Tag Archives: Copyright

Copyright law revision: compromise is the key to success – no exceptions for hotel rooms

The revision of the existing Copyright Act is entering the decisive phase this year. After seven years’ preparatory work, parliamentary debates have now started. The revised act could come into force on 1.1.2020 if both federal houses respect the delicate compromise. Text by Andreas Wegelin

Copyright law revision: compromise is the key to success – no exceptions for hotel rooms

The jurisprudence in Switzerland and Europe is clear: when a hotel receives radio or television broadcasts and retransmits them into its guest rooms, it is a use which is relevant for copyright purposes. (Photo: Piovesempre / iStock)

The long road to a minor partial revision started nine years’ ago: in 2010, State Councillor Géraldine Savary asked the Federal Council to propose solutions to prevent the use of illegal online offers. The Federal Council rejected the request arguing that authors could simply give more concerts to make up for the loss in earnings caused by the slump in CD sales. This answer outraged musicians, and rightly so: not all composers can perform their own works.

In summer 2012, Federal Councillor Sommaruga responded to the protests by creating a working group to prepare proposals for the revision of the Copyright Act. AGUR12, as the working group was called, submitted its recommendations in December 2013. Based on those recommendations and on a wealth of additional unacceptable proposals, the Federal Council produced a preliminary bill in 2015 which met with widespread criticism in the consultation process. FC Sommaruga was obliged to reconvene the AGUR in autumn 2016. AGUR12 II concluded its work in March 2017 with a compromise. At the end of 2017, relying largely upon this compromise, the Federal Council submitted a revised bill to Parliament.

Main points of the revised bill

The relevant key elements of the compromise for musical authors are:

  • Obligation for the hosting provider to remove illegal content and to prevent further uploading of such content (Article 39d); provision for processing personal data to facilitate prosecution of illegal uploading of protected music (Article 77i). Additional demands by authors and producers, e.g. to block access to illegal offers on the Internet, met with strong resistance from consumers and network operators, and were disregarded in the compromise. In this context, one should also consider that such blocking in the musical field would in any event have come ten years too late. Thanks to a wide range of affordable, legal and easy-to-use music streaming services, file-sharing networks and illegal services in the musical field have been greatly reduced.
  • SUISA’s right to information from users in tariff negotiations and accelerated procedure for the approval of copyright tariffs (Articles 51 and 74(2))
  • Extended collective licence (Article 43a): this provision, for instance, enables users to obtain a licence from the collecting societies for publications from archives.

Remuneration for video on demand – unnecessary for composers

The Federal Council also proposed to introduce a remuneration claim for music with regard to video on demand (Articles 13a and 35a). Music creators do not, however, need this: Article 10(2) already entitles them to authorise or refuse the use of their works (in this case, film music). SUISA has already concluded licence agreements for VoD services with all main providers. No new remuneration claims are needed. The existing legislation is adequate.

The VoD remuneration claim was primarily designed to enable Swiss filmmakers to receive fair compensation when their films are viewed on new platforms like Netflix. This would reduce the “value gap” that filmmakers suffer because they participate neither in the direct “pay per view” revenue nor in the platforms’ indirect revenues from advertising and the sale of usage data. Conversely to film music composers who are well organised in rights’ management organisations worldwide, Swiss filmmakers have very limited bargaining power and are therefore dependent on this new remuneration claim.

Against the recommendations of AGUR12 II, the Federal Council extended this claim to music authors who, as mentioned above, do not need this special entitlement. Regrettably, the National Council did not follow our reasoning in the detailed discussion of the law in December 2018 and failed to provide for an exception for music authors. The last hope now lies with the Council of States, which will probably deal with the subject in its March session.

New exemption from the obligation to pay remuneration for radio and TV reception in hotel rooms?

In December 2018, the National Council decided, via the back door so to speak, to follow the parliamentary initiative of Valais FDP MP Nantermod and add a new clause in Article 19(1)(d) FCA providing that the retransmission of radio and TV broadcasts, but also of music or video channels, on demand in hotel rooms, rented holiday apartments, hospital rooms and prison cells, are exempted from copyright fees. As a result, authors would be in a worse position than under the existing legislation, and the revision of the law would work largely to their disadvantage.

