Tag Archives: Copyright review

Copyright law revision: work starts in the parliamentary committees

On 22 November 2017, the Federal Council presented its Message on the revision of the Federal Copyright Act (FCA), and referred the copyright bill (FCA-B) to the two houses of Parliament. Text by Vincent Salvadé

Copyright law revision: work starts in the parliamentary committees

Revision of Swiss copyright law: work has started in the Federal Palace in Berne. (Photo: Simon Zenger / Shutterstock.com)

The bill reflects the compromise reached by the AGUR12 II working group at the beginning of March 2017. Parliament has started working on the bill, and SUISA was invited to present its point of view on 12 April 2018 at a hearing organised by the Science, Education and Culture Committee of the National Council. SUISA also had the opportunity to state its views before the Legal Affairs Committee of the National Council, first in writing and then orally on 18 May 2018.

Each time, SUISA acted in association with Swisscopyright, the entity which brings together the five Swiss collective management societies in the field of copyright and neighbouring rights. SUISA started by underscoring that the main objective of Swisscopyright was to ensure fair remuneration for cultural creators, including in the digital age. For this reason, the five collective rights management societies supported the compromise achieved at AGUR12 II level and, consequently, the Federal Councilʼs proposal. However, the societies asked for changes in the provisions governing the new entitlement to remuneration for video on-demand (VoD) with a view to ensuring that the new regulations better reflect the AGUR12 II compromise and secure fair remuneration for creators.

1. General appraisal of the FCʼs bill

Swisscopyright welcomed the Federal Council’s intention to introduce an “extended collective licence” (Article 43 FCA-B). Collecting societies could thus grant blanket authorisations for certain uses, including on behalf of rightholders they do not contractually represent; this would foster cultural projects while assuring remuneration for entitled parties. The blanket authorisation would apply to uses which cannot be individually controlled by rightholders; collecting societies would act as an “insurance” (of a sort) for users. The extended collective licence is perfectly consistent with the function of a collective rights management society, which is to facilitate and simplify rights management for all stakeholders.

Generally speaking, Swisscopyright welcomes all the measures designed to improve collective rights management: according to the FCʼs proposal, users would be required to communicate their declarations to collecting societies in electronic form to facilitate automatic processing (Article 51 FCA-B); collecting societies would be authorised to exchange the data delivered by users (Article 51(1bis) FCA-B); accelerated tariff appeals procedure (Article 74(2) FCA-B); and the Federal Arbitration Commission in charge of tariffs would be permitted to hear witnesses (see draft of new Article 14(1) lit. g of the Administrative Procedure Act). These new rules are designed to increase efficiency, reduce management costs and ensure more money is available for distribution to cultural creators.

“Swisscopyright believes these new anti-piracy measures are necessary to foster legal offers ensuring fair remuneration for creators.”

Swisscopyright also supports the Federal Councilʼs proposals for new anti-piracy measures since they contribute to improving the situation. According to Article 39d FCA-B, platforms presenting significant piracy risks would be obligated to actively combat copyright infringements (stay down obligation). The possibility of processing data for criminal prosecution purposes (Article 77i FCA-B), must be included in the FCA since the Federal Supreme Court ruled that collecting information on pirates and hackers (in particular their IP addresses) is not currently admissible under the Law on Data Protection (ATF 136 II 508). Swisscopyright believes these new anti-piracy measures are necessary to foster legal offers ensuring fair remuneration for creators.

Swisscopyright accepted the proposed copyright exception for the use of works for scientific research (Article 24d FCA-B), but only in the context of the AGUR12 II compromise. The fact that – conversely to what had been proposed in the original draft in 2015 – this exception is not accompanied by a claim to remuneration is indeed problematic for rightholders in the literary field. Swisscopyright underscored that no further concessions to the scientific community would be accepted on the backs of cultural creators.

2. Right of remuneration for VoD

Online platforms making available feature films (cinema and TV) have replaced DVD rental. Whereas, under Article 13 FCA, authors and artists used to receive a share of DVD rental revenues, this is no longer the case for online availability. The revised legislation must ensure that authors and performing artists, as the primary creators of value, participate in this new economic model: Swisscopyright welcomed the introduction of a right to remuneration in Articles 13a and 35a FCA-B. The collecting societies underscored that the right to remuneration must be supplemental to the fees paid to the creators by producers (for the commissioning of works, the performances therein and the corresponding rights). The FCʼs proposal is not clear in this respect; Swisscopyright argues that the parliamentary debates must make it clear that the right to remuneration is supplemental to, and not in lieu of, such fees.

“The composers and publishers of film music entrust their rights to collective rights management societies like SUISA which act directly vis à vis the VoD platforms. The contractual system for music assures composers more favourable financial conditions than they would have under a statutory remuneration right.”

Moreover, the exclusion of music works from the new right to remuneration was an essential element of the AGUR 12 II compromise; regrettably, the FC has not included this exclusion in its proposal. Since the voluntary collective management model functions well in the music sector, we should come back to the solution advocated by AGUR12 II. The music and the audiovisual sector diverge significantly in this respect. The composers and publishers of film music entrust their rights to collective rights management societies like SUISA which act directly vis à vis the VoD platforms (alongside the aggregators who handle all other rights in the film). The contractual system for music assures composers more favourable financial conditions than they would have under a statutory remuneration right.

In the field of music, however, it is necessary to ensure that the revenues distributed by collecting societies are properly apportioned between the composer and the publisher. The composer must in any event receive an equitable share. Article 49(3) FCA already guarantees this for concerts, radio broadcasts and recordings. But this rule only applies to areas under federal regulation, and therefore not to VoD. As a result, Swisscopyright proposes rewording paragraph 5 of Article 13a FCA-B to stipulate the composerʼs right to a fair share of the voluntary collective management revenues, in line with SUISAʼs current practice.

The plenary debates in the National Council (expected in autumn) will show whether the parliamentary committees were sensitive to the argumentation put forward by Swisscopyright.

Related articles
Copyright Act Review: Authors and publishers must benefit more from the online exploitation of their worksCopyright Act Review: Authors and publishers must benefit more from the online exploitation of their works The Federal Council has adopted a dispatch on the new Copyright Act. SUISA is in principle content with the current version of the law. The solutions achieved in the working group for the Copyright Act (AGUR12 II) were implemented. In order for authors, performers, publishers and producers to benefit better from the digitisation, it is necessary to adopt important additions. Read more
Blockchain – an ending or future for collective management organisations?Blockchain – an ending or future for collective management organisations? Dear members, everyone in the music industry is talking about “Blockchain” at the moment. But it’s not easy to find anyone who can explain in simple terms what it’s all about … Read more
Changes to the distribution of collections for internet useChanges to the distribution of collections for internet use New distribution keys will be used for the distribution of collections for internet use (audio and video on demand offers). For downloads, a new key of 25% for performing rights and 75% for reproduction rights shall be applied. For streaming, the split shall consist of 75% performing rights and 25% reproduction rights. Read more
Collapse article

Leave a Reply

All comments will be moderated. This may take some time and we reserve the right not to publish comments that contradict the conditions of use.

Your email address will not be published.

On 22 November 2017, the Federal Council presented its Message on the revision of the Federal Copyright Act (FCA), and referred the copyright bill (FCA-B) to the two houses of Parliament. Text by Vincent Salvadé

Copyright law revision: work starts in the parliamentary committees

Revision of Swiss copyright law: work has started in the Federal Palace in Berne. (Photo: Simon Zenger / Shutterstock.com)

The bill reflects the compromise reached by the AGUR12 II working group at the beginning of March 2017. Parliament has started working on the bill, and SUISA was invited to present its point of view on 12 April 2018 at a hearing organised by the Science, Education and Culture Committee of the National Council. SUISA also had the opportunity to state its views before the Legal Affairs Committee of the National Council, first in writing and then orally on...read more

2018 – a challenging year?!

Review of the Copyright Act, No-Billag-Initiative, online licensing, further development of “my account”… With such topics, SUISA continues to pursue the aim to offer its members efficient services and to create optimal framework conditions. We will face the challenge! By Irène Philipp Ziebold, Director

2018 – a challenging year?!

