collec%ve licensing An “independent” European perspec%ve Mars Mertens / OurMusic.Biz
The death of the collec%ve? • Does this mean back to the individual? – Collec%ve > rights managers>individual • Level playing ﬁeld for various rights owners – High proﬁle composers, new composers • Collec%ve is Collec%ng? • Diﬀerent role between Author’s society and the collec%ng body. • Issues of exclusive deals and monopolies
Con%nent vs Anglo-‐America • Anglo American Publisher controls Mechanical Right • Online use is combina%on between mechanical rights and communica%on to the public (Performing Right). • E.g.: Download 75% mechanical/25% performing • E.g.: Stream 25% mechanical/75% performing
Popularity Anglo-‐American repertoire • Important market share Anglo American repertoire in con%nental countries • Local ar%sts co-‐write repertoire with Anglo-‐ American authors, joint copyright. Mul%ple Publishers. • Not only Hit Repertoire/ Cultural diversity one of the founding principles of European Union.
Local representa%on • Anglo American publishers very o^en deal with local sub-‐publishers. How does this impact the changes in direct Cross-‐Border licensing? • The author’s share looses value in the juggling system of the reciprocal agreements between socie%es.
Complex Copyright-‐ Mechanical • Mechanical copyright (Interac%ve-‐Non interac%ve) • Anglo American publishers withdraw rights • Mechanical copyright European socie%es – Reciprocal Representa%on agreements for E.E.A.? CISAC CASE was about Performing Rights! (2008) • Mechanical copyright Non-‐ European socie%es – Exis%ng agreements not on EEA basis but by country.
Complex Copyright-‐ Performing • Communica%on to the public: Performing copyright (Interac%ve-‐Non interac%ve) • US performing Rights Org: ASCAP, BMI, SESAC • Performing copyright European socie%es – All Reciprocal Representa%on agreements for E.E.A. renewed a^er CISAC CASE? (July 2008) • Mechanical copyright Non-‐European socie%es – Exis%ng agreements not on EEA basis but by country.
New Digital Music Services • Pan European licensing impossible for start ups. • Roll Out Country by Country. • Complexity: – what to pay – to whom – for which repertoire?
Tariﬀ • The tariﬀ for Pan-‐ European licensing: – No ﬁxed/set price per usage across Europe – O^en set by Tariﬀ Country of Des%na%on – Split between Mechanical/Performing income might diﬀer in various countries. • No harmonisa%on of deﬁni%ons/clauses in contracts. Eg status Temporary Download? • The Tariﬀ should be balanced between author and user to make innova%on possible.
BUILDING A NEW STRUCTURE DDEX -‐ GRD -‐ IMR -‐ DCE • Digital CrossBorder licensing asks for new standards and databases • DDEX: standards metadata/ repor%ng • Global Repertoire DataBase: musicworks • Interna%onal Music Registry:WIPO ini%a%ve • UK: Digital Copyright Exchange?
New Structures • A solu%on to the problem? • Systems are s%ll under control of the “old” players. • Open Data? Including Non Society works • Important to have an eﬃcient transparent system with direct distribu%on to rightsholders
Closing Remarks • The collec%ve is s%ll important • New regula%ons from EC needed, not only recommenda%ons • “One Stop Shop” solu%ons will beneﬁt the European market
Thank you for your ahen%on Connect and Share: Mars Mertens @MarsM / mars@OurMusic.Biz