What is at stake? If a hotel retransmits radio or TV broadcasts to its guest rooms, the retransmission qualifies as a “rebroadcast” within the meaning of Article 10(2)(e) FCA. This was decided by the Federal Supreme Court in 2017. The providers of TV sets and audio players in guest rooms are hoteliers, landlords of holiday apartments, or hospital operators. All of them operate for profit. Such usage does not, therefore, qualify as private use. The jurisprudence in Switzerland and Europe is clear: this is a relevant usage under copyright law.

The decisions are based on the Bern Convention, the most important international treaty in copyright law, and on other international treaties such as the WCT and the WPPT. Switzerland cannot disregard these treaties. If it did, it would expose itself to sanctions because the obligations under the Bern Convention are also enshrined in the WTO Agreement on the Protection of Intellectual Property (TRIPS). To avoid sanctions if Switzerland were to incorporate this new exception into its law, the exception could only apply to the works of Swiss authors – a totally unacceptable discrimination.

“Hotel rooms would hardly be cheaper if the small copyright fee was eliminated.”

What does it cost hoteliers today? Fees are calculated based on the surface area covered by the TV/audio usage. Up to 1000 m2, the monthly licence fee is CHF 38. Hotels with up to 50 rooms of 20m2 each pay less than CHF 1 per room per month. The rate is slightly higher for larger areas. Hotels with 100 rooms pay CHF 91.80, which is still less than CHF 1 per room per month. The cost for hotels is therefore modest. However, all things being equal, the shortfall for authors and other rightholders would add up to some CHF 1 million per year.

Hoteliers pay their other suppliers for all other services delivered to their hotels. These range from electricity and cleaning to soap in the bathrooms. These goods and services are not provided free of charge – they are part of the hotel supply chain. Hoteliers run their hotels for profit, and in-room entertainment contributes to the price of a room and, therefore, to the added value of the hotel. Why should hoteliers who offer this service to their guests not have to pay the music and film rightholders? Exempting hotel rooms from the copyright remuneration obligation would discriminate against authors and other rightholders compared with other suppliers. And consumers would not even benefit from the exemption because hotel rooms would hardly be cheaper if the small copyright fee was eliminated.

The compromise and the FCA revision both at jeopardy

As mentioned above, the compromise bill for the revision of copyright law put together by AGUR12 II and the Federal Council is now on the finishing straight. If Parliament were to significantly worsen authors’ situation by introducing the hotel room exception, authors would feel slighted and might present further demands for revision. With the risk that no new law is adopted and nearly nine years’ revision efforts will all have been for nothing in the end.

If the revision were to deprive them of the right to allow their works to be rebroadcast in hotel rooms against remuneration, music authors would probably be better off under the existing law.

It is essential that we defend the delicate compromise in the coming months and impress on the Councils that no further changes to the detriment of authors are admissible.

Related articles
When SUISA does politicsWhen SUISA does politics SUISA and the other Swiss rights administration societies have never been as actively involved in politics as in 2018. But is it really justified for SUISA to become engaged in politics? Read more
No adequate share for audiovisual artists regarding video on demand and streaming successNo adequate share for audiovisual artists regarding video on demand and streaming success Film director Ursula Meier is speeding from one success to the next, both in Switzerland as well as abroad. She elaborates why it is necessary to enhance the value of the position of film makers and actors in the video on demand (VOD) sector in the course of the copyright law review. Read more
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
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 revision of the existing Copyright Act is entering the decisive phase this year. After seven years’ preparatory work, parliamentary debates have now started. The revised act could come into force on 1.1.2020 if both federal houses respect the delicate compromise. Text by Andreas Wegelin

Copyright law revision: compromise is the key to success – no exceptions for hotel rooms

The jurisprudence in Switzerland and Europe is clear: when a hotel receives radio or television broadcasts and retransmits them into its guest rooms, it is a use which is relevant for copyright purposes. (Photo: Piovesempre / iStock)

The long road to a minor partial revision started nine years’ ago: in 2010, State Councillor Géraldine Savary asked the Federal Council to propose solutions to prevent the use of illegal online offers. The Federal Council rejected the request arguing that authors could simply give more concerts to make up for...read more

When SUISA does politics

SUISA and the other Swiss rights administration societies have never been as actively involved in politics as in 2018. But is it really justified for SUISA to become engaged in politics? By Vincent Salvadé, Deputy CEO

When SUISA does politics

SUISA’s political work is geared to creating a favourable framework for Swiss musical creators in terms of rights management. (Photo: Trybex / Shutterstock.com)

The revision of copyright law certainly has something to do with SUISA’s political engagement. But the rights administration societies have also taken a stand on numerous other issues: the “No Billag” initiative, gambling legislation, revision of telecommunications law, various parliamentary motions and initiatives, etc. Moreover, the societies regularly respond to consultation procedures on a broad range of legislative proposals. This shows that music, and culture in general, have become ubiquitous in our society. Music and culture are multi-faceted and as such are affected by a great number of political issues.