SUISA supports a NO to the No-Billag-Initiative: “If we did not do anything, we would not live up to our duties as a self-help organisation of music creators” writes Director Irène Philipp Ziebold. (Photo: Manu Leuenberger)

We want to continue to provide efficient services to our members in 2018 and to create optimal framework conditions for them. We have been pursuing these goals in a continuous process for quite a while. For this year we have made a clear note of these intentions and resolutions in our ‘to do’ notepads, since we are facing many challenges in 2018.

With respect to the framework conditions, for example, it is important that authors and publishers benefit better from the online usage of their works with the review of the Copyright Act, or that, in the interest of Swiss music, the reception fees made out of solidarity for public service media are not abolished. In an increasingly cross-border oriented competitive environment, it is, however, also of entrepreneurial importance to optimise the service range offered for members and customers alike.

Since December 2017, statements are made available via “my account”Since December 2017, statements are made available via “my account”
Thanks to the password-protected members’ area “my account”, our members can keep an overview of their distribution statements and distribution settlements. Many members asked us to stop the dispatch by post. We have taken this request into account and introduced the option to renounce on the postal dispatch. Read more

Something we at SUISA can determine as a Cooperative Society is whether a member can access its settlements via “my account”. Since December 2017, only those who have had access to “my account” have been receiving their distributions electronically. It is important in this context that we approach such developments in the interest of our members and never lose sight of the goal to offer high-quality efficient services. Driven by such a motivation, we have continued to improve our services for our members throughout the last few years.

Above and beyond that, we also have the duty as a collective management organisation for copyright to make social and political statements and to create optimal framework conditions as a consequence. Compared to the above mentioned “internal” processes and services, we cannot make the “right” decisions ourselves but influence matters so that the interests of our members are being taken seriously.

Copyright Act Review: Authors and publishers must benefit more from the online exploitation of their worksCopyright Act Review: Authors and publishers must benefit more from the online exploitation of their works
The Federal Council has adopted a dispatch on the new Copyright Act. SUISA is in principle content with the current version of the law. The solutions achieved in the working group for the Copyright Act (AGUR12 II) were implemented. In order for authors, performers, publishers and producers to benefit better from the digitisation, it is necessary to adopt important additions. Read more

We thus engage ourselves to ensure that the creatives, our members as the content suppliers for online platforms do not come out of this empty-handed and that they can expect a modern Copyright Act.

We therefore also support a NO to the No-Billag-Initiative. For many of our members, the public service idea, especially the opportunity to disseminate music and culture, is essential. In this case, the broadcasters of SRG SSR as well as the 35 state-licensed TV and radio stations play a fundamental role. If the reception fees made by Swiss households out of solidarity for their public service media would be abolished, then important platforms for our members for the dissemination of their works would fall away.

Subsidised broadcasters offer more variety and more SUISA repertoireSubsidised broadcasters offer more variety and more SUISA repertoire
Subsidised radio and TV broadcasters in Switzerland and Liechtenstein tend to create more broadcasting space for the music of SUISA members than privately financed channels. Moreover, the majority of the broadcasters supported by the Swiss Federation play more diverse music titles than their counterparts which are focussed on advertising revenue. In the interest of our local music creation and the cultural diversity, we therefore have to reject an abolition of the solidarity-based fees for public service media. Read more

SUISA therefore supports the activities of creators and artists and their associations such as Sonart – music creatives Switzerland, Suisseculture or the Swiss Music Council against No-Billag. If we did not do anything, we would not live up to our duties as a self-help organisation of music creators. And that’s why we take on the challenges 2018 is going to throw at us!

Related articles
Blockchain – an ending or future for collective management organisations?Blockchain – an ending or future for collective management organisations? Dear members, everyone in the music industry is talking about “Blockchain” at the moment. But it’s not easy to find anyone who can explain in simple terms what it’s all about … Read more
SUISA’s financial year 2018: an outlookSUISA’s financial year 2018: an outlook In the Committee and Board meetings towards the end of the year, framework conditions for the following financial year are set. As such, the meetings of the SUISA Board in December 2017 continued to be characterised by budgets, cost rates, staffing plans, roadmaps, politics and quite a bit more. Read more
Always on top of things thanks to “my account”Always on top of things thanks to “my account” More than 14,000 members are already using our member portal “my account”. More than half of all new registrations of original works during 2016 were done online. Why do more and more members regularly use “my account”? Thanks to the password-protected members’ area “my account”, our members keep an overview of the most significant SUISA matters such as settlements and work registrations. Read more
Collapse article

Leave a Reply

All comments will be moderated. This may take some time and we reserve the right not to publish comments that contradict the conditions of use.

Your email address will not be published.

Review of the Copyright Act, No-Billag-Initiative, online licensing, further development of “my account”… With such topics, SUISA continues to pursue the aim to offer its members efficient services and to create optimal framework conditions. We will face the challenge! By Irène Philipp Ziebold, Director

2018 – a challenging year?!

SUISA supports a NO to the No-Billag-Initiative: “If we did not do anything, we would not live up to our duties as a self-help organisation of music creators” writes Director Irène Philipp Ziebold. (Photo: Manu Leuenberger)

We want to continue to provide efficient services to our members in 2018 and to create optimal framework conditions for them. We have been pursuing these goals in a continuous process for quite a while. For this year we have made a clear note of these intentions and resolutions in our ‘to do’...read more

SUISA’s financial year 2018: an outlook

In the Committee and Board meetings towards the end of the year, framework conditions for the following financial year are set. As such, the meetings of the SUISA Board in December 2017 continued to be characterised by budgets, cost rates, staffing plans, roadmaps, politics and quite a bit more. Report from the Board by Dora Zeller

SUISA’s financial year 2018: an outlook

During the meetings of the SUISA Board in December 2017, the focus was on the figures for the next financial year. (Photo: Kemal Taner / Shutterstock.com)

For the first time in the history of SUISA, the Board presented two budgets in the December meeting: that of the Cooperative Society SUISA and that of the group of companies. The group of companies includes – apart from the parent company – the subsidiary company SUISA Digital Licensing (headquartered in the Principality of Liechtenstein). Furthermore, the group of companies holds a 50% share in the Joint Venture Mint Digital Licensing AG (headquartered in Zurich).

The Board members were given access to the budgeted figures of the affiliated companies. The definitive decision on their business lies, however, with the committees in charge of each society. A new point is therefore added to SUISA’s competency rules in terms of rights and obligations of the Board.

SUISA budget 2018

Back to the numbers: A modest increase is expected for performing and broadcasting rights and a continuation of the downward trend among the reproduction rights. The compensation claims, however, might see a steep rise compared to the 2017 budget (thanks to higher collections from the blank media levy, internal networks in businesses and the rental of set top boxes). Part of the online collections will be allocated to the subsidiary company for accounting purposes. Collections from online use for music on Swiss websites, online advertising campaigns and video on demand services remain in the SUISA budget.

SUISA’s overall turnover budgeted for financial year 2018 amounts to CHF 151.9m. Collections from the use of copyright in Switzerland are budgeted to reach CHF 136.6m. On top of that, net revenues of CHF 11m are expected from abroad. Furthermore, secondary income of CHF 4.3m shall contribute to the overall results.

Expenditure is probably going to increase compared to the previous year, mainly because of the collections of CT 3a (background entertainment). From mid-July, additional staff positions are budgeted to take over this business. The Board has approved the budget for 2018 knowing that it is based on the rejection of the No-Billag-Initiative. Should the voting populace reject the fee for the reception of broadcasts, the changed situation would be met with adapted scenarios.

Regulations and statutory provisions

The auditors regularly supply the governing bodies of SUISA a questionnaire on potential unlawful actions. With this statutory provision, the level of awareness among governing bodies for unlawful acts shall be determined. By way of their answers, management and Board estimate the risk levels and comment on the control procedures. The results were approved and passed on to BDO.

Cost coverage deductions

The Board also decided that the deductions in the off-line sector correspond to those of the previous year. For the online sector it approved slightly changed rates for domestic and international application.

Changes at Board level

Due to the limitation of the period in office, two members of the Board will step down in June 2019. The knowledge acquired over many years in office by the Board members who are now stepping down needs to be replaced and SUISA needs to prepare for future challenges. As early as autumn 2017, a working group has begun with a situational analysis regarding the imminent Board retirements. The Board was informed about the results and the next steps of this analysis.

Copyright Act Review

In November, the Federal Council has passed the message regarding the Copyright Act review together with the legislative proposal on to Swiss parliament. The matter is initially going to be dealt with at National Council level by the Legal Affairs Committee (LAC), and subsequently in the States Council’s Science, Education and Culture Committee (SECC).

