Collective Management of Copyright

Licensing is one of the essential means of exploiting the monetary value of a musical work, and yet it is an area fraught with many issues and transactional costs which make it a difficult process for individuals and organizations. Many issues in music licensing arise from the legal complexity (e.g., national and international copyright law), business complexity (authentication, tracking, accounting, etc.), value web complexity (transparency of relationships among stakeholders), and technical complexity (e.g., establishing a global repertoire database for music, sufficient metadata standards) of working with music. Then, in addition to these issues, there are specific transactional costs (identification, negotiation, monitoring, and enforcement) associated with the licensing process. To mitigate the complexity and transactional costs associated with music and the licensing process, researchers and technologists have been investigating how new technologies and design models from the ...

Copyright Collective Management is a cornerstone of the global music industry. It has proven effective in facilitating and balancing the interests of creators/copyright owners, businesses, and users, especially in cases involving multiple creators/copyright owners, widespread music usage, and a large number of users, which renders individual song or user-based licensing inefficient. Under this system, Collective Management Organizations (CMOs) are formed by groups of creators/copyright owners. CMOs act as intermediaries, granting licenses, collecting royalties from users, and distributing royalties to copyright owners. Furthermore, CMOs in different countries establish networks and operate under common standard principles to ensure that copyrighted works receive compensation when used across borders.

Thailand has consistently faced challenges in collecting public performance royalties for music since 1999, with as many as 30 public performance royalty collection organizations, leading to economic inefficiency.

This article examines the legal frameworks of copyright collective management in various countries (France, Germany, Japan, South Korea, the United Kingdom, India, Singapore, and Malaysia). It finds that countries employing the civil law system emphasize government oversight and not-for-profit organizational structures, while common law countries tend to adopt market-driven approaches with less government regulation. In all countries, the issues of governance and transparency in the operations of copyright management organizations are considered of paramount importance by governments.

Currently, Thailand lacks a clear legal framework. Therefore, this study proposes five key reform directions: (1) Define CMOs legally as organizations that manage the rights of multiple copyright owners, facilitate licensing for users, and distribute royalties to owners. (2) Align Thailand's CMO system with international standards, establishing CMOs based on types of copyrighted works and mandating connections with international organizations. (3) Apply the German model, allowing for both not-for-profit organizational structures, such as social enterprises, and for-profit limited company structures, with all organizational forms required to comply with points (1) and (2) above. (4) Implement the "Good Practice Guidelines for Collective Management Organizations" developed by the World Intellectual Property Organization as a guideline for organizational oversight. (5) Establish a committee to oversee CMO governance and transparency, adapting the South Korean model. Implementing these reforms will help Thailand create a transparent, efficient, and fair copyright management system, fostering sustainable growth in the music industry and preparing it for the global market.

This paper examines the implications for European music culture of the European Union's (EU) Digital Single Market strategy. It focuses on the regulatory framework being created for the management of copyright policy, and in particular the role played by collective management organisations (CMOs or collecting societies). One of the many new opportunities created by digitalisation has been the music streaming services. These depend on consumers being able to access music wherever they are, but such a system runs counter to the management of rights on a national basis and through collecting organisations which act as monopolies within their own territories. The result has been 'geo-blocking'. The EU has attempted to resolve this problem in a variety of ways, most recently in a Directive designed to reform the CMOs. In this paper, we document these various efforts, showing them to be motivated by a deep-seated and persisting belief in the capacity of 'competition' to resolve problems that, we argue, actually lie elsewherein copyright policy itself. The result is that the EU's intervention fails to address its core concern and threatens the diversity of European music culture by rewarding those who are already commercially successful.

Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.

Despite the increasing international integration of intellectual property (IP), national laws and structures for implementing rights in music continue to vary, for better or for worse, in ways that matter to musicians and other copyright stakeholders. This article draws on oral history and archival data to examine one such variation. Where most countries have only one copyright collecting society for musical authors, there are two in Turkey (MESAM and MSG). IP experts and administrators blame competition or lack of coordination between the two societies for a host of problems, including complicating the processes of performing rights licensing and royalty distribution. Analyzing the origin story of the second collecting society through the lens of Anna Tsing’s influential concept of “friction,” I highlight the social and cultural dynamics that complicate the ongoing global integration of IP and the general development of structures for enforcing IP rights in music.