But is it really justified for SUISA to become engaged in politics? Yes. When we act, we do so without partisan labels, motivated solely by our members’ interests. Rights management can rarely be dissociated from politics.

“Generally speaking, our political actions are always aimed at achieving a favourable legal framework for rights management.”

In recent months, SUISA’s tariff negotiations have triggered two parliamentary interventions in Bern: first, in an attempt to counter our supplementary common tariff 3a, which had been confirmed by the Federal Supreme Court at the end of 2017, National Councilor Philippe Nantermod filed a parliamentary initiative demanding that licence fees be abolished for hotel rooms and the like; and second, National Councilor Martin Candinas submitted a motion proposing to disregard State subsidies to local radio stations in peripheral regions in the copyright calculation basis, although the matter has already been decided to the contrary on several occasions by the authorities responsible for approving the tariffs. In both cases, politics were the means chosen to try to defeat what we have struggled to achieve through our rights management activities.

Generally speaking, our political actions are always designed to foster a favourable legal framework for rights management. That is just as true for the revision of copyright law as it was earlier this year in our stand against the “No Billag” initiative: both were driven by the same motivation. Recently, we intervened to ensure that the revision of the telecommunications legislation would not jeopardise a balanced solution for authors’ rights with regard to replay TV.

Such political action requires major investment in terms of argumentation and persuasion. But it has proved worthwhile: on 13 June 2018, the Council of States rejected the Candinas motion (as well as the alternative proposed by the Federal Council) by 22 votes to 21. Would the outcome have been the same if the musical world had not mobilised? SUISA therefore intends to continue resolutely on this path and pursue its active political engagement, in particular against the parliamentary initiative of National Councilor Nantermod.

Related articles
Replay TV: catching up with advertising revenuesReplay TV: catching up with advertising revenues Replay TV (also known as time-shift or catch-up TV) offers consumers the option of watching television broadcasts on a time-shifted basis instead of at the regular scheduled time. This function, which is very popular with viewers, is now jeopardised by an ongoing legal and political dispute. Read more
Copyright law revision: work starts in the parliamentary committeesCopyright 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. 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. Read more
Invoicing licence fees for background music and TV reception in businesses as of 2019Invoicing licence fees for background music and TV reception in businesses as of 2019 Businesses that play background music on their premises or show broadcasts on screens are required to pay licence fees in accordance with Common Tariff 3a. As of 2019, SUISA will once again manage all customers under this Tariff directly. 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.

SUISA and the other Swiss rights administration societies have never been as actively involved in politics as in 2018. But is it really justified for SUISA to become engaged in politics? By Vincent Salvadé, Deputy CEO

When SUISA does politics

SUISA’s political work is geared to creating a favourable framework for Swiss musical creators in terms of rights management. (Photo: Trybex / Shutterstock.com)

The revision of copyright law certainly has something to do with SUISA’s political engagement. But the rights administration societies have also taken a stand on numerous other issues: the “No Billag” initiative, gambling legislation, revision of telecommunications law, various parliamentary motions and initiatives, etc. Moreover, the societies regularly respond to consultation procedures on a broad range of legislative proposals. This shows that music, and culture in general, have become ubiquitous in our society. Music...read more

Arrangement of works in the public domain

Before you start arranging musical works that are not protected by copyright, it is worth being aware of the legal pitfalls in order to avoid costly stumbles. Text by Ernst Meier and Claudia Kempf

Arrangement of works in the public domain

An arrangement is when a new work is created using an existing work. (Photo: Tabea Hüberli)

Seeking inspiration from others, arranging existing works for different instrumentation, incorporating all or part of existing compositions into new works … these are age-old practices.

What pitfalls have to be avoided when you undertake a musical arrangement? – In a new series of articles to be published on the SUISAblog and in SUISAinfo, we shall try to shed some light on this topic. Initially, we shall examine the arrangement of works in the public domain, i.e. works that are no longer protected by copyright since their authors have been dead for more than 70 years.

What is an arrangement?

