying levy to customers

Importers and manufacturers of taxable equipment must pay private copying levy under current Russian law. They don’t like it. They don’t understand why they must pay this levy if only customers make copies of content, only customers make harm to right holders, manufacturers only produce and importers only import equipment capable of copying.

Comments closed

Public comment by National Cable & Telecommunications Association on review of collective rights management rules

From the perspective of providers of audio-visual television programming, the Consent Decrees continue to serve very important purposes, acting as safeguards to constrain ASCAP’s and BMI’s substantial market leverage, while providing a framework that facilitates licenses for program providers and fair compensation for music creators.

Comments closed

“Elimination” in/or (chose yourself) collective rights management in Russia?

CEO of Russian union of right holders, collecting private copying levy under state accreditation, and VOIS, collective management organisation collecting royalties under state accreditation for all worldwide repertoire, explained the main tendencies in Russian collective rights management and his vision of perspectives.

Comments closed