This Year, the Ministry of Culture, Arts, and Sports in Tanzania introduced "The Copyright and Neighboring Rights (Collective Management Organizations) Regulations, 2023." These regulations are specifically aimed at governing Collective Management Organizations (CMOs) in the country. CMOs play a vital role in managing and administering copyright and neighboring rights on behalf of creators, authors, performers, and rights holders. They are responsible for collecting and distributing royalties, granting licenses, monitoring the usage of copyrighted works, and advocating for the rights of creators. These regulations seek to ensure transparency, fairness, and accountability in the management of intellectual property rights within Tanzania.
Here is a brief of its contents....

, Elsevier. I am coming from a publishing background and am a little confused about models for collective management organizations ("CMOs"). The way that I think about the continental European models is that it is typically, at least for publishing, based on a statutory right to authorize and derive some revenue from activity taking place in the territory. I think we heard about going from territory to repertoire in the music space. But I think in publishing, it is still mostly territorial, and it is still mostly about the statutory mandates that are provided by law, and that obviously seems like a very different model. My impression was that there was a collective model that was more of a singular model, and at least in publishing, I still see that there are two very different regimes, which, as we heard in the Spanish music scenario, give very different results, and I just wondered if you could comment about that. Daniel Gervais: Thanks, Mark. Your question really seems to focus on Europe as an example. First of all, repertory and territory are two different things, in my paper at least. Repertory is the bundle of works or rights that are licensed, whereas territory is the footprint of the license. 1 What was going on in Europe was that if you publish a book in one of the twenty-seven member states, you cannot really prevent it is circulation. 2 So, even if you have given territorial rights, it is going to be essentially impossible to enforce those rights as a matter of exhaustion within the European Union. Exhaustion rules are not set internationally. Exhaustion basically means once you have printed a book or journal and put it on the market in a particular country with your authorization, then the question is: can another country consider that that particular book is authorized in this other territory because it is a legal copy but not made for this other country? Within the European Union, again, the rule is: one territory. Now, some countries have so called international exhaustion, so that would trump a contract in which you are trying to create an exclusive right because that country is allowed to consider that the book that you have published and put on the market legally in country A is legal in their country and in their territory. Territory is complicated; the default rule of the Berne

Das von Prof. Dr. Ernst E. Hirsch entworfene "Gesetz über geistige und künstlerische Werke" (FSEK) trat 1952 in der Türkei in Kraft und ist bis heute gültig. Die technologischen Entwicklungen des letzten Vierteljahrhunderts und die Beitrittsverhandlungen der Türkei mit der Europäischen Union haben zu Änderungen und Ergänzungen des Gesetzes über geistige und künstlerische Werke geführt. 

Das Interesse an geistigem Eigentum und die Bedeutung des Immaterialgüterrechts haben in der Türkei aufgrund gesellschaftlicher Veränderungen zugenommen. Die Schaffung von Fachgerichten, die Einrichtung von Lehrstühlen für Immaterialgüterrecht an Universitäten, die Zunahme von Monographien zum Immaterialgüterrecht, die Aufnahme der Tätigkeit von Verwertungsgesellschaften und deren zunehmende Bekanntheit in der Öffentlichkeit sind nur einige dieser Entwicklungen. All dies hat zweifellos dazu beigetragen, die Gesellschaft für Fragen des geistigen Eigentums zu sensibilisieren.

Die Türkei hat mehr als 85 Millionen Einwohner, und es ist bekannt, dass die in den letzten Jahren in der Türkei produzierten Fernsehserien - trotz einiger kontroverser Diskussionen - zu den meistgesehenen Fernsehserien von Südamerika über Europa, den Balkan, den Kaukasus und den Nahen Osten gehören.  Dies wird noch deutlicher, wenn man bedenkt, dass die Türkei nach Hollywood der zweitgrößte Exporteur von Fernsehserien ist. Der Exportwert dieser Serien wird auf bis zu 600 Millionen Dollar geschätzt.

Darüber hinaus haben digitale Plattformen (Netflix, Disneyplus, Amazon Prime usw.), die ihre Dienste in der Türkei anbieten, sich auf türkische Film- und Fernsehproduktionen konzentrieren und diese Produktionen ihren Zuschauern zur Verfügung stellen, dazu beigetragen, dass das ausländische Interesse an der türkischen Film- und Fernsehindustrie in den letzten Jahren zugenommen hat. Dieses Interesse hat auch zu einer erhöhten Nachfrage ausländischer Rechtsexperten nach Informationen über das türkische Urheberrecht geführt. Der Verfasser hat selbst an den Verträgen solcher Serienproduktionen oder Kinofilme mitgewirkt und dabei festgestellt, dass die Anwendung türkischen Rechts in solchen Verträgen häufig von den Parteien vereinbart wird.