The Board was informed about the developments by G. Savary, member of the Board and the SECC. At the same time, he learned from the Executive Committee that the collective management organisations are satisfied with the draft by and large. It corresponds to the compromise developed by the AGUR12-II.

Need for action continues to exist in the sector concerning the online usage of music. In the EU there has been a discussion on the transfer of value on the internet for quite some time. It is high time that this discussion also takes place in Switzerland and that measures are implemented to stop the shift of the value creation away from authors towards internet technology companies.

Related articles
SUISA Board looks ahead into the futureSUISA Board looks ahead into the future Initiated by Ticino-based Board member Zeno Gabaglio, the Board of Directors of SUISA held its autumn meeting in Lugano this year. The agenda items for the meetings on 3 and 4 October 2017 were quite exhaustive. A selection of the topics under discussion are included in this report from the Board by Dora Zeller. Read more
To be continued: Our success story, spanning more than 90 yearsTo be continued: Our success story, spanning more than 90 years The General Assembly of our Cooperative Society will take place on Friday, 23 June 2017, in Zurich. Members will have the opportunity during the General Assembly to co-determine the destiny of their cooperative society. Apart from the positive results of the annual accounts for 2016, SUISA is also going to report on the Joint Venture Mint Digital Services, co-founded with SESAC, plus on the developments regarding the copyright revision and the debate on the ‘service public’. Read more
Changes in relation to the distribution of Tariff CT 1 and CT 2 collectionsChanges in relation to the distribution of Tariff CT 1 and CT 2 collections In the last few years, cable network providers switched their offerings from analogue to digital. In order to take these changes into consideration, the distribution of the collections arising from Tariffs CT 1 (cable networks), CT 2a (retransmitters) and CT 2b (IP based networks) was aligned. In item 5.5.1 of the distribution rules the calculation basis of the reference parameter “number of subscribers” was changed to “daily reach”. Read more
Collapse article

Leave a Reply

All comments will be moderated. This may take some time and we reserve the right not to publish comments that contradict the conditions of use.

Your email address will not be published.

In the Committee and Board meetings towards the end of the year, framework conditions for the following financial year are set. As such, the meetings of the SUISA Board in December 2017 continued to be characterised by budgets, cost rates, staffing plans, roadmaps, politics and quite a bit more. Report from the Board by Dora Zeller

SUISA’s financial year 2018: an outlook

During the meetings of the SUISA Board in December 2017, the focus was on the figures for the next financial year. (Photo: Kemal Taner / Shutterstock.com)

For the first time in the history of SUISA, the Board presented two budgets in the December meeting: that of the Cooperative Society SUISA and that of the group of companies. The group of companies includes – apart from the parent company – the subsidiary company SUISA Digital Licensing (headquartered in...read more

Copyright Act Review: Authors and publishers must benefit more from the online exploitation of their works

Last week, the Federal Council has adopted a dispatch on the new Copyright Act. SUISA is in principle content with the current version of the law. The solutions achieved in the working group for the Copyright Act (AGUR12 II) were implemented. In order for authors, performers, publishers and producers to benefit better from the digitisation, it is necessary to adopt important additions. The “Transfer of Value”, for example, is extremely disappointing for creators and artists: Internet giants’ platforms continue to be the ones that cash in on the online exploitation of music and films. Creators and artists – and thus the suppliers of the content – are almost left empty-handed. Text by Andreas Wegelin, CEO

The Copyright Act urgently requires provisions for the online exploitation of works protected by copyright. The value creation nowadays completely passes by creators and artists – and thus the producers of the content. It is especially the powerful internet industry that benefits strongly thanks to the revenue from advertising and usage data. (Image: yaichatchai / Shutterstock.com)

Many creators and artists, users’ associations and other target groups are likely to have received the current version of the Copyright Act with relief: The legal text is a giant step compared to the half-baked draft which the Federal Council had presented at the end of 2015, and which had caused nearly all interest groups to shake their heads. The outcome was that up to March 2016 a record number of more than 1,200 position papers were submitted. The working group on copyright AGUR12 II was also reactivated. We had already reported on this earlier this year, in March, via our SUISAblog.

Parliament supposed to blaze the trail for a modern Copyright Act

The working group is made up of creators and artists, producers, users, consumers, internet service providers, the Federal Office of Justice as well as additional representatives of the administration has obviously done a good job: In the current version, the proposals of the working group were adopted to a large extent. It is now down to the Parliament to blaze the trail for a modernised version of the Copyright Act. SUISA as well as other Swiss collective management organisations support the compromise.

This does, however, not mean that the current version does not need any improvements. On the contrary – the biggest problems of digitisation for creators and artists remains unsolved: Protected works in videos, texts, images and music data have never been used at the same intensity levels as they are today via the internet. Some major internet companies are the profiteers of this exploitation while the value creation almost completely passes by creators and artists – and thus the producers of the content.

Thanks to the internet: Music lovers can nowadays access an enormous number of films, music pieces, books and news articles, nearly from anywhere and at any time. There is no longer a need for physical work copies. The availability in the Cloud or access via streaming is now enough. Apart from online distributors such as Apple, Spotify, Netflix or Amazon, music and films are nowadays mainly shared via social media platforms such as YouTube or Facebook.

Many internet providers hardly take care of copyright

Online distributors usually take care of copyright and enter into licensing agreements with producers and collective management organisations. This leads to musicians, producers and other creators and artists to receive a remuneration for their work. In the case of intermediaries, e.g. social media platforms and aggregators such as Tunein, the situation is different. The technical services they offer also allow users to disseminate works protected by copyright. In such models where protected content is shared, the providers hardly look after the copyright. On the contrary: They regularly pass the responsibility on to the users who upload the contents.

Add to that the fact that social media platforms and aggregators are the competitors of online distributors such as iTunes or Spotify – they yield high financial gains without participating the authors adequately. A European study shows that value added for the operators of such platforms is very high thanks to works such as music and films protected by copyright. 18% of Google’s income, for example, is made on the back of protected works e.g. via sponsored links. If the protected works were to fall away, the click rate and therefore the attractiveness of the search engine would drop. The value creation on platforms such as YouTube is even higher – they yield 2/3 of their turnover with contents protected by copyright – mainly from advertising, but also sales of profile data. They do, however, defer the act of clearing the copyright to those uploading the contents, even though the latter are not even in a position to do so.

A discussion on the Transfer of Value must also take place in Switzerland

Authors, the actual creators of the works, receive no or hardly any remuneration at all in the case of such platforms. This calls for urgent action. In the EU there has been a discussion on the Transfer of Value on the internet for quite some time. It is therefore high time to bring this discussion to Switzerland. Urgent measures are needed in Switzerland so that the transfer of value away from authors can be stopped – and therefore the creeping expropriation of creators and artists. Social media platforms, aggregators and search engine operators must be obligated to pay a compensation for the works used via their technical platforms.

SUISA and other Swiss collective management organisations are therefore going to introduce these important additions to the legislative process. Creators and artists must get a fairer share in the value creation on online platforms.

Related articles
Swiss Copyright Review: SUISA in charge of a working groupSwiss Copyright Review: SUISA in charge of a working group Given the diverging reactions to the preliminary draft for the copyright law review, Federal Councillor Simonetta Sommaruga consulted the AGUR12 again in the summer of 2016 – the latter is a working group consisting of representatives from the affected sectors. The working group had the goal to look for conjoint solutions. Read more
Second attempt to review the Swiss Copyright ActSecond attempt to review the Swiss Copyright Act The preliminary draft by the Swiss Federal Council for a review of the Swiss Copyright Act was not able to carry a majority during the consultation. The Federal Councillor in charge, Simonetta Sommaruga, has therefore called upon a working group again. AGUR12 II is asked to work out specific legislative proposals alongside the compromise that had been achieved by AGUR12 and been in place for more than 2 years. Read more
Copyright: Quo vadis?Copyright: Quo vadis? In December 2015, the Federal Council presented the draft for the review of the Swiss Copyright Act. At the same time, the consultation started, which is open until March 2016. Read more
Collapse article
  1. sam says:

    danke für ihren einsatz

  2. Stevens says:

    They stole our revolution and now they steal our music.

Leave a Reply

All comments will be moderated. This may take some time and we reserve the right not to publish comments that contradict the conditions of use.

