This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.
Business News Legal Top Stories
FAC support government over term extension wrangling
By CMU Editorial | Published on Tuesday 31 March 2009
Talking of interesting, this is. While the UK’s Musicians’ Union joined with record label trade bodies BPI and AIM and recording royalties body PPL in criticising the government for blocking copyright extension proposals in Europe last week, even though they did so because British representatives didn’t think it provided a good enough deal for musicians, the recently launched Featured Artists Coalition has said our political representatives did the right thing.
As previously reported, there was disappointment in much of the British music industry on Friday when a meeting of the EU’s Committee Of Permanent Representatives failed to pass the current draft of the European proposals to extend the recording copyright term from its current fifty years. It failed because the UK’s reps, while in favour of some kind of extension, disagreed with much of the rest of Europe over plans for a special ‘session fund’ which would give artists and session musicians an automatic right to a bigger cut of any royalties that come in after fifty years.
Currently said fund would only apply to recordings already in existence when the extended term becomes law, but the UK wants the increase of royalties to artists at fifty years to be a permanent measure that will apply to all future recordings too. As a result it refused to approve the proposals as they currently stand, stopping them from passing on to the decision-making EU Council Of Ministers. Although in theory just a delay in the proceedings, some worry that the proposal will now not be passed before the European Elections in June, which will in turn push any chance of copyright extension back months, maybe years.
The MU and PPL, both of whom represent some of the musicians the UK government would argue it is trying to help by pushing for an extension of the fund system, criticised ministers on Friday, saying that said musicians were in favour of the proposals as they currently stood, and that our reps had therefore jeopardised the passing of the whole term extension proposals by misrepresenting British musicians on the fund issue.
But the Featured Artists Coalition begged to differ yesterday, saying it supported the British government in its bid to secure a better deal for artists, over labels, as part of any copyright term extension. The announcement is perhaps unsurprising, given that the FAC last week said it was of the opinion that, while the copyright term on recordings should be extended, the rights should be returned to the artist at fifty years. Although that is unlikely to happen, the UK’s efforts to improve the deal for artists post-fifty years – and there is also talk of a ‘use it or lose it’ system to force labels to make sure fifty year old recordings are publicly available online, otherwise they lose the copyright – were likely to appeal to the new Coalition.
Plus, it being a new body, FAC officials haven’t themselves been involved in the current negotiations that have led to the current proposals being discussed at the EU council meeting last week, and therefore have less emotional attachment to them – they are willing to wait if they reckon it will deliver artists a better deal.
In a statement issued yesterday, the Coalition said: “Under the proposals voted down on Friday, record companies would simply gain another 45 years of ownership, entrenching the terms of record contracts signed in an analogue age. Historically, record companies took an average of 85% of the price of a sound recording because they had to manufacture and distribute physical product. Although the internet has made this no longer necessary, deals are still being signed under the old model and artists are being offered royalty rates of 15% of the price of a digital download. While this might sound a lot, the reality is that through a range of discounts and deductions this 15% is dramatically reduced to only a few pence at best”.
They continued: “Owning our rights would enable artists to negotiate new deals with record labels and other users of music that would reflect the true costs of digital distribution. We would also be able to decide when our music can be used for free and when we should expect remuneration. Furthermore, the amount of catalogue that major rights holders have digitised is shocking, with one major record label admitting that only 30% of what is in their vaults has been digitised. If this is the case for other major rights holders then returning rights to artists would allow the remaining 70% of catalogues to be brought out into the daylight, providing consumers with greater access to a wider range of music”.