Andererseits führen die mehr als 5 Millionen in Deutschland lebenden Menschen türkischer Herkunft und die Millionen deutscher Staatsbürger, die jedes Jahr in der Türkei Urlaub machen, zu einem "Kulturaustausch" in diesem Bereich. Im Rahmen dieses Kulturaustausches rückt das Urheberrecht wieder in den Vordergrund. In diesem Zusammenhang wurden zwischen den Verwertungsgesellschaften in der Türkei und in Deutschland Gegenseitigkeitsverträge geschlossen, die die Auszahlung der in Deutschland eingenommenen Tantiemen an die Künstler in der Türkei ermöglichen.

Das vorliegende Buch "Türkisches Urheberrecht", das sich an Juristen richtet, wurde im Hinblick auf diese Bedürfnisse verfasst und ist das Ergebnis einer langjährigen Beschäftigung mit diesem Thema. Das Wissen, das ich im Rahmen meiner Lehrtätigkeit an den Universitäten in Istanbul und Antalya in Grund-, Magister- und Promotionsstudiengängen erworben habe, und die praktischen Erfahrungen aus den Gutachten, die ich als Rechtsanwalt und Sachverständiger an den Gerichten für geistiges Eigentum in Istanbul seit ca. 15 Jahren erstellt habe, bildeten die Grundlage für die Erstellung dieses Buches.

Das Buch stellt die theoretischen und rechtlichen Grundlagen des türkischen Urheberrechts dar, wobei die Bedürfnisse der Praxis nicht außer Acht gelassen werden und die Entscheidungen des türkischen Kassationsgerichtshofes, wo immer möglich, hervorgehoben werden. Insofern richtet sich das Buch an Richter, Staatsanwälte, Rechtsanwälte, Sachverständige und Rechtspraktiker, die Theorie und Praxis miteinander verbinden. 

Als Anhang ist das Gesetz Nr. 5846 über geistige und künstlerische Werke (Stand: Januar 2023) in deutscher Übersetzung beigefügt. 


Das Werk berücksichtigt die neuesten Entwicklungen in Gesetzgebung und Rechtsprechung bis Januar 2023.

Das Buch können Sie über die folgenden Links beziehen:

Shop Tredition (shop.tredition.com)
Amazon
Thalia

The existing economic theory of copyright collectives, or copyright management organizations (CMOs) is strongly focused on the benefits of sharing of transaction costs. Here, we appeal to the contractual environment of CMOs to offer a different perspective. Copyright collectives form contracts at two principle points along the supply chain. First, there are the contracts between the collective’s members themselves (the copyright holders), for distribution of the collective’s income. And second there are the licensing contracts that the collective signs with users of the repertory. Using standard economic theory, the paper argues that there are significant efficiency benefits from having copyrights managed as an aggregate repertory, rather than individually, based on risk-pooling and risk-sharing through the contracts between the members themselves. Similarly, there are also aggregation benefits (at least in terms of the profit of the CMO) of licensing only the entire repertory, rath...

The existing economic theory of copyright collectives, or copyright management organizations (CMOs) is strongly focused on the benefits of sharing of transaction costs. Here, we appeal to the contractual environment of CMOs to offer a different perspective. Copyright collectives form contracts at two principle points along the supply chain. First, there are the contracts between the collective's members themselves (the copyright holders) for distribution of the collective's income. And second there are the licensing contracts that the collective signs with users of the repertory. Using standard economic theory, the paper argues that there are significant efficiency benefits from having copyrights managed as an aggregate repertory, rather than individually, based on risk-pooling and risk-sharing through the contracts between the members themselves. Similarly, there are also aggregation benefits (at least in terms of the profit of the CMO) of licensing only the entire repertor...

