Not only Russian copyright, broadcast and digital law
In the present case, the parties are in dispute in particular as to whether the principles developed in SGAE ruling, which concerned copyright and hotel bedrooms, can be applied by analogy to the related rights of phonogram producers and performers, where a radio broadcast in which phonograms are used is audible in a dental practice. The referring court wished to know, first of all, whether a dentist who makes radio broadcasts audible in his practice is required to pay equitable remuneration for the indirect communication to the public of phonograms communicated in the radio broadcasts.
Comments closedSocietà Consortile Fonografici (SCF) is a copyright management society for Italy and abroad. It represents performers and phonogram producers. SCF conducted negotiations with the Associazione Dentisti Italiani (Association of Italian Dentists) with a view to concluding a collective agreement quantifying the relevant equitable remuneration within the meaning of Articles 73 or 73a of the Law on copyright for the communication of phonograms, including distribution in private professional practices whatever the technique used.
Comments closedThis appeal presents a single question: does BMI’s Consent Decree prohibit BMI from licensing a fractional interest in the public performance right to a musical work (commonly referred to as “fractional licensing”), when BMI does not control the entirety of the public performance right for that musical work? As demonstrated below, the answer to this question is no.
Comments closedCollective licensing works on the basis of rights holders mandating collecting societies to manage certain rights on their behalf. As such, those rights holders actively opt in to collective licensing schemes and become collecting society members.
Comments closedSIA AKKA/LAA (SIA “Autortiesību un komunicēšanās konsultāciju aģentūra/Latvijas Autoru apvienība” –Copyright and Communication Consulting Agency ltd./Latvian Authors Association) is a non-profit organisation founded in Riga by a separate non-profit organisation, the Latvian Authors Association, whose members are various Latvian artists.
Comments closedSIA AKKA/LAA (SIA “Autortiesību un komunicēšanās konsultāciju aģentūra/Latvijas Autoru apvienība” –Copyright and Communication Consulting Agency ltd./Latvian Authors Association) is a non-profit organisation founded in Riga by a separate non-profit organisation, the Latvian Authors Association, whose members are various Latvian artists.
Comments closedAs authors and performers tend to be in a weaker contractual position when they grant licences or transfer their rights, they need information, to assess the continued economic value of their rights, compared to the remuneration received for their licence or transfer, but they often face a lack of transparency. Therefore, the sharing of adequate information by their contractual counterparts or their successors in title is important for the transparency and balance in the system that governs the remuneration of authors and performers.
Comments closedUnder Russian copyright law, and not only under Russian law, the owner of copyright, the author, publisher has a property right to receive remuneration for exploitation of its rights in work. Economical rights of creators must be protected under national laws of different countries, including Russia, and under international law. But Russian government decided to simplify the law concerning mandatory licensing of public performance right and provided three-year term for economical rights of copyright owners.
Comments closedMandatory 100-percent licensing of jointly owned works would contravene the basic rule adopted in the 1976 Act that ownership of copyright, and the exclusive rights comprised in a copyright, are divisible without limitation. The Act provides that a copyright may be transferred to another person “in whole or in part,” and that exclusive rights, “including any subdivision of any of the rights,” may be transferred and owned separately. Thus, as one court has described it, a copyright may be “chopped up and owned separately, and each separate owner of a subdivided exclusive right may sue to enforce that owned portion of an exclusive right, no matter how small.”
Comments closed