{"id":3253,"date":"2020-03-24T14:30:27","date_gmt":"2020-03-24T14:30:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.dekuzu.com\/en\/?p=3253"},"modified":"2020-03-24T14:30:30","modified_gmt":"2020-03-24T14:30:30","slug":"iipa-on-collective-management-in-301-special-report","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.dekuzu.com\/en\/2020\/03\/iipa-on-collective-management-in-301-special-report.html","title":{"rendered":"IIPA on collective management in 301 special report"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

IIPA, in its written submission<\/a> in response to USTR\u2019s request for comments, gave main principles for collective management of rights. Actually it seems like recommendation for certain countries, including Russia, how to organize governing of CMO on national level. It would be better not to change anything in this peace of submission. By reading always keep in mind, that collective management in Russia organized rather than submission recommends.<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

State accreditation appoints certain CMO to manage public performance. The Russian law does not prohibit establishment of non-accredited CMO, but right holders, especially those who keep foreign repertoire, are not interested to do so directly. The Russian companies take licenses from foreign right holders and register themselves as right holders (non licensees) in CMO and declare that they are representative of foreign right holders. Mostly so called representative have only written letters without clear representation of authority to collect royalties in Russia, license public performance or digital rights. So, just remind yourself what are the principles of collective management.<\/span><\/p>\n

Laws and Regulations Governing Collective Management Organizations (CMOs)<\/strong><\/span><\/h2>\n

Direct licensing of copyright works and sound recordings by individual rights holders of their exclusive rights should always remain the baseline. However, in certain circumstances where it makes economic sense and where international treaties permit, rights holders may prefer to exercise some of their rights on a collective basis, e.g., through CMOs.<\/span><\/p>\n

Public performance and broadcasting rights are a good example, because there are often a large number of users (potential licensees) involved, for example, from cafes and restaurants, to hundreds of radio stations, and the value of individual transactions may be relatively small compared to the transactional costs. Public performance income has become an increasingly important source of revenue for music rights holders, more so than broadcast income worldwide.<\/span><\/p>\n

This represents an important source of monies for the financing of the production and dissemination of new works. This importance has heightened the need for efficient, transparent, and accountable collective management services. It is therefore essential that rights holders can, on a voluntary basis, set up and govern their own CMOs.<\/span><\/p>\n

Governmental roles should be limited to establishing regulatory frameworks that enable efficient, fair and non-discriminatory operations of CMOs backed by rights holders, and, where appropriate, providing expert fora for the resolution of disputes on certain aspects of collective management, including by ensuring that rights are properly valued.<\/span><\/p>\n

If specific CMO legislation is enacted, it should focus on setting out principles for the establishment and basic operations of CMOs, including:<\/span><\/p>\n