Kolektivno ostvarivanje autorskog prava je vitalni deo korpusa modernih autorskopravnih sistema. Bez njega se ostvarivanje, pa i postojanje autorskog prava teško može zamisliti. Uprkos tome, u poslednje dve decenije sve se više postavlja pitanje njegove svrsishodnosti u današnjem dobu informacionog društva. Predmet istraživanja je upravo podrobnija analiza određenih aspekata interakcije sistema kolektivnog ostvarivanja autorskog prava i novih prilika u informacionom društvu. Analizom se želi postići dvostruki cilj: teorijski i praktični. Teorijski cilj je da se odgovori na sledeća dva pitanja:
I Da li je i pod kojim uslovima sistem kolektivnog ostvarivanja autorskog prava svrsishodan u savremenom dobu informacionog društva?
II Koji su mogući svrsishodni pravci daljeg razvoja sistema kolektivnog ostvarivanja autorskog prava u informacionom društvu?
Praktični cilj je da se pokaže kako dobijeni teorijski nalazi mogu da se iskoriste u kreiranju i planiranju nacionalne politike razvoja sistema kolektivnog ostvarivanja autorskog prava u informacionom društvu, i to na primeru Srbije.
Odgovori na dva teorijska pitanja i rešenje za praktični zadatak se, pri tome, traže kroz prizmu konstrukcije društvenog konteksta, koja je posebno determinisana za potrebe istraživanja, tako da je čine spoljašnji sloj – četiri grupe društvenih faktora (tehnološki, ekonomski, kulturološko-vrednosni i politički) i unutrašnji sloj – autorsko pravo.
Sprovedeno istraživanje je dalo naredne odgovore. Kolektivno ostvarivanje autorskog prava je i dalje svrsishodno u informacionom društvu, budući da još uvek postoji dovoljna društvena potreba za njegovim tradicionalnim ulogama i ono te svoje uloge može delotvorno da izvršava. Ipak, kako bi ostalo svrsishodno na duži rok, kolektivno ostvarivanje autorskog prava mora da se razvija, da se reformiše. Mogući svrsishodni pravci daljeg razvoja sistema kolektivnog ostvarivanja autorskog prava razlikuju se među državama zbog razlika koje postoje u njihovim lokalnim društvenim kontekstima. Oni se kreću od privremenog insistiranja na tradicionalnom ustrojstvu, preko umerene reforme (kao najuniverzalnije opcije), do fundamentalne reforme kolektivnog sistema. Na osnovu tih teorijskih nalaza, naposletku su pružene i smernice za planiranje politike daljeg razvoja sistema kolektivnog ostvarivanja autorskog prava u Srbiji.

While digitalization has opened up new opportunities for disseminating creative contents, issues related to the management of metadata (data to identify works and authors) impact the capacity of creators to obtain fair copyright-based remuneration. The reasons for incomplete or incorrect metadata are the lack of properly assigned metadata, of interoperability, and of  authoritative sources. This creates difficulties in the distribution of revenue to creators, editors and other rightholders, missed licensing opportunities and recognition for authors, as well as increased risks of unauthorized use. As problems of metadata directly impact digital creation, digital distribution and access to creative works, cultural policy has a role to play in their resolution. Any long-term and efficient solution will require the support of the artistic community. For these reasons, the issuesrelated to metadata and the data infrastructure around creative works should also be discussed in the context ...

The existing economic theory of copyright collectives, or copyright management organizations (CMOs) is strongly focused on the benefits of sharing of transaction costs. Here, we appeal to the contractual environment of CMOs to offer a different perspective. Copyright collectives form contracts at two principle points along the supply chain. First, there are the contracts between the collective’s members themselves (the copyright holders), for distribution of the collective’s income. And second there are the licensing contracts that the collective signs with users of the repertory. Using standard economic theory, the paper argues that there are significant efficiency benefits from having copyrights managed as an aggregate repertory, rather than individually, based on risk-pooling and risk-sharing through the contracts between the members themselves. Similarly, there are also aggregation benefits (at least in terms of the profit of the CMO) of licensing only the entire repertory, rath...

The existing economic theory of copyright collectives, or copyright management organizations (CMOs) is strongly focused on the benefits of sharing of transaction costs. Here, we appeal to the contractual environment of CMOs to offer a different perspective. Copyright collectives form contracts at two principle points along the supply chain. First, there are the contracts between the collective's members themselves (the copyright holders) for distribution of the collective's income. And second there are the licensing contracts that the collective signs with users of the repertory. Using standard economic theory, the paper argues that there are significant efficiency benefits from having copyrights managed as an aggregate repertory, rather than individually, based on risk-pooling and risk-sharing through the contracts between the members themselves. Similarly, there are also aggregation benefits (at least in terms of the profit of the CMO) of licensing only the entire repertor...