Your email address will not be published.

Last week, the Federal Council has adopted a dispatch on the new Copyright Act. SUISA is in principle content with the current version of the law. The solutions achieved in the working group for the Copyright Act (AGUR12 II) were implemented. In order for authors, performers, publishers and producers to benefit better from the digitisation, it is necessary to adopt important additions. The “Transfer of Value”, for example, is extremely disappointing for creators and artists: Internet giants’ platforms continue to be the ones that cash in on the online exploitation of music and films. Creators and artists – and thus the suppliers of the content – are almost left empty-handed. Text by Andreas Wegelin, CEO

The Copyright Act urgently requires provisions for the online exploitation of works protected by copyright. The value...read more

To be continued: Our success story, spanning more than 90 years

The General Assembly of our Cooperative Society will take place on Friday, 23 June 2017, in Zurich. Members will have the opportunity during the General Assembly to co-determine the destiny of their cooperative society. Apart from the positive results of the annual accounts for 2016, SUISA is also going to report on the Joint Venture Mint Digital Services, co-founded with SESAC, plus on the developments regarding the copyright revision and the debate on the ‘service public’. By Andreas Wegelin, CEO

To be continued: Our success story, spanning more than 90 years

SUISA founded the Joint Venture Mint Digital Services together with US authors’ society SESAC. The project helps improve the competitiveness of SUISA in the online music market. Shown in the picture: Andreas Wegelin, SUISA CEO (on the left), and John Josephson, Chairman and CEO of SESAC Holding. (Photo: Hannah McKay)

SUISA can look back on a successful financial year 2016. Thanks to the positive year-end result, we are able to pay out more than CHF 128m to those who are entitled to receive a payment. That is more than ever before in the successful history of the Cooperative Society SUISA, spanning more than 90 years.

We are also doing well in terms of our costs. An average cost coverage deduction of 12.37% shows that we have the costs under control. If you take the reoccurring supplementary distribution of 7% into consideration as a contribution to the costs, the actual percentage amounts to 6.75% of the pay-outs to those entitled to receive a payment.

SUISA improves its competitiveness in the online market

Members will have the opportunity during the General Assembly to co-determine the destiny of their cooperative society. Apart from the positive annual accounts, we are also going to present the newly founded project for the improvement of SUISA’s international competitiveness in the online music market.

Together with the US authors’ society SESAC, we have founded Mint Digital Services as a Joint Venture back in February 2017. The JV enterprise offers services in relation to the administration and processing of online music licences. With this JV, we emphasise our strategic direction, i.e. to offer rightsholders an efficient and cost-effective administration.

Wanted: Active participation of our cooperative members

There will also be news on the legal framework conditions. AGUR12 II has passed a compromise for the attention of the Head of the Ministry in the EJPD (Federal Department of Justice and Police, FDJP); we are now waiting for it to be substantiated in a legislative draft.

Please do take part in our General Assembly. Only your active participation ensures that SUISA will be there for its members as a Cooperative Society in future.

See you on 23 June 2017 in the Kaufleuten Zurich.

Related articles
Attend the SUISA General Assembly 2017 and take part in the decision-making processAttend the SUISA General Assembly 2017 and take part in the decision-making process SUISA’s ordinary General Assembly shall take place on Friday, 23 June 2017 in the Kaufleuten Festsaal in Zurich. How did financial year 2016 go? Who will be newly elected into the Distribution and Works Committee? What’s next for the “Service Public” at SRG? What are the aims of the recently created JV Mint Digital Services? Read more
Commentary on SUISA’s annual results for 2016Commentary on SUISA’s annual results for 2016 SUISA can report a very successful financial year 2016. The result reflects an all-time high regarding the income from domestic copyright exploitation. In the Cooperative Society’s history of more than 90 years, this is a record sum in terms of remuneration that is due for distribution. The average cost coverage deduction remains low – about CHF 88 per CHF 100 of the income collected can be paid out to authors and publishers that are entitled to receive such remuneration. Read more
SUISA member services: one look back, one look forwardSUISA member services: one look back, one look forward Quicker pay-outs due to quarterly settlements, simpler data processing via online works registrations, digital access to statements via “my account”, more efficiency via online forms … What’s next – settlements in “real time”? Will there be no more paper dispatched in future? Read more
Collapse article

Leave a Reply

All comments will be moderated. This may take some time and we reserve the right not to publish comments that contradict the conditions of use.

Your email address will not be published.

The General Assembly of our Cooperative Society will take place on Friday, 23 June 2017, in Zurich. Members will have the opportunity during the General Assembly to co-determine the destiny of their cooperative society. Apart from the positive results of the annual accounts for 2016, SUISA is also going to report on the Joint Venture Mint Digital Services, co-founded with SESAC, plus on the developments regarding the copyright revision and the debate on the ‘service public’. By Andreas Wegelin, CEO

To be continued: Our success story, spanning more than 90 years

SUISA founded the Joint Venture Mint Digital Services together with US authors’ society SESAC. The project helps improve the competitiveness of SUISA in the online music market. Shown in the picture: Andreas Wegelin, SUISA CEO (on the left), and John Josephson, Chairman and CEO of SESAC Holding. (Photo: Hannah McKay)

SUISA can look...read more

Swiss Copyright Review: SUISA in charge of a working group

Given the diverging reactions to the preliminary draft for the copyright law review, Federal Councillor Simonetta Sommaruga consulted the AGUR12 again in the summer of 2016 – the latter is a working group consisting of representatives from the affected sectors. The working group had the goal to look for conjoint solutions. Text by Vincent Salvadé

Swiss Copyright Review: SUISA in charge of a working group

The exhibition “Oh Yeah! Pop music in Switzerland” in the Museum for Communication in Berne covered 60 years of Swiss pop culture in the form of a multimedia experience (as pictured). An exhibition such as this would be able to benefit from a simplified rights acquisition via an extended collective licence (ECL). The introduction of such a licence has been one of the issues being discussed regarding a possible review of the Swiss Copyright Law. (Photo: Museum for Communication / Hannes Saxer)

For this purpose, several sub-groups were created; they were tasked with analysing several topics. SUISA was leading one of these sub-groups (working group 1) which focussed on four questions: Introduction of the extended collective licence, governance of the so-called “orphan” works, a possible new exception in copyright for science and the question of secondary publication rights of publicly financed scientific works.

Working group 1 consisted of the following representatives: Authors (Suisseculture), work users (DUN), libraries (BIS), music producers (IFPI), book publishers (SBVV), the Federal Office of Culture and the collective management organisations (Swissperform and SUISA). It was active between October 2016 and February 2017 and achieved the following results:

Extended collective licence

The extended collective licence (ECL) is a legal institution which is common in the Nordic countries, authorising collective management organisations to be active on behalf of all rightsholders as long as the societies are sufficiently representative. The working group holds the view that the ECL brings advantages both to rightsholders and users and consumers alike. It grants the former a remuneration for the mass exploitations of their works and performances, which individuals can hardly control and monitor. For the users, the ECL simplifies that process for obtaining the rights for projects which are connected with several goods protected by copyright (URG, CopA). This is particularly important in our digital age. Finally, the ECL could entail a growth in the number of cultural goods that are offered legally.

The working group has therefore presented a draft for a legal provision to introduce the ECL. It was careful when wording the draft that the legal basis would not be used to licence usages which clash with offers that are individually authorised by the rightsholders. Furthermore, the working group endeavoured to secure the freedom of the rightsholders by providing them with the opportunity to opt out from an ECL if the provisions are unacceptable for them.

Orphan works

Works are referred to as ‘orphan works’ if the rightsholders are unknown or cannot be located. Current legislation contains a provision on orphan works (Art. 22b URG/CopA) which authorises users to obtain the necessary exploitation rights via the licensed collective management organisations if the rightsholders cannot be contacted. This provision is, however, limited to sound and audiovisual recordings.

The working group suggests to expand this solution to all orphan works provided that they can be located in the archives of libraries, schools, museums and other institutions which contribute to the preservation of cultural heritage. It also recommends a solution in such cases where the collective management organisations cannot pay rightsholders after a period of ten years has lapsed: The money would then have to be invested into retirement funds and cultural promotion funds.

Exception for science

The working group is of the opinion that an exception of the exclusive right can be justified if the works are reproduced for scientific purposes by technical processes. These processes are, among others, data processing (text and data mining, TDM) and other similar procedures by means of which works are reproduced automatically in order for specific common features to be identified, for example. The European Union also plans to introduce such an exception.

