1. Implementing
Copyright Collective Management:
A Comparison of Malaysia and
Thailand
Supatchara Distabanjong
สุพชรา ดิษฐบรรจง
ั

2. What is Collective Management?
• Collective Management
pool rights license
Composers, Collective Many
Right Management right
owners $ royalties Organization $ users
(CMO)
• CMO is NFP organization:
- License works for users (monitor use & collect royalties)
- Distribute royalties to members

3. CMOs in Music Industry
• CMO for musical works ( or
Authors & composers’ Society)
• CMO for recording companies
• CMO for singers and musicians
“Communication to the public right (public performance right or
performing right)”

4. Why the research is important?
• Copyright collective management is important in music
industry
• Collective management Organization (CMO) is essential in
representing composers demanding royalties
• Composers in some Asian countries do not appreciate full
benefit of collective managements
• Few studies of how the collective management is developed
in Asia.
• None compare between success and problematic cases in the
same region

5. Introduction
• Macro factors comparison between
Malaysia and Thailand
– Language
– Legal system
– Copyright Law
– Provision of Collective management
“licensing body” definition in Malaysia Copyright law

6. Malaysian Authors
Music Copyright (Thailand): MCT
Copyright Protection :MACP
Currency: RM
Currency: Baht
20,000,000 20,000,000
18,000,000 18,000,000
16,000,000 16,000,000
14,000,000 14,000,000
12,000,000 12,000,000
10,000,000 10,000,000
8,000,000 8,000,000
6,000,000 6,000,000
4,000,000 4,000,000
2,000,000 2,000,000
0 0
'90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05
Revenue Expenditure Revenue Expenditure

7. Aim & Scope
• Aim : to provide a guideline of collective
management for policy maker so that
Thai composers properly receive
royalties locally and internationally
• Scope: focus on collective management of
composers

8. Research Question:
• How can the collective managements in Thailand be
implemented successfully so that Thai composers
can receive royalties locally and internationally?
- What are indicators for success of collective
management?
- How can Thailand implement collective
management successfully?

9. Methodology
Methodology: Case-Study
• “Convergent Interview” of nine interviewees:
- 4 from executives of MACP
- 4 from executive of MCT
- 1 from international expert from CISAC

10. Operationalized Framework for
Success of Collective Management
• Business Perspectives:
– Revenue
– Cost
– Opportunity lose
– Opportunity gain
• Law Perspectives:
– Protect composers’ right
– Lifting the real practice to international standard

11. Indicators of
Collective Management’s Success
The success of collective management is indicated
by the collective management organization (CMO) that:
• represents almost all international and local
repertoire of a copyright works,
• can collect the reasonable royalties at reasonable
costs, and
• is able to transparently distribute royalties to
creators/owners within its first two years of licensing
activities.

12. The Indicator for Success of CMO
in Collecting Royalties in Thailand
Compare to Malaysia
• Government
– Build understanding of international practice
– Correct interpretation about international practice
• Thai recording companies
– join CMO as music publishers
– Need to be internationalize and be competitive
in the region
– Need to protect right internationally
– Build good image and Social responsibility

13. The Indicator for Success of CMO
in Collecting Royalties in Thailand
Compare to Malaysia
• CMO
– Need clear legal identity
– Reduce conflict of Interest perceived by recording
companies
– Build good alignment with recording companies,
CMO, and composers
– Build of awareness campaign

14. The Indicator for Success of CMO
in Collecting Royalties in Thailand
Compare to Malaysia
• Users
– Build understanding
– Limit selective channel for Thai songs
• Thai composers:
– Build understanding
– Build solidarity to increase negotiation power with
recording companies

15. Conclusion
• The Policy maker should align and balance
all stakeholders within the operationalized
framework
• Mutual benefit of composers, recording
companies, and CMO should be enhanced
• Implementation should be at the macro level
both locally and internationally

16. Implications:
1.National Level
1.1 Provide guideline regarding law,
regulation and administration for policy
maker
1.2 Build national competitiveness by
recognizing composers’ right up to
2. Industrial Level
international practice
2.1 Internationalized music industry by enhancing C
2.2 Good governance of CMO by positioning NFP
3. Individual Level
3.1 Less users’ infringement by
obtaining CMO license
3.2 Fair incentive to composers

17. Future Research
• To what extent the Government should
control/supervise CMO
• Culture involved??
• CMO of performers?