This article offers a normative analysis of key blockchain technology concepts from the perspective of copyright law. Some features of blockchain technologies-scarcity, trust, transparency, decentralized public records and smart contracts-seem to make this technology compatible with the fundamentals of copyright. Authors can publish works on blockchain creating a quasi-immutable record of initial ownership, and encode 'smart' contracts to license the use of works. Remuneration may happen on online distribution platforms where the smart contracts reside. In theory, such an automated setup allows for the private ordering of copyright. Blockchain technology, like Digital Rights Management 20 years ago, is thus presented as an opportunity to reduce market friction, and increase both licensing efficiency and the autonomy of creators. Yet, some of the old problems remain. The article examines the differences between new, smartcontract-based private ordering regime and the fundamental components of copyright law, such as exceptions and limitations, the doctrine of exhaustion, restrictions on formalities, the public domain and fair remuneration.

Collective management organizations (CMOs) in China have been in a rapid development and made a great progress in the past 20 years. Yet, there remain a number of issues that should be addressed. This note surveys the current practice of Chinese CMOs and, a number of important issues, and suggests possible solutions to ameliorate the situation. The first issue, namely, the relation between CMOs and their members, is particularly visible in the issue of CMO's standing to sue. The second issue, namely relations with nonmembers, has caused a recent litigation explosion against users of collective managed works. The third issue, the abuse of monopoly position, is mainly a sign of the need for an appropriate regulatory regime for CMOs. It is important for China to draw on the successful experience and learn lessons from the best CMOs and regulatory models in other countries. Because of the relatively short history of collective management in China, the improvement of CMOs will likely be a gradual institutional process characteristic by bold experiments, as when making one's way across a deep river.

Our copyright system still bears the imprint of its original design. In 1790, reproduction and distribution were expensive, and Congress chose to give authors narrow, short-lived, alienable rights in the works they created and to encourage them to transfer those rights to distributors in 2011] THE LANDSCAPE OF COLLECTIVE MANAGEMENT SCHEMES 425 compared to the full copyright term, may nonetheless require a full transfer of the author's copyright. 9 There may thus be daylight between authors, on the one hand, and those to whom their rights are assigned, on the other, when it comes to the role of CMOs. However, as I explain below, that gap may be closing in the online environment. Are U.S. CMOs inherently less collective than their foreign counterparts? There is some evidence to the contrary. Performing Rights Organizations ("PROs") offer services beyond just licensing and collection. 10 For example, they provide songwriting workshops or awards to celebrate successful authors and publishers. 11 Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. ("CCC") also offers a variety of services to individual authors. 12 CMOs can also fund test cases, which may or may not be purely economic in nature. 13 Yet, the fundamentally economic model under which CMOs operate in the United States, and the worldview that informs it, are likely to limit any of Dr. Ficsor's "collectivized elements." The U.S. PRO model is further hemmed in by antitrust rules, and that model's first aim is to eliminate or compensate for any monopoly rent. 14 Cheaper is better, some might say-though apparently this is not for rights holders themselves to return for publication and, sometimes, a little money. Distribution is no longer so expensive. Copyright rights are no longer so narrow. Copyright terms are no longer short. Copyrights are still, however, alienable, and the system still encourages creators to convey all of their rights to distributors in return for dissemination and, sometimes, a little money. The justifications for concentrating copyrights in distributors' hands make less sense today, when copyrights last lifetimes and cover myriad uses that might intrigue different sorts of distributors at different times, and when mass distribution no longer requires massive capital investment.

The potential implications of blockchain technology have turned into a highly popular stream of research topics among scholars in many business-related communities, such as supply chain management, marketing, finance, tourism, and, quite obviously, information systems. This is just the most recent phase in an evolution that started decades ago with the development of seminal technologies, such as linked timestamping, digital cash, proof of work, byzantine fault tolerance, public keys as identities, and smart contracts (Narayanan & Clark, 2017). It was Bitcoin that combined many of these seminal concepts and illustrated that the digital transfer of value (i.e., the solution of the so-called double spending problem) is actually feasible (Nakamoto, 2008). In the years following the release of the Bitcoin core client (the first Bitcoin block was mined on January 3, 2019), the business and economic potential of blockchain was more or less ignored. The first publications that finally outlined these potentials (Narayanan & Clark, 2017; Swan, 2015; Tapscott & Tapscott, 2016) triggered a hype that, more often than not, praised blockchain technology as a silver bullet for numerous business problems. In the months to follow, the emergence of numerous fraudulent business models that frequently operated in a legal gray zone and used blockchain technology as a fundraising mechanism through so-called ICOs (Initial Coin Offerings) have contributed to shaping the opinion of managers and the general public, leading many to question the practical applicability of blockchain. In order to alleviate this situation and be able to objectively assess blockchain use cases, researchers have suggested rigorous frameworks and procedures. Several of these procedures depend heavily on a thorough understanding of the underlying technology and its characteristics (Fridgen et al., 2018; Treiblmaier, 2019). The recent advances in blockchain technology, however, have led to an emergence of numerous types of distributed ledgers (DLs). The term DL is broader than blockchain and