The working group did, however, not reach an agreement concerning the issue whether this exception should be accompanied by a right to receive remuneration for the affected authors. The authors from the literature sector supported such a move whereas the users pleaded for an exception free of charge.

Technical measures simplify reading and processing of sources for scientists. Reading is a way to enjoy a work free from copyright. SUISA therefore reckons that a right to receive remuneration for the usage of sources in the context of a scientific activity is not advisable. An important factor, however, is to watch out whether the exploitation of the scientific research falls under copyright if this result contains recognisable, protected works. Furthermore, authors’ moral rights must remain unchanged, and the teaching activity must not fall under the new exception as they are already subject to a special regulation pursuant to Art. 19 and 20 URG/CopA (which provides for authors’ remuneration). The proposal of the working group takes these demands into account.

Secondary publication right

Work users, especially academic circles at Universities, wish to change the Swiss Code of Obligations in order to prohibit an author of a scientific work to assign his rights to make a work available to a publisher free of charge if it has been largely funded by the public authorities. It is the aim to allow authors to publish their works for free access on the internet, parallel to the publication by the publisher.

The working group was not able to submit a proposal regarding this issue as the opinions within the group varied too much. For publishers, such a provision would be the same as an actual expropriation and would prevent them from investing in the scientific sector.

What next?

The working group 1 has submitted its proposals to the AGUR12. The latter will discuss them together with other issues affecting the URG review (such as the fight against piracy or private copying). AGUR12 has finally established a supported compromise package where the three proposals described earlier by working group 1 were taken into consideration.

While it had to represent very different parts of the business, working group 1 managed to bring about an approach of the divergent views. This certainly contributed to a growth of the mutual understanding among the parties, and that a compromise could be found. A compromise, whose elements will be anchored in the law sooner or later, or so we hope.

Related articles
Second attempt to review the Swiss Copyright Act The preliminary draft by the Swiss Federal Council for a review of the Swiss Copyright Act was not able to carry a majority during the consultation. The Federal Councillor in charge, Simonetta Sommaruga, has therefore called upon a working group again. AGUR12 II is asked to work out specific legislative proposals alongside the compromise that had been achieved by AGUR12 and been in place for more than 2 years. Read more
The fight for the copyright review gets tougher Dear members, the Swiss Federal Council launched the consultation for a draft to review copyright in December 2015. The draft followed the recommendations by AGUR12. However, further proposals were added from the administration and as a result of parliamentary initiatives. Read more
“Without an organisation like SUISA many songs would never have been created” The famous and popular musician Peter Reber has been a SUISA member since 1971. In a written interview, the composer, lyricist, artist and publisher explains, why his collective management organisation is important for him and why – from his point of view – it is not necessary that collective management organisations should be subject to a stricter supervision. Read more
Collapse article
  1. Maruchka says:

    Droit d’auteur – révision
    Je ne suis pas sure d’avoir compris le chapitre ‘pour la science’

    Une petite vraie interrogation/apréhension : où s’arrête l’exception, ‘pour la science’ ?
    peut-on réquisitionner quelqu’un – juste pour la science – ?

    la science c’est des mio de personnes…
    la science ne sait-elle pas aller demander de la même façon, que n’importe quelle personne, qui veut diffuser une oeuvre ?
    si le scientifique aspirait à travailler gratuit, pour sa bonne cause ; reste que prendre c’est voler et obliger c’est très rarement bien.

    suggestion D : le scientifique fait sa demande à l’auteur et lui demande son prix/propose un tarif le scientifique informe l’auteur, qui a 10-15 jours (vs. poste) pour exprimer et exposer un éventuel désaccord et définir un autre tarif, que celui proposé par le scientifique
    + un tarif minimum mentionné dans les articles – calculé en fonction de la valeur ajoutée par l’oeuvre et des tarifs en vigueur dans le secteur du scientifique ou de l’artiste (l’oeuvrier) ; le tarif le plus élevé étant appliqué
    – en effet, dans ce genre de situation, ne faudrait-il normalement demander un audit par l’artiste ou un contrat de travail pour le scientifique-artiste ?
    pourquoi pas ?
    + subventions sont à disposition du scientifique, qui voudrait investir dans une recherche, p.ex. musicale

    Souvenez-vous quand nous montions aux fronton, pour défendre l’idée, le droit à la réflexion.
    Rappelez-vous quand le propriétaire du piano ou des toiles et de la peinture était le propriétaire de l’oeuvre, car l’esprit n’avait que peu de valeur, c’était le bien matériel qui comptait et qui recevait la somme totale des mérites, l’artiste vivant d’amour de son art et d’eau fraîche, rosée
    jusqu’à ce que sa toile ou sa musique finisse par lui rapporter argent…, enfin…, à ceux qui détenaient ses oeuvres ; lui n’ayant pas connu le jeans

    certains sont montés aux barricades, ce ne fut ni simple, ni rapide, peut-être y a-t-il eu des vies risquées mais la raisons a eu le dessus et le droit d’auteur est né, affaiblissant sans doute l’esclavagisme (ancrage du concept)
    cela a pris du temps, pour nous apporter le droit d’auteur, donc, à présent, que nous pouvons en profiter, faut-il vraiment le concéder, sans tenir compte des autres outils et données scientifiques comme un travail artistique ?
    mais pourquoi ?

    Voilà pour la science.

    Par contre se prendre un droit d’auteur sur quelque chose de visible (=/= créé par l’homme), comme par exemple une plante brésilienne brevetée aux USA/par USA c’est inconcevable…

    C’est un sujet qui me tient à coeur… 🙂

    • Nicolas Pont says:

      La restriction en faveur de l’utilisation à des fins scientifiques a été notamment conçue pour favoriser la fouille de textes et de données (text and data mining ou TDM).

      Il s’agit par exemple de pouvoir analyser et découvrir d’éventuels liens entre les nombreuses publications scientifiques, afin de trouver de nouvelles pistes de recherche, notamment dans le domaine de la médecine.

      Sans restriction en faveur de l’utilisation à des fins scientifiques, les chercheurs devraient, pour fouiller et compiler des extraits de textes, demander l’autorisation préalable des auteurs de ces textes, protégés par le droit d’auteur. Cela n’est tout simplement pas possible d’un point de vue pratique.

      SUISA est favorable à la restriction, qui ne devrait toutefois que peu concerner les oeuvres musicales.

      Ce qui se fait dans le secret du laboratoire du chercheur est difficilement contrôlable et il est donc également complexe de faire valoir un droit d’auteur sur cet acte.

      En revanche, il est capital que le résultat de la recherche scientifique ne puisse pas être exploité librement, s’il reproduit des oeuvres protégées. Les auteurs de ces oeuvres protégées doivent avoir leur mot à dire sur cette exploitation et avoir les moyens de demander une rémunération. C’est l’une des priorités de SUISA.

      L’exception pour la science ne doit pas concerner l’enseignement, y compris dans les universités, puisque la loi prévoit un droit à rémunération en faveur des auteurs dans ce cadre. Ce droit à rémunération fait l’objet du tarif commun 7, lequel ne doit pas être touché par une exception pour la science. C’est l’autre priorité de SUISA.

      Nicolas Pont / Service juridique SUISA Lausanne

Leave a Reply

All comments will be moderated. This may take some time and we reserve the right not to publish comments that contradict the conditions of use.

Your email address will not be published.

Given the diverging reactions to the preliminary draft for the copyright law review, Federal Councillor Simonetta Sommaruga consulted the AGUR12 again in the summer of 2016 – the latter is a working group consisting of representatives from the affected sectors. The working group had the goal to look for conjoint solutions. Text by Vincent Salvadé

Swiss Copyright Review: SUISA in charge of a working group

The exhibition “Oh Yeah! Pop music in Switzerland” in the Museum for Communication in Berne covered 60 years of Swiss pop culture in the form of a multimedia experience (as pictured). An exhibition such as this would be able to benefit from a simplified rights acquisition via an extended collective licence (ECL). The introduction of such a licence has been one of the issues being discussed regarding a possible review of the Swiss Copyright Law. (Photo: Museum...read more

The fight for the copyright review gets tougher

Dear members, the Swiss Federal Council launched the consultation for a draft to review copyright in December 2015. The draft followed the recommendations by AGUR12. However, further proposals were added from the administration and as a result of parliamentary initiatives. By Vincent Salvadé, Deputy CEO

The fight for the copyright review gets tougher

SUISA continues the fight for copyright and is getting ready for the digital future at the same time: Together with the US-American collective management organisation, SESAC, it founded Mint Digital Licensing, a joint venture issuing online licences. (Photo: ScandinavianStock / Shutterstock)

The draft was welcomed with keen interest, reflected by as many as 1,224 statements submitted during the consultation process. Unfortunately, they highlighted the fundamental differences in opinion. Something that had been expected: There are inherent risks when moving away from the compromise of the AGUR 12 (a working group on copyright that had been set up by Federal Councillor Simonetta Sommaruga in 2012) in the context of an issue as disputed as copyright.

