2. 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
3. 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
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. 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?
9. 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.
10. 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?
11. 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
12. 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
13. Thank
you
for
your
ahen%on
Connect
and
Share:
Mars
Mertens
@MarsM
/
mars@OurMusic.Biz