This text will analyse how the remuneration for authors and owners of related rights in music, film and similar entertainment industries should be determined. Since they can exercise their rights individually and collectively, the systems and criteria for setting the amounts of remuneration in individual and collective management will be examined. This analysis will be put in a traditional and in the online context.

This paper examines the implications for European music culture of the European Union’s (EU) Digital Single Market strategy. It focuses on the regulatory framework being created for the management of copyright policy, and in particular the role played by collective management organisations (CMOs or collecting societies). One of the many new opportunities created by digitalisation has been the music streaming services. These depend on consumers being able to access music wherever they are, but such a system runs counter to the management of rights on a national basis and through collecting organisations which act as monopolies within their own territories. The result has been ‘geo-blocking’. The EU has attempted to resolve this problem in a variety of ways, most recently in a Directive designed to reform the CMOs. In this paper, we document these various efforts, showing them to be motivated by a deep-seated and persisting belief in the capacity of ‘competition’ to resolve problems t...

This paper discusses whether a compensation system (CS) for recorded music - endowing private Internet subscribers with the right to download and use works in return for a fee - would be welfare increasing. It reports on the results of a discrete choice experiment conducted with a representative sample of the Dutch population consisting of 4,986 participants. Under some conservative assumptions, we find that applied only to recorded music, a mandatory CS could increase the welfare of rights holders and users in the Netherlands by over €600 million per year (over €35 per capita). This far exceeds current rights holder revenues from the market of recorded music of ca. €144 million per year. A monthly CS fee of ca. €1.74 as a surcharge on Dutch Internet subscriptions would raise the same amount of revenues to rights holders as the current market for recorded music. With a voluntary CS, the estimated welfare gains to users and rights holders are even greater for CS fees below €20 on the...

This paper discusses whether a copyright compensation system (CCS) for recorded music-endowing private Internet subscribers with the right to download and use works in return for a fee-would be welfare increasing. It reports on the results of a discrete choice experiment conducted with a representative sample of the Dutch population consisting of 4986 participants. Under some conservative assumptions, we find that applied only to recorded music, a mandatory CCS could increase the welfare of rights holders and users in the Netherlands by over €600 million per year (over €35 per capita). This far exceeds current rights holder revenues from the market of recorded music of ca. €144 million per year. A monthly CCS fee of ca. €1.74 as a surcharge on Dutch Internet subscriptions would raise the same amount of revenues to rights holders as the current market for recorded music. With a voluntary CCS, the estimated welfare gains to users and rights holders are even greater for CCS fees below €20 on the user side. A voluntary CCS would also perform better in the long run, as it could retain a greater extent of market coordination. The results of our choice experiment indicate that a well-designed CCS for recorded music would simultaneously make users and rights holders better off. This result holds even if we correct for frequently observed rates of overestimation in contingent valuation studies.

This article aims to provide a conceptual framework for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to evaluate the appropriation of blockchain technology for their business needs and challenges. This conceptual framework aims to respond to the problem of increasing speculations surrounding the blockchain that is considered to be an absolute and innovative solution to many business-related problems. However, this argument might not be realistic for SMEs despite this assumption. The main argument of the article is that SMEs should be skeptical while evaluating the appropriation of this technology for their business needs and they should follow a tailored approach whilst adopting it. Otherwise, the likelihood is high that a short-term and unstructured knowledge management process to adopt blockchain will end up with a waste of resources. The present paper conceptualizes an appropriation framework within nine factors namely, reduction of costs, internalization, digital representation of ...

Strowel's courses cover copyright, design and media law, as well as the interface between intellectual property and competition. Belgian avocat since 1988, he works as Of Counsel in the Brussels office of Covington & Burling LLP, where he focuses on digital copyright and trademark issues. Prof. Strowel is a panelist for the WIPO and ".be" domain name resolution procedures.