Copyright review: The devil is in the detail

At the end of 2016, Ms Sommaruga asked the same working group to transfer their suggestions into legislative provisions and, where necessary, submit further compromise proposals. It probably was the best that could have been done, even though another option could have been to instruct an expert committee with such editorial tasks: As we all know, the devil is in the detail …

Furthermore, a neutral expert committee could have increased the legitimacy of the proposals of AGUR12. But SUISA which is represented in the working group, will join into this second round.

Cooperation with the American organisation SESAC

Given the circumstances, the plan of a stricter Federal supervision on collective management organisations is not likely to be pursued further. This is good news. After all, the future is digital, and the rights management for online usages of music follows competition rules at the instigation of the European Union.

SUISA takes the new circumstances into account and has created a joint venture, Mint Digital Licensing, together with the American organisation SESAC. Yes, dear members, your eyes didn’t deceive you: The rightsholders in the USA are interested in SUISA’s know-how and the technology so that they can manage their rights in Europe! This implies investments, innovative spirit, additional responsibility and all the risks that a free market entails. Any interference by the government would not have been appropriate in this context.

Yet, the fight for the copyright review can be expected to get tougher. We will have to prove to the market and to consumers that collective management organisations do not just claim money from them. We must show that we create the necessary legal certainty by enabling them to acquire the rights in a simple process and at a fair price for all. The fight has not been won yet – but it’s worth being fought!

Related articles
Sustainable growth for members Cooperative societies excel by their solid economic activities. This is also true for SUISA. The cooperative society for composers, lyricists and publishers of music has slightly increased its income in 2015. SUISA pays out approx. 88% of its income to the rightsholders. That’s a total of CHF 125m. The cooperative society thus makes a substantial contribution to the financial livelihood of its members. Below is an analysis of the annual result. Read more
Right in the middle of it and in full swing to improve the service range offered to members – A glance on the service range offered by SUISA for its members shows: During the last few years, there have been innovations which brought about more efficiency and quality. Among these are more detailed settlement statements, the web portal “my account” and the digitisation of member files. These improvements signify a continu-ous process with SUISA right in the middle of it – and in full swing at it, as the follow-ing outlook shows: New: quarterly distributions. “My account” is undergoing further development. We are modernising the technology of our works database. Our member services are also subjected to a fundamental review. Read more
Collapse article

Leave a Reply

All comments will be moderated. This may take some time and we reserve the right not to publish comments that contradict the conditions of use.

Your email address will not be published.

Dear members, the Swiss Federal Council launched the consultation for a draft to review copyright in December 2015. The draft followed the recommendations by AGUR12. However, further proposals were added from the administration and as a result of parliamentary initiatives. By Vincent Salvadé, Deputy CEO

The fight for the copyright review gets tougher

SUISA continues the fight for copyright and is getting ready for the digital future at the same time: Together with the US-American collective management organisation, SESAC, it founded Mint Digital Licensing, a joint venture issuing online licences. (Photo: ScandinavianStock / Shutterstock)

The draft was welcomed with keen interest, reflected by as many as 1,224 statements submitted during the consultation process. Unfortunately, they highlighted the fundamental differences in opinion. Something that had been expected: There are inherent risks when moving away from the compromise of the AGUR 12 (a...read more

Second attempt to review the Swiss Copyright Act

The preliminary draft by the Swiss Federal Council for a review of the Swiss Copyright Act was not able to carry a majority during the consultation. The Federal Councillor in charge, Simonetta Sommaruga, has therefore called upon a working group again. AGUR12 II is asked to work out specific legislative proposals alongside the compromise that had been achieved by AGUR12 and been in place for more than 2 years. Text by Andreas Wegelin

Second attempt to review the Swiss Copyright Act

Back to square 1: The working group for copyright convenes again. Specific legislative proposals for the review of the Swiss Copyright Act are expected to be tabled by the end of 2016. (Photo: Manu Leuenberger)

In the 19th century, Switzerland was one of the leading countries involved in the process to anchor copyright for authors at international level. The Berne Convention of 1879 was the first international Treaty on copyright. Today, nothing is left of the pioneering role Switzerland once held.

Quite the contrary: The existing Swiss copyright law was enacted after 30-year-long discussions upon the pressure by the USA on 01 July 1993. Important trade agreements with the USA would otherwise not have been possible to implement. A similar situation occurred during the partial review of the Act in 2006.

An adaptation of the copyright law to technological developments is now due. The European Union has also been holding discussions on this topic for a while. On 14 September 2016, the European Commission has tabled a proposal for a directive on copyright in the digital single market. In the EC directive, current problems such as “liability of internet service providers” were addressed at least.

Review of the Swiss Copyright Act 2011 launched

In Switzerland, the progress made by the review of the Copyright Act and the alignment of the legislative provisions to the current exploitation forms in the digital world has been rather sluggish. To recap: The trigger for the current conversations on an update of the Swiss Copyright Act had been the reply by the Federal Council in August 2011 to a Postulate by the Ständerätin (Councillor for the Council of Cantons) Géraldine Savary.

At the time, the Federal Council was of the opinion that Existing legal provisions would satisfy current options for digital usage. Authors would have to exploit the existing legal possibilities more thoroughly and equalise their lost income from internet piracy by other means: for example by giving more live concerts, in order to offset the lower income from sales of sound recordings.

This type of reply led to an outcry among the rightsholders. Known authors and musicians, specifically from the rock/pop sector, joined forces under the umbrella of the powerful association “Music Creators Switzerland”. The producer associations Audiovision Schweiz and IFPI founded the “Alliance against internet piracy”, together with the collective management organisations and other partners.

The AGUR12 Compromise

Federal Councillor Sommaruga finally gave in to the concerted demands for measures to be taken: In the summer of 2012, she initiated the working group copyright 2012. The “AGUR12” had the following task: “Show options to align copyright law with the technological developments. These include identifying and remedying of usage limitations and competitive barriers, guaranteeing a fair and adequate remuneration for the usage of content protected by copyright and the fight against piracy. On the other hand, collective management must be evaluated in terms of identifying areas for increasing efficiency and lowering costs.”

At the end of 2013, AGUR12 closed their project with recommendations which were carried by all participants. One could thus call it an “AGUR12 compromise”. The demand for implementing the recommendations remained an evident topic for the Federal Council: Subsequently, various circles submitted proposals to the parliament which were answered by the Federal Council referring to the impending legal review and thus postponed to a later date.

Preliminary draft and consultation

In December 2015, the Federal Council presented a preliminary draft for the legal review, which entered the consultation process until the end of March 2016. What was particularly bothersome with this preliminary draft was the fact that while it followed the recommendations of AGUR12, further proposals from administration itself had been added; for example, a more extensive and stricter supervision over collective management organisations. SUISA replied with an extensive statement and provided specific wordings for improving the legislative text.

More than 1,200 statements and opinions were submitted during the consultation process. Those from libraries and archives (about 400) all have the same message. They demand simple possibilities to make their archives accessible. When it comes to rights exploitation issues, they blame the collective management organisations for any difficulties that arise in this context. It is, however, the latter who enable certain usages by bundling rights together.

AGUR12 II initiated

The Federal Councillor in charge had to realise this summer that the consultation draft was coming under fire from all corners and was still far away from a solution carried by the majority. She therefore wishes to offer the affected parties to find a solution that can be carried before the Federal Council can decide on the next steps in the legislative process.

On 30 August 2016, Federal Councillor Sommaruga thus initiated the working group AGUR12 II. The working group has now got additional stakeholders, representing the interests of internet providers and experts from the Federal Office for Justice. AGUR12 II is thus tasked with working out specific legislative proposals in line with the compromises determined by AGUR12, which have been in place for more than 2 years now.

