Copyright Review Commission Report - ICT Law and Regulation ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

PRS (UK)SPRE (FRANCE)SUISA(SWITZERLAND)IPRS (INDIA)SAMROBetween60% and70%6%81% to90%8%Music is lessthan 15% of thetotal broadcast1%Between70% and80%Between80% and90%7%8%91% to100%9%Between90% and100%9%8.2.2.1. SAMRO has an average rate of 3,25% for radio broadcasters, but the published tariffs are different.According to the published tariffs, SAMRO uses a sliding scale of between 1% and 10% in accordancewith music usage. For the purposes of this analysis, the average tariffs (of 3,25%) were used.8.2.2.2. The global norm is the sliding scale based on either the music usage or revenue generated.8.2.2.3. SAMRO ranks lowest when compared with the performance rights collecting societies of the UK,Switzerland and India (as per Table 5). Most local music radio stations allocate about 70% of their airspaceto music and generate more than R30 million in revenues per annum. Comparable figures are reflected inTable 6 at 70%.Table 6: Radio Stations Tariffs for Radio Stations with at least 70% Music Airspace and at least R30 millionAnnual RevenuePRS (UK) SUISA (Switzerland) IPRS (India) SAMRO5,25% 7% 7% 3,25%8.2.2.4. Based on Table 6, it is clear that SAMRO rate at 3,25% compares unfavourably to 7% for IPRS, 5,25% forPRS and 7% for SUISA and 6% for SPRE. Talk radio stations such as Radio 702 and SAFM would benefitunder the SUISA model because they would pay only 1%. The SPRE and SUISA tariffs relate to bothperformance rights and sound recording rights. Without taking into account the sound recording rights, it isclear that SAMRO’s tariffs are at least 3% below those of the other collecting societies.- 60 -
8.2.3 Commercial Radio Stations – Sound RecordingsTable 7: Radio Stations Tariffs for Sound Recording RightsPPL (UK) SPRE (FRANCE) PPL (INDIA) SAMPRANet BroadcastingRevenueRatesNetBroadcastingRevenueRatesLess thanR7,3 million2%Up toR5,1 million4%Flat rate of 2%based on theadvertising revenueThe tariffs are notavailable since thematter was referred tothe Copyright TribunalBetweenR7,3 million andR14,6 million3%BetweenR5,1 million andR30,6 million5%Above R14.6million5%BetweenR30,6 millionandR132,6 million6%R132,6 millionand above7%8.2.3.1. For sound recordings in Table 7, PPL (UK’s sound recording collecting society) charges 5% for all radiostations generating revenues in excess of R14 million. The Indian PPL has a flat rate of 2% for all radiobroadcasters. There is no separate charge in respect of the sound recordings for France and Switzerland.The royalties collected by SPRE (with regard to France) are shared by all relevant role players(composers, songwriters, publishers, music producers and performers). The same principle applies toSwitzerland.8.2.4 Consolidated Costs for Commercial Radio Stations – Performance Rights Plus SoundRecordingsTable 8: Combined Radio Stations Tariffs with 70% Music Airspace or at least R30 Million Annual RevenueDetailsPerformance RightsSound RecordingRightsTotal Liability(Sum of bothRights)UKCollecting society PRS PPLRates 5,25% 5% 10,25%SWITZERLANDCollecting societySUISA(inclusive for bothrights)No separate chargeRates 7% - 7%- 61 -
Page 2 and 3:
TABLE OF CONTENTSLIST OF ABBREVIATI
Page 4 and 5:
11.8 RECOMMENDATIONS ..............
Page 6 and 7:
LIST OF TABLESTable 1: Cases of Non
Page 8 and 9:
NORMOSPsPOSAPPLPPL (India)ProLitter
Page 10 and 11:
These problems are addressed in the
Page 12 and 13:
xxi.The report considers developmen
Page 14 and 15:
1.3.8. Determine whether all money
Page 16 and 17: 1.4.9. The CRC derived considerable
Page 18 and 19: 2.3 SUBMISSION BY THE DEPARTMENT OF
Page 20 and 21: Aspects of Intellectual Property Ri
Page 22 and 23: (1) Subject to the provisions of th
Page 24 and 25: Copyright Tribunal or an arbitrator
Page 26 and 27: society, the South African Recordin
Page 28 and 29: 3.2.14. With the liquidation of SAR
Page 30 and 31: the final rate or rates to be appli
Page 32 and 33: (a)that payment is to be made to th
Page 34 and 35: information as to their use to enab
Page 36 and 37: The WCT and WPPT oblige members to
Page 38 and 39: Once the handset technology changed
Page 40 and 41: 4.3.16. In 2009, in what was coined
Page 42 and 43: 4.4.6. In exchange for the above li
Page 44 and 45: operators are licensed by NORM to p
Page 46 and 47: 5.2 FUNCTIONING OF COLLECTING SOCIE