Collective management is one option within the copyright system that requires or allows rights holders to administer their rights through a Collective Management Organization (CMO)
Managing every single prospect of a certain work for the performers designers authors musicians and other professionals was so frustrating and takes massive cost and energy, due to this in dispensable fact those professionals were subjugated to authorize their work under COM to protect their works from fraud, failure and plagiarism as well as copy right.

This working document is a contribution to the Consultation on a European Strategy for Data conducted by the European Commission between 19 February and 31 May 2020. It is the result of an extensive collaboration with creative enterprises, digital service providers, industry associations, research institutes and government agencies. These conceptual notes are published here to nurture the ongoing conversation.

Intellectual Property gives rights to creators of intellectual or artistic work. The rights are worthless unless they can be enforced properly. Since the basic idea of Intellectual Property law is to monetize the rights, it is important that the owner of the rights get the monetary benefits. The rights owner can take the enforcement or he can use a third party, a specialized entity called Collective Society which would do that job for the owner.
Intellectual Property Act of Sri Lanka included provisions for establishing Collective Societies and for their administration. There are few Collective Societies operational to this day. However, their effectiveness in fulfilling their objectives is highly debated. The Act also causes ambiguity to their operation and the regulation under IP Act further confuses their role. One of the biggest handicaps seems to be the vagueness of the relationship between the owner of copyrights, Collective Society and the user of the copyrights. This vaguely defined relationship would cause confusion in the parties and hinder their effective operation and collaboration. So in essence, even though the Act has passed more than one and half decades ago, regulations being implemented for the payment for use of copyrights and establishing several Collective Societies their practical effectiveness is limited if not non-existent.
In addressing this deficiency, this report tries to look to comparative jurisdictions in India and the European Union, especially the case law in India where the functionality and limitations of a Collective Society are illustrated. Certain recommendations are also made ranging from changes in the Intellectual Property legislation to raising awareness in the business community and general public on the rights of artists. Arming Collective Societies to deal with the changes in technology and using it to their advantage is also explored as a crucial progressive step.
A Qualitative research method is adopted in this paper. Scholarly articles written by academics in collective management of Intellectual Property rights are analyzed. The research will also conduct a comparative study of Intellectual Property legislation; policies, regulation, and case law adopted by Sri Lanka and other jurisdictions.

Seen as perhaps not the most exciting part of the music industry, collective management societies (CMOs) provide a practical service, which aims at significantly reducing rights’ administration costs. Nonetheless, many harsh judgments of the manner in which CMOs operate have been given. This article analyses some of the pros and cons of CMOs and takes on a case study from Bulgaria to illustrate when management of rights risks becoming mismanagement. By unravelling the potential of CMOs, the article argues that these organisations presently find themselves before a new opportunity of reviving their crucial management role. The focus in this respect is on the newly adopted Directive 2019/970 on copyright and related rights and in particular, Article 17, which introduces a licensing obligation of online intermediaries. The article argues that CMOs may be key in solving the convoluted obligations of the new Directive. In order to do so, though, now more than ever it is imperative that they become better mediators and negotiators.
Following the introduction in Part I, Part II turns to the significant benefits of CMOs. Part III highlights some competition law issues that emerge whenever CMOs lose control and in that sense underlines the inherent monopolistic nature of CMOs. The focus here is on the abuse of dominant position taking on a case study from Bulgaria in which the relationship between the Bulgarian National Radio (BNR) and the collective society responsible for the authors’ rights (Musicautor) was at stake. Part IV turns to the new challenge for CMOs in the face of the licensing obligations in Article 17 of Directive 2019/790, which if executed in a clever manner could indeed be the new horizon for CMOs. The last part (V) concludes the discussion by stressing the delicate position CMOs occupy in the balance between users and rightholders.

This article offers a normative analysis of key blockchain technology concepts from the perspective of copyright law. Some features of blockchain technologies-scarcity, trust, transparency, decentralized public records and smart contracts-seem to make this technology compatible with the fundamentals of copyright. Authors can publish works on blockchain creating a quasi-immutable record of initial ownership, and encode 'smart' contracts to license the use of works. Remuneration may happen on online distribution platforms where the smart contracts reside. In theory, such an automated setup allows for the private ordering of copyright. Blockchain technology, like Digital Rights Management 20 years ago, is thus presented as an opportunity to reduce market friction, and increase both licensing efficiency and the autonomy of creators. Yet, some of the old problems remain. The article examines the differences between new, smart-contract-based private ordering regime and the fundamental components of copyright law, such as exceptions and limitations, the doctrine of exhaustion, restrictions on formalities , the public domain and fair remuneration.