The new AGUR12II has, in the meantime, started with its activities. In the first meeting, it became apparent that the members deal with the different interests and positions in a focussed and constructive manner. As a consequence, further sub-groups were created with the aim to prepare specific legislative proposals in a smaller but representative circle. The results are expected to be ready by the end of 2016.

Legal review thrown back by 30 months

Collective management organisations are active on behalf of authors within the AGUR12 II working group. Their representatives hold the necessary legal knowledge in order to formulate legislative provisions. A modernised copyright with fair framework conditions for rightsholders is one of the core aims of the Cooperative Society for Authors and Publishers of Music: SUISA readily offers its expert knowledge and collaborates actively in the working group.

By initiating the AGUR12 II working group, the copyright legislation review in Switzerland has been set back by 30 months. Back to square 1, where AGUR12 finished with its recommendations at the end of 2013. One can’t help but get the impression that the government’s ideas on trade and agricultural policies are clearer than those on copyright. That is a real shame, even more so when Switzerland, as a veritable nation of culture, once excelled as a pioneer of the rights for the protection of authors.

Related articles
Copyright: Quo vadis? In December 2015, the Federal Council presented the draft for the review of the Swiss Copyright Act. At the same time, the consultation started, which is open until March 2016. SUISA supports the proposed measures inasmuch as they have been taken from the compromise agreement reached by the working group on copyright (AGUR12). SUISA has been contributing to said working group which had been summoned by Federal Councillor Simonetta Sommaruga in 2012, consisting of affected parties. Read more
Collapse article

Leave a Reply

All comments will be moderated. This may take some time and we reserve the right not to publish comments that contradict the conditions of use.

Your email address will not be published.

The preliminary draft by the Swiss Federal Council for a review of the Swiss Copyright Act was not able to carry a majority during the consultation. The Federal Councillor in charge, Simonetta Sommaruga, has therefore called upon a working group again. AGUR12 II is asked to work out specific legislative proposals alongside the compromise that had been achieved by AGUR12 and been in place for more than 2 years. Text by Andreas Wegelin

Second attempt to review the Swiss Copyright Act

Back to square 1: The working group for copyright convenes again. Specific legislative proposals for the review of the Swiss Copyright Act are expected to be tabled by the end of 2016. (Photo: Manu Leuenberger)

In the 19th century, Switzerland was one of the leading countries involved in the process to anchor copyright for authors at international level. The Berne...read more

“Without an organisation like SUISA many songs would never have been created”

The famous and popular musician Peter Reber has been a SUISA member since 1971. In a written interview, the composer, lyricist, artist and publisher explains, why his collective management organisation is important for him and why – from his point of view – it is not necessary that collective management organisations should be subject to a stricter supervision.

“Without an organisation like SUISA many songs would never have been created”

Peter Reber is a composer, lyricist, publisher, artist and event organiser and a SUISA member since 1971 (Foto: zVg)

Peter Reber, you have been a SUISA member since 1971. Why?
Peter Reber: It goes without saying that you don’t go to the baker and help yourself from the shelf with the bread rolls without paying. Not everyone understands that you can’t simply use intellectual property without paying, as it’s much more complex and needs explaining in more depth. Composers and lyricists are not in a position to manage their interests on a national and international level themselves. Without an institution such as SUISA and its international partners, I would never have been able to find an economic foundation for my activity. Many songs would never have been written. SUISA does not just manage my financial interests, but is also the prerequisite for a diverse range of activities in our country.

Copyright issues are subject to change. How do artists and musicians have to adapt to it?
Of course it also is down to us artists to deal with those issues. We witness such developments in every day situations, after all. Due to the digital revolution such as loss-free copying and the rapid development of the new media, i.e. the internet, many new questions have to be answered. As an artist, I pass my feedback and my issues on to SUISA; in return, I benefit from the workshops and infos which SUISA offers to us authors.

The Federal Council intends to tie collective management organisations more closely to the government. What is your stance regarding these plans?
I have been a SUISA member for 45 years. As a composer, lyricist, publisher, artist and event organiser, I know the entire spectrum of the music business. It is very complex, as it ranges from aesthetic via organisational to legal issues. Due to its flexibility and the flat hierarchy within SUISA it has always been possible for me to find someone to talk to about my issues. My issues have always been in good hands as a consequence of the profound knowledge of the SUISA staff. I would have huge concerns if the government and the politicians would increase the influence and control over our copyright society. It is important to me that SUISA retains a certain independence. Only if it does, can it represent the interests of us authors in a credible manner and does not turn into a playground for other political and economic interests.

Where could copyright be improved from your point of view?
There is always and everywhere room for improvement. Important steps have been introduced by SUISA already in some ways: Authors have the opportunity today to let SUISA only represent them in partial aspects and to manage the other areas themselves, for example.
The biggest problem, however, has been and will remain the fact that the public still does not show enough understanding for the fact that intellectual property is worth protecting and must be paid for, too. That’s an area where us authors and our SUISA have to continue to work on.

On Peter Reber
With more than 40 gold and platinum awards for more than 2 million sold sound recordings, Peter Reber can be counted among the most successful Swiss composers, lyricists and performers. From 1968 to 1981, he has been member of the successful band Peter, Sue & Marc, after that he began an equally successful solo career. During his career, Peter Reber has written more than one thousand lyrics, melodies and arrangements and provided six Swiss contributions to the Eurovision Song Contest. His compositions have been published on sound recordings by more than hundred national and international artists, from folk musicians to rock musicians. 2016, he received the Swiss Music Award for his life’s work. www.peterreber.ch

The interview with Peter Reber was conducted for the “Sessionsbrief” (session letter) of Swisscopyright. Swisscopyright is the joint umbrella of the five Swiss collective management organisations ProLitteris, SSA, SUISA, Suissimage and Swissperform. With the “Sessionsbrief”, the societies inform interested parties from within the political scene as well as the public on subjects affecting copyright.

Swisscopyright Sessionsbrief September 2016 (PDF)
Swisscopyright Website

Related articles
SUISA is working cost-consciously Last year, SUISA and the other Swiss collective management organisations (CMOs) have invested time and money into a cost analysis which had been requested by the federal government. The results of the study are now available. At hardly anyone’s surprise, study reveals that the Swiss CMOs work efficiently and have their costs under control. Nevertheless, the Federal Council demands a stronger control of the collective management organisations in its proposal for the copyright law revision. This is not just unnecessary, but actually absurd, as a closer look at the study results reveals. Read more
Copyright: Quo vadis? In December 2015, the Federal Council presented the draft for the review of the Swiss Copyright Act. At the same time, the consultation started, which is open until March 2016. SUISA supports the proposed measures inasmuch as they have been taken from the compromise agreement reached by the working group on copyright (AGUR12). SUISA has been contributing to said working group which had been summoned by Federal Councillor Simonetta Sommaruga in 2012, consisting of affected parties. Some suggestions of the draft for the copyright revision now need to be criticised, while others endanger the compromise that other interested circles have reached. Read more
The freedom of SUISA members is at stake Dear members, did you know that your collective management organisation invested time and money into a cost analysis requested by the Federal Government during the summer of 2015? Why, you ask? Well, just read on …
Collapse article
  1. Giorgio Tebaldi says:

    Lieber Jean-Pierre

    Die SUISA kommuniziert seit 2008 die Löhne der Geschäftsleitung transparent in ihrem Jahresbericht (www.suisa.ch/jahresbericht). 2015 belief sich der Lohn unseres Generaldirektors auf CHF 307’506, wie man im letzten Jahresbericht auf Seite 32 lesen kann; insgesamt erhielten die drei GL-Mitglieder CHF 776’349. Das ist um einiges tiefer als die von Dir genannten CHF 400’000 pro Person.

    Die Verwaltungskosten sind für die SUISA natürlich ein wichtiges Thema, und wir sind entsprechend darum bemüht, unseren Aufwand so gering wie möglich zu halten. Dass die Kosten der SUISA – und auch der anderen vier Schweizer Verwertungsgesellschaften – in einem angemessenen Rahmen sind hat Ende 2015 übrigens eine Studie im Auftrag des Instituts für Geistiges Eigentum (IGE) gezeigt: https://blog.suisa.ch/de/die-suisa-arbeitet-kostenbewusst/ / https://www.ige.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/Urheberrecht/d/Studie_Verwaltungskosten/MM_IGE_Abschluss_der_Verwaltungskostenanalyse14012016.pdf.