According to the Copyright Act, an arrangement is a “derived” (in German, literally, a “second-hand”) work. For an arrangement to qualify for copyright protection, it must satisfy the same requirements as a “work”, in other words: arrangements which are deemed artistic creations of the mind of the arranger are protected by copyright in the same way as an autonomous work. In the case of an arrangement, the artistic creation consists in the recognisable transformation, changing, or extension, of the musical substance of an existing work.

An arrangement is when a new work is created using an existing work in such a way that the latter remains recognisable with its individual character. The newly created element must, however, also have an individual character. Typical examples of arrangements are works orchestrated for different instruments, or lyrics translated into another language.

SUISA’s Distribution Rules (in German) have a section (1.1.3.5) that lists a whole series of works that do not qualify as arrangements for copyright protection purposes. In practice, this list has proven itself repeatedly. The following modifications do not qualify as arrangements:

  • adding dynamic or agogic accents;
  • adding musical phrasing symbols;
  • entering finger positions (fingering);
  • registrations for organs or other keyboard instruments;
  • flourishes;
  • translating an old musical notation style into a style in use today;
  • correcting clerical mistakes in the original and similar changes;
  • transferring music into other keys or pitches (transpositions);
  • editing out individual voices;
  • exchanging or doubling voices;
  • adding purely parallel voices;
  • allocating existing voices to other instruments (simple transcription).

Arranging works in the public domain and registering them with SUISA

Musical works which are not protected by copyright can be freely arranged and altered – no consent is necessary. To register an arrangement of a work in the public domain, you must send SUISA a copy of the new work together with the existing work, so that the music department can establish copyrightability. This applies to works whose authors are unknown or have been dead for at least 70 years. This also applies to works that have been handed down by folklore and are considered traditional.

When it receives an arrangement, SUISA’s music department verifies whether it satisfies the criteria for protection by copyright. This is always done by comparing the original to the arranged version. The musical quality of the submitted piece or movement is unimportant at this stage.

What types of arrangements are there, and what is the arranger’s share of the remuneration?

In its appreciation, SUISA distinguishes between the five following types of arrangement:

(Graphics: Crafft Communication)

1. Normal arrangement

The “normal” case (representing about 90% of all applications) is an arrangement in the strict sense of the word. A popular melody is arranged by adding voices or instruments for a specific ensemble or group (e.g. mixed choir, string quartet, orchestra, Big Band, etc.). The melody or main voice is taken over exactly, only the arrangement is new.

In this case, the arranger’s share is 15% (for works with lyrics) or 20% (works without lyrics).

Normal arrangement

2. Co-composition

Here the unprotected melody is not the upper voice; it is hidden in the musical structure. In this particular case (e.g. choir and organ music), the arranger’s work is of higher value since he has to compose his own upper or main voice and the existing music has to be embedded into the piece with a contrapuntal technique.

The arranger’s share in this type of work is 50% of the composer’s share.

Co-composition

3. Reconstruction

An original work is interrupted in one or several places, or left unfinished by the composer (or lost in handing down), and is then finished by the arranger.

The arranger’s share in this case is 50% of the composer’s share.

Co-composition

4. Complex jazz versions with changing soloists

The piece starts with a short presentation of the unprotected original melody. Then, a succession of soloists or “registers” (saxophone, trumpets, piano, drums) take up the melody with improvised figurations; these make up the greater portion of the work. Visually this is illustrated by the fact that the individual soloists or “registers” stand up for their solos. At the end, the original melody is often repeated all together.

In this type of work, the arranger’s share is 50% or 100% of the composer’s share, depending on the length and importance of the solos.

Complex jazz versions with changing soloists

5. Sets of variations

Variations on historic musical themes (e.g. Diabelli, Paganini or Gershwin variations) are typical examples of compositions where the original takes backstage to the variation. The starting theme is merely a pretext for a completely new work. It follows, therefore, that the creator of the variation is entitled to the full remuneration. For example: “Diabelli variations by Beethoven” etc.

The arranger’s share in this type of work is 100% of the composer’s share.