This book chapter considers the defining characteristics of and functions of collective management organizations (CMOs) and proposes a theoretical model to understand the role that collective management plays in the application of copyright, especially to digital uses.

In this paper we discuss the often-mentioned possibility to use DLTs in reducing government corruption and increasing transparency, as it could be applied to the specific Mexican context, identifying the most propitious areas of implementation with preliminary analysis of barriers, opportunities, and keys to successful implementation.

The amount of piracy in the streaming digital content in general and the music industry in specific is posing a real challenge to digital content owners. This paper presents a DRM solution to monetizing, tracking and controlling online streaming content cross platforms for IP enabled devices. The paper benefits from the current advances in Blockchain and cryptocurrencies. Specifically, the paper presents a Global Music Asset Assurance (GoMAA) digital currency and presents the iMediaStreams Blockchain to enable the secure dissemination and tracking of the streamed content. The proposed solution provides the data owner the ability to control the flow of information even after it has been released by creating a secure, self-installed, cross platform reader located on the digital content file header. The proposed system provides the content owners' options to manage their digital information (audio, video, speech, etc.), including the tracking of the most consumed segments, once it is release. The system benefits from token distribution between the content owner (Music Bands), the content distributer (Online Radio Stations) and the content consumer(Fans) on the system blockchain.

Capítulo do livro: https://karisma.org.co/descargar/la-gestion-colectiva-ante-el-desafio-digital-en-america-latina/

As investigações de 2012 do Senado sobre o sistema de gestão coletiva no Brasil, o processo administrativo em sede de defesa de concorrência que resultou em condenação do ECAD, as entrevistas realizadas com compositores, intérpretes e advogados, a percepção geral de usuários de música, todos apontam para a questão que se repete pelos países da América Latina: falta de transparência no sistema de gestão coletiva dos direitos autorais. O sujeito dessa transparência é ora o associado, ora o usuário, ora o público em geral. Este ensaio busca mapear as demandas por transparência do sistema, e investiga as suas diversas fundamentações, tanto mais complexas por ser a gestão coletiva uma atividade que foge a classificações fáceis. O conceito é central para a disputa atual, no Supremo Tribunal Federal brasileiro, pela constitucionalidade ou não da Lei n. 12.853/2013, que regulamenta o sistema de gestão coletiva, e as discussões sobre sua aplicação têm se enriquecido nesse processo.

The passage of the 1909 U.S. Copyright Act was embedded in a significant period of evolution for international copyright law. Just a year before, the Berne Convention had been revised for the second time. This Berlin (1908) Act of the Convention in remembered in particular for the introduction of a broad prohibition against formalities concerning the “exercise and enjoyment” of copyright. 1909 was also just one year before a new copyright bill was brought before the British Parliament. This Copyright Act, finally adopted in December 1911 and which entered into force in July 1, 1912, greatly influenced laws in many countries, including Australia, Canada, Israel, New Zealand, Nigeria, and South Africa.

In this Essay, I situate the Berlin Act within the framework of the evolution of the Berne Convention from 1886 until the current 1971 Act and explore the role played by the United States, not as much as a participant in the Berlin Conference but by the way its actions influenced the actions of others. To this end, I discuss sequentially the emergence and evolution of the Berne Convention, and then two areas worthy of deeper analyses when considered against the backdrop of the 1909 Act, namely the prohibition against formalities and the rule imposing retroactive application of the Convention.

To balance the grant of exclusive rights to authors with the state’s interest in promoting the progress of science, America’s initial copyright statutes included a set of state-imposed, formalities that authors and other copyright holders were required to comply with in order to obtain and maintain copyright protection. The formalities served several functions, including public notification of the copyright claim. Requiring registration generated publicly available information on “claimed” works that users could consult in order to obtain metadata. When the United States joined the Berne Convention in 1989, mandatory formalities were essentially made optional. This Article reviews the constraints imposed by the Berne Convention and suggests that instead of focusing on ways to impose work registration, the system would accomplish its goals and fulfill its mission better by emphasizing recordation of transfers.