    Herzliche Grüsse
    Giorgio Tebaldi / Leiter Kommunikation

  2. Nicht nur als langjähriges SUISA-Mitglied (Tonträger “Face the world” von A touch of class; jp’s acoustic instrumentals & Disco (S)Hits) bin zwar generell und grundsätzlich ebenso gegen staatliche Eingriffe aller Art.
    Da ich bis Ende April ’13 hauptberuflich 18 Jahre lang als geschäftsleitender Berater der Communication Executive AG (Tochter des Headhunters Engineering Management Selection Schweiz) aktiv war, ist mir allerdings konkret bekannt, welche fürstlichen Löhne sich die erweiterte Geschäftsleitung der SUISA seit Jahrzehnten genehmigt: Da es sich dabei um über 400’000.- CHF Jahresgehalt pro Person und Jahr handelt, ist nur völlig logisch und nachvollziehbar, dass die Entschädigungen an all die echten Musiker und musikalisch eher trivialen Musikanten zur Deckung dieser “Overhead”-Kosten ZU LASTEN der Künstler allzu mickrig ausfallen müssen!
    Gegen diesen Schutz der GF-Pfründe ist längst konkreter Handlungsbedarf angezeigt; und es wäre äusserst sinnvoll, wenn die SUISA-Verantwortlichen diesbezüglich selbst ein Einsehen hätten!…

Leave a Reply

All comments will be moderated. This may take some time and we reserve the right not to publish comments that contradict the conditions of use.

Your email address will not be published.

The famous and popular musician Peter Reber has been a SUISA member since 1971. In a written interview, the composer, lyricist, artist and publisher explains, why his collective management organisation is important for him and why – from his point of view – it is not necessary that collective management organisations should be subject to a stricter supervision.

“Without an organisation like SUISA many songs would never have been created”

Peter Reber is a composer, lyricist, publisher, artist and event organiser and a SUISA member since 1971 (Foto: zVg)

Peter Reber, you have been a SUISA member since 1971. Why?
Peter Reber: It goes without saying that you don’t go to the baker and help yourself from the shelf with the bread rolls without paying. Not everyone understands that you can’t simply use intellectual property without paying, as it’s much more complex and needs explaining in...read more

Copyright: Quo vadis?

In December 2015, the Federal Council presented the draft for the review of the Swiss Copyright Act. At the same time, the consultation started, which is open until March 2016. Text by Vincent Salvadé

After a partial review in 2008, it is planned to review the Swiss Federal Act on Copyright and Related Rights once more. (Photo: Manu Leuenberger)

SUISA supports the proposed measures inasmuch as they have been taken from the compromise agreement reached by the working group on copyright (AGUR12). SUISA has been contributing to said working group which had been summoned by Federal Councillor Simonetta Sommaruga in 2012, consisting of affected parties. Some suggestions of the draft for the copyright revision now need to be criticised, while others endanger the compromise that other interested circles have reached.

Three areas need to be given particular attention:

Private copying

In Switzerland, the copying of works for private purposes is usually allowed by law and is also remunerated via a levy on blank media. The major advantage of this system is that it does not criminalise consumers, something that AGUR12 also reiterated. The relevant remuneration and levies do, however, have to be constantly adapted to the current circumstances.

At the same time, private copying has been undergoing change. In the music sector, downloads have increasingly been replaced by streaming. Nowadays, music is being listened to online instead of downloaded. While listening to music, the copying process on the end device of the consumer (smartphone, tablet etc.) now only stretches over a very short period. The permanent reproduction takes place elsewhere, on remote servers (key word: “Cloud computing”).

SUISA believes that neither current legislation nor the draft of the URG (CopA) revision accommodates the new developments appropriately. SUISA is thus going to submit modernising suggestions in the course of the consultation.

Collective rights management

The Federal Council plans to extend the supervision of collective rights management, namely at two levels: On the one hand, the supervision shall comprise the entirety of activities of collective management organisations (CMOs), irrespective of which sector they cover; on the other hand, the Swiss Federal Institute of Intellectual Property (IPI) shall not only check the legality of rights management but also its adequacy in future.

CMOs have been founded by rightsholders in order to defend their rights. As a consequence, only rightsholders should be able to decide on the operation of its CMOs. The planned expansion of the supervision would be problematic from a constitutional law aspect.

In order to safeguard a correct collective rights management, today’s controls are more than adequate: first, by the members via the society’s internal bodies and committees, second, via external auditors, third, via the IPI which is confined to the legality of the administration and areas with a dominating market position of CMOs, and fourth, via tariffs which are controlled by the Federal Arbitration Commission for the Exploitation of Copyright and Related Rights.

Why should the government thus interfere in the personal transactions of authors and other rightsholders? The affected parties had not requested anything to this end. Furthermore, a recently published expert analysis which has been published on behalf of the IPI confirmed that CMOs work efficiently and have their costs under control. As a consequence, this kind of expansion of the supervision by the government must be rejected.

On the other hand, SUISA welcomes the suggestion by the Federal Council that an extended collective licence should be introduced in Switzerland. This is a type of statutory provision which is already known in Nordic countries. Thanks to the collective licence, the CMO could represent rights holders which are not members. For such rightsholders, licensing agreements which have been concluded between CMOs and users of works shall apply unless they explicitly pull out from such agreements (“opt out”). It would thus be possible to legalise the mass usage of works – something that is paramount in the digital age – in order to be able to pay rightsholders their due remuneration. The latter do, however, continue to have the freedom to opt out from such licensing agreements.

Anti-piracy measures

SUISA supports the measures suggested by the Federal Council to combat piracy. They are the result and an important component of the compromise of AGUR12. The proposals are based on the contributions of the access and host providers. They would have to delete illegal contents under certain conditions, prevent such contents from being re-uploaded, to block access to piracy sites or to point their action out to relevant users in the case of copyright infringements.

This type of system does, however, mainly rely on self-regulation. SUISA therefore believes that the law should have a higher minimum standard than provided in the legislative proposal. In addition, certain measures are only possible if the works are already on the market in Switzerland. In other words: Illegal online offers of a film which is not available in Switzerland yet, would be less severe than in the case of a DVD which can already be purchased anywhere in the shops… The desire of the consumer to get access to a bigger number of legal offers is understandable. In this context, innovative enterprises do, however, have to be protected from unfair competition by illegal providers.

There is another gap: If the explanatory notifications by the access providers to the infringer bear no fruit, the rights holder could use legal means to find out about the identity of the illegal providers. In order for this step to be available, two such notifications must turn out to have been futile within a year. In other words: Rights holders are asked to tolerate the infringement of their rights for a whole year, before intervening steps are taken … This is hardly acceptable.

Conclusion

The impression prevails that the Federal Council has taken the recommendations of AGUR12 on board but then complemented them ad lib. It surely is a good thing that political visions influence the development of copyright to a degree. On the other hand, copyright repeatedly finds itself as the focal point of various interests: those of authors, consumers, the industry etc.

The compromise established by AGUR12 has the advantage that it safeguards a balanced development of the legal framework – which has been accepted by the affected parties. It is thus vital that this compromise is not put at risk. Otherwise, the CopA review is in danger of getting stuck …

Additional information:
SUISA works cost efficiently (SUISAblog, 13.01.2016)
SUISA members’ freedom is at stake (SUISAblog, 20.11.2015)

Collapse article

Leave a Reply

All comments will be moderated. This may take some time and we reserve the right not to publish comments that contradict the conditions of use.

Your email address will not be published.

In December 2015, the Federal Council presented the draft for the review of the Swiss Copyright Act. At the same time, the consultation started, which is open until March 2016. Text by Vincent Salvadé

After a partial review in 2008, it is planned to review the Swiss Federal Act on Copyright and Related Rights once more. (Photo: Manu Leuenberger)

SUISA supports the proposed measures inasmuch as they have been taken from the compromise agreement reached by the working group on copyright (AGUR12). SUISA has been contributing to said working group which had been summoned by Federal Councillor Simonetta Sommaruga in 2012, consisting of affected parties. Some suggestions of the draft for the copyright revision now need to be criticised, while others endanger the compromise that other interested circles have reached.

Three areas need to...read more