Sets of variations

What does public domain (“domaine public”) mean?
For further information on the protection period for works we refer you to the article “Erstmals seit 20 Jahren werden wieder Werke gemeinfrei” (article available in German, French and Italian, PDF) in the SUISAinfo edition.
Related articles
The beats from others – but your own songsThe beats from others – but your own songs The melody is a catchy tune but the groove just doesn’t match. For days, you haven’t got rhythm while some ingenious lyrics are on the tip of your tongue. There are many reasons why creators use someone else’s raw material for their own songs. The following legal and practical tips on how to deal with bought-out beats help you keep in sync with formalities. Read more
Personnel changes in SUISA’s Music DepartmentPersonnel changes in SUISA’s Music Department At the end of September 2018, Ernst Meier, Head of the Music Department, retired after 33 years’ work for authors and publishers. His successor is Andres Pfister. Read more
Plagiarism accusations – what does SUISA do?Plagiarism accusations – what does SUISA do? Various media have been reporting on plagiarism accusations against a Swiss artist in the last few days. The topic is not new, but it seems to continue to be shrouded in ambiguity: Who is the accuser? What happens to an artist who lifts from another? How much does he have to pay? And what role does SUISA actually play? 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.

Before you start arranging musical works that are not protected by copyright, it is worth being aware of the legal pitfalls in order to avoid costly stumbles. Text by Ernst Meier and Claudia Kempf

Arrangement of works in the public domain

An arrangement is when a new work is created using an existing work. (Photo: Tabea Hüberli)

Seeking inspiration from others, arranging existing works for different instrumentation, incorporating all or part of existing compositions into new works … these are age-old practices.

What pitfalls have to be avoided when you undertake a musical arrangement? – In a new series of articles to be published on the SUISAblog and in SUISAinfo, we shall try to shed some light on this topic. Initially, we shall examine the arrangement of works in the public domain, i.e. works that are no longer protected by copyright...read more

Replay TV: catching up with advertising revenues

Replay TV (also known as time-shift or catch-up TV) offers consumers the option of watching television broadcasts on a time-shifted basis instead of at the regular scheduled time. This function, which is very popular with viewers, is now jeopardised by an ongoing legal and political dispute. Text by Vincent Salvadé

Replay TV: catching up with advertising revenues

Replay TV: Thanks to digital technology, viewers can go back in time up to seven days and catch up on any programmes they may have missed. (Photo: Getty Images / Steve Lawrence)

Broadcasting companies, i.e. TV channels, are demanding veto rights on the time-shifted use of their programmes. What is at stake? Their advertising revenues. After all, who will watch commercials if you can skip them in replay? This dispute is of significance for SUISA and for musical rightholders too.

Current status

In past decisions, the Federal Arbitration Commission for copyright and neighbouring rights has equated subscription to a replay TV service with copying for private use, which is permitted by Article 19(2) FCA. In exchange, rightholders (including, in this case, broadcasting companies) are entitled to remuneration in accordance with Article 20(2) FCA, levied by the collecting societies in accordance with Common Tariff 12 (CT 12).

This has been the status since 2013, and broadcasters have not disputed it before the civil courts. This situation has several advantages: the distributors of the broadcasting programmes (Swisscom TV, UPC, Sunrise, etc) can offer their customers attractive services in exchange for a fee. And the collecting societies collect the fees and pass them on to the copyright and neighbouring rights rightholders.

However, in February 2018, the Federal Arbitration Commission responsible for reviewing the tariffs of the collecting societies approved the new CT 12, which provides for a slight increase in these fees, for the period 2017 to 2020. On 21 March 2018, 23 broadcasting companies appealed this decision before the Federal Administration Court. They argued that replay TV was not governed by the legal regime for private copying, and should be subject to their consent. On 12 September 2018, the Court ruled that the broadcasting companies were not entitled to appeal.

In parallel, however, turning to account the ongoing revision of the Telecommunications Act (TCA), the broadcasting companies had also demanded veto rights for replay TV in that context. In July 2018, the Transport and Telecommunications Committee of the National Council (TTC-N) followed their reasoning and introduced Article 12e TCA. This triggered a number of reactions from stakeholders opposed to the new provision. Finally, the Committee backed down and proposed that the issue be resolved in the framework of the copyright law revision.

The issue

SUISA appreciates that broadcasting companies should seek to safeguard their advertising income. This is also in the interest of the holders of musical rights, since the tariffs governing broadcasting rights (tariff A for the SSR and Common Tariff S for private broadcasters) are based on broadcasters’ revenues.

By way of reminder: based on tariff A and CT S, SUISA collected about CHF 16.8 million in remuneration from Swiss TV broadcasters in 2017, plus an additional CHF 1.3 million from the Swiss advertising windows of foreign broadcasters. By comparison, TC 12 generated slightly over CHF 3 million for musical rightholders. We should be careful not to lop off the branch on which musical rights are sitting.

Solutions

However, granting veto rights to broadcasting companies on replay TV seems unjustified. By refusing their consent, broadcasters would limit the offer available to consumers and, as a result, reduce CT 12 revenues for rightholders. By limiting private copying options, which is now regularly the case on the cloud, we would be sounding the death knell for a system that is the envy of our neighbours and has contributed to developing innovative digital services.

We feel that existing copyright law provides for a well-balanced system: under Articles 59 and 60 FCA, remuneration under CT 12 must be fair. That means on the one hand, that distributors must compensate the broadcasting companies commensurately with the significant revenues generated by replay TV. On the other hand, Articles 59 and 60 FCA are worded in sufficiently flexible terms to take into account, at least partially, the same distributors’ loss in earnings.

At the same time, the law could require distributors to obtain the broadcaster’s consent, not to their offering replay TV services to their customers, but to enabling their customers to skip the commercials. This means distributors would have to take the necessary technical measures to prevent viewers from skipping commercials when the broadcaster withholds its consent. Consumers may at first be reluctant to accept such solutions. But such measures would be the lesser evil compared with a broadcaster veto liable to significantly limit the current offer. And, for a number of stakeholders, it is a win-win solution:

  • providers who distribute the programmes could continue offering full replay TV, while consumers could continue subscribing to that option;
  • distribution companies would be able to preserve or increase their advertising revenues since they would have an additional audience of viewers who are unable to tune into programmes at the scheduled times;
  • other rightholders would continue to collect significant broadcasting distribution revenues (tariff A and CT S in the case of musical rights) while taking advantage of the booming revenue flows from CT 12.

Switzerland always favours balanced solutions. The legal regime for replay TV should be no exception to the rule; the interests of all stakeholders must be taken into account.

Related articles
Copyright law revision: work starts in the parliamentary committeesCopyright 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. 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. 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
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
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.

Replay TV (also known as time-shift or catch-up TV) offers consumers the option of watching television broadcasts on a time-shifted basis instead of at the regular scheduled time. This function, which is very popular with viewers, is now jeopardised by an ongoing legal and political dispute. Text by Vincent Salvadé

Replay TV: catching up with advertising revenues

Replay TV: Thanks to digital technology, viewers can go back in time up to seven days and catch up on any programmes they may have missed. (Photo: Getty Images / Steve Lawrence)

Broadcasting companies, i.e. TV channels, are demanding veto rights on the time-shifted use of their programmes. What is at stake? Their advertising revenues. After all, who will watch commercials if you can skip them in replay? This dispute is of significance for SUISA and for musical rightholders too.

Current status

In past decisions,...read more

No adequate share for audiovisual artists regarding video on demand and streaming success

Film director Ursula Meier is speeding from one success to the next, both in Switzerland as well as abroad. She elaborates why it is necessary to enhance the value of the position of film makers and actors in the video on demand (VOD) sector in the course of the copyright law review. Text/Interview by guest author Jürg Ruchti, CEO, SSA

No adequate share for audiovisual artists regarding video on demand and streaming success

Ursula Meier is a film director and a member of SSA. SSA is a sister society of SUISA and manages copyright for stage and audiovisual works. (Photo: Claude Dussez)

Ursula Meier, you are a member of the Société Suisse des Auteurs (SSA) – why?
Well, first and foremost because SSA looks after my copyright in an efficient manner. It also provides me with additional services: SSA is a cooperative society which is based on mutuality and solidarity and defends the interests of creators of audiovisual and stage works.

Creatives are asking for an implementation of new provisions regarding the video on demand (VOD) into the Swiss Copyright Act.
Yes, that’s very important. Thanks to the internet, our works are being consumed as often as never before but creatives are not paid to the extent that they would deserve. Digital economy players claim the income which have arisen from the consumption of our works but reject any obligations above and beyond that.

But isn’t it the case that authors negotiate their rights with the producer when they create a film?
Yes, but the contractual chains for the exploitation of the works are so complex and sometimes opaque that the income does actually not reach the artist or creator. There is a multitude of contracting parties. The digital economy leaves producers in an unprecedented state of uncertainty. They don’t know whether they’ll ever get their investment back. There are several reasons for that. This affects the levels of remuneration which they can grant artists during the contractual negotiations prior to the completion of a film. Our conditions have thus got worse.

