Press "Enter" to skip to content

Category: Royalties

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

Russian right holders don’t receive financial guarantees for digital rights in Russia unlike musical majors

Or in other words – why such major companies like Universal, Warner etc. receive much more money for their copyright in content exploited in Russian social networks and they receive money in advance, but Russian music publishers and record labels receive much lesser, in best case, if nothing at all?

Comments closed

Payers of private copying levy in Russia realised its imperfections but can’t change it

Currently Russian law requires manufacturers and importers of equipment capable of copying a copyrighted content to pay private copying levy. Nobody from “taxpayers” likes this levy, and pays it reluctantly. What they can do? File a suit? Yes, Russian law allows it to challenge system of private copying levy in court and there is a defendant. But they always chose wrong defendant and lost.

Comments closed

The “Heavy Young Heathens” filed suit for missing consideration for and credits in “Lucifer” theme

According to suit Marderosians wrote, recorded and produced the original musical composition and master recording from which the main title theme of the hit television series Lucifer is excerpted. The Heavy Young Heathens were outraged, that, as they believe, their music has been used as Lucifer main title theme, they have not received due consideration for this.

Comments closed

When “retransmission” is a transmission without initial broadcast for copyright clearance purposes

The case concerns the question of retransmission of broadcasts, cf. section 34 of the Copyright Act, when a cable company distributes television channels, which it receives in a closed electronic transmission, but which are broadcast simultaneously via satellite and the terrestrial network.

Comments closed

The SOCAN’s public comment on collective management rules review

SOCAN is Canada’s music performing rights society. Pursuant to the applicable provisions of the Canadian Copyright Act (the “Acf’), SOCAN carries on the business, on a not-for-profit basis, of granting licences for the public performance and communication to the public by telecommunication of musical works in Canada.

Comments closed

“RussianProperty” dislikes idea to help LenFilm and Gorky Studio regain a copyright in films made before 2002

“RussianProperty”, (Rosimushestvo) federal agency on state property management, gave negative opinion on proposition, made by Russian minister of culture Vladimir Medinsky. He has sent letter to Russian prime-minister Dmitry Medvedev and requested regain copyright in movies made by LenFilm and Gorky Film studios to these studios.

Comments closed