Page 48 and 49: the grant of licences. Article 17 o
Page 50 and 51: 6.1.3. The CRC’s assessment of th
Page 52 and 53: 6.3.3. SAMPRA should be given one y
Page 54 and 55: Corporate Governance GapsKing II Re
Page 56 and 57: King IIIPrincipleKing IIIRequiremen
Page 58 and 59: King IIIPrincipleKing IIIRequiremen
Page 60 and 61: 8 COLLECTION OF MUSIC ROYALTIES8.1
Page 62 and 63: 8.1.4.2. Needletime royalties are n
Page 64 and 65: 8.1.7.4. For the past five years, V
Page 68 and 69: DetailsPerformance RightsSound Reco
Page 70 and 71: 8.2.7 Comparative Study Performed b
Page 72 and 73: y a collecting society. A rights ho
Page 74 and 75: agency, its rights being derived fr
Page 76 and 77: Mr Robinson said DALRO assumed the
Page 78 and 79: 10.1.6. The distribution to publish
Page 80 and 81: 10.4.4. Most of the other collectin
Page 82 and 83: 10.6.3.4. South African English-lis
Page 84 and 85: 10.10 CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIPS BET
Page 86 and 87: 10.12.2. The Regulations should rec
Page 88 and 89: licence that the licensee comply wi
Page 90 and 91: 11.4.6. The details of ICASA’s ta
Page 92 and 93: RecommendationsTimelines for Recomm
Page 94 and 95: enterprises. There was a suggestion
Page 96 and 97: Copyright as it relates to copyrigh
Page 98 and 99: 13.4 DEPARTMENT OF ARTS AND CULTURE
Page 100 and 101: Table 28: Comparative Study’s Key
Page 102 and 103: KEY ITEMS BRAZIL FRANCE INDIA NORWA
Page 104 and 105: KEY ITEMS BRAZIL FRANCE INDIA NORWA
Page 106 and 107: about 30%, which is the highest amo
Page 108 and 109: 15.1.3. The Copyright Tribunal’s
Page 110 and 111: 15.1.20. Local music content requir
Page 112 and 113: for the selected artists. The outco
Page 114 and 115: King III Report by Institute of Dir
Page 116 and 117:
Paranagua Pedro, “Strategies to I
Page 118 and 119:
Copyright Amendment Act of 1984Copy
Page 120 and 121:
APPENDIX 1(B): SUMMARY OF ORAL REPR
Page 122 and 123:
Due to the fact that the existing c
Page 124 and 125:
Mr BrottelProtection of copyright m
Page 126 and 127:
1.1.3. LIST OF ENTITIES VISITED AND
Page 128 and 129:
In the 2009 Annual Report of ABRAMU
Page 130 and 131:
The implementation of this law led
Page 132 and 133:
ecordings. In respect of audio-visu
Page 134 and 135:
In 1995, ECAD distributed 72% of it
Page 136 and 137:
niches in the market to ensure fair
Page 138 and 139:
Proprietary rights allow authors to
Page 140 and 141:
International royalty distribution
Page 142 and 143:
3.2. Relevant LegislationsThe prese
Page 144 and 145:
IPRS uses the standard tariffs in r
Page 146 and 147:
Ad-hoc workshops on copyright are c
Page 148 and 149:
meaningful living out of their crea
Page 150 and 151:
4.1.3. LICENSING AND LEGAL REGIMESI
Page 152 and 153:
Ballet teachers; Teachers in the fi
Page 154 and 155:
It was founded in 1928 by the Norwe
Page 156 and 157:
6.2. STRUCTURE OF COLLECTING SOCIET
Page 158 and 159:
6.5. COLLECTION OF MUSIC ROYALTIEST
Page 160 and 161:
1957, when the Managing Director of
Page 162 and 163:
16.4.14 SWISSPERFORM: CHF4 millionI
Page 164 and 165:
Cross-border licensing of digital r
Page 166 and 167:
algorithm could be used to determin
Page 168 and 169:
Collecting societies in the UK all
Page 170 and 171:
APPENDIX 3: RECOMMENDATIONS BY MITT
Page 172 and 173:
1.PREAMBLEThe Music Industry Task T
Page 174 and 175:
The environment in which the music
Page 176 and 177:
3.1.3 IMPLEMENTATION AND ACCESSION
Page 178 and 179:
In this regard, the Minister should
Page 180 and 181:
3.5.6 OMBUDSMANThe music industry s
Page 182 and 183:
RECOMMENDATION 23:The MITT recommen
Page 184 and 185:
The MITT further recommends that DA
Page 186 and 187:
APPENDIX 4A: EXTRACTS FROM COPYRIGH
Page 188 and 189:
(f)(g)doing, in relation to an adap
Page 190 and 191:
(i)requiring notice of any intended
Page 192 and 193:
(b)any organization claiming to be
Page 194 and 195:
PERFORMERS’ PROTECTION ACTNO. 11
Page 196 and 197:
the parties may agree to refer the
Page 198 and 199:
- 192 -
Page 200 and 201:
- 194 -
Page 202 and 203:
- 196 -
Page 204 and 205:
- 198 -
Page 206 and 207:
ANNEXURE 5: COPY OF SARRAL’S CONT
Page 208 and 209:
- 202 -
Page 210 and 211:
ANNEXURE 6: SARRAL’S AUDIT REPORT
Page 212 and 213:
- 206 -
Page 214 and 215:
TERMS OF REFERENCESNO’SREQUIREMEN
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224:
- 218 -
show all

Copyright Review Commission Report - ICT Law and Regulation ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?