Why should VOD platforms be obliged to remunerate authors via their collective management organisations?
Because if that were the case, authors would get a fair share of the success of their work, since their collective management organisations would get involved with the last player in the value chain i.e. the party which is in direct contact with the consumer. In the TV sector in Switzerland, this model has been established for quite some time and it works to our satisfaction. The current law does actually provide an obligation to pay for the rental of video tapes or DVDs. Since VOD has now taken over this market segment, the law should be adapted to this development.

The suggested new provision does, however, not seem to be beyond all doubt.
No, since it contains two contentious issues: First, it also affects music which does not want this provision since its system already works well in all countries. This is not the case for scriptwriters, directors and actors. A collective management of their rights only exists in few countries and the platforms often operate from other countries. The second issue which is problematic relates to works which are commissioned by TV broadcasters: The legislative draft provides for them to be excluded from the new mandatory remuneration for artists.

What exactly is the problem in the case of commissioned work?
These works are the most sought after works on this new market, for example series. The circle of principals has grown: In future, VOD platforms join TV broadcasters. There is no reason to treat the former in any other way than the latter. Works do follow a path. Sooner or later they can be consumed on a multitude of platforms. If commissioned works are being excluded from this new VOD right, authors do not receive any remuneration for their online exploitation. Their situation would therefore hardly improve. Here’s an example: A new series, commissioned by the RTS, which subsequently is made available via a streaming service such as Amazon would be exempt from the new legislation. This exclusion undermines the meaning of the new law and its general intention consequently misses the mark. The argument which forms the basis to this legal article does not reflect reality and I hope that this will be resolved in the course of the debates in the respective sessions.

About Ursula Meier
Ursula Meier is an internationally renowned film director. “Home” (with Isabelle Huppert) was among the nominated films at the 2008 Cannes Film Festival and received numerous international awards. In 2012, “L’enfant d’en haut” (with Léa Seydoux and Kacey Mottet Klein) was awarded the special prize Silberner Bär [Silver Bear] at the Berlinale [Berlin Film Festival]. Just like “Home”, in 2010, the film was given three Swiss film awards, among them the award for the best film, and it also represented Switzerland at the Oscars. At the beginning of 2018, Ursula Meier completed “Journal de ma tête”, a TV film with Fanny Ardant and Kacey Mottet Klein. The film was nominated for the Berlinale. Ursula Meier was the president of the jury for the Caméra d’Or at the Cannes Film Festival this year.
About the remuneration right for video on demand
Online platforms that make 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 in principle. The collecting societies, however, 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 receive 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 CD productions. 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.
Excerpt from the SUISAblog-Article: “Copyright law revision: work starts in the parliamentary committees” by Vincent Salvadé.

The interview with Ursula Meier was conducted for the “Sessionsbrief” (session letter) (PDF, in German) of Swisscopyright, published in September 2018. 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 Website

Related articles
Copyright law revision: work starts in the parliamentary committeesCopyright 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. 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. 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
Peter Reber: “Without an organisation like SUISA many songs would never have been created”“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

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.

Film director Ursula Meier is speeding from one success to the next, both in Switzerland as well as abroad. She elaborates why it is necessary to enhance the value of the position of film makers and actors in the video on demand (VOD) sector in the course of the copyright law review. Text/Interview by guest author Jürg Ruchti, CEO, SSA

No adequate share for audiovisual artists regarding video on demand and streaming success

Ursula Meier is a film director and a member of SSA. SSA is a sister society of SUISA and manages copyright for stage and audiovisual works. (Photo: Claude Dussez)

Ursula Meier, you are a member of the Société Suisse des Auteurs (SSA) – why?
Well, first and foremost because SSA looks after my copyright in an efficient manner. It also provides me with additional services: SSA is a cooperative society which is based on...read more

Exploitation rights in the EU and review of SUISA’s Articles of Association

Liechtenstein has been – other than Switzerland – a member of the European Economic Area since 1995 and must, as such, accept a major proportion of the European Union legal provisions. What do EU exploitation rights have to do with the revision of the SUISA Articles of Association? Text by Bernhard Wittweiler

Exploitation rights in the EU and review of SUISA’s Articles of Association

Copyright developments in Europe are of importance for Switzerland’s SUISA, too: The image shows CISAC President Jean-Michel Jarre on 06 March 2018 handing a petition to the European Parliament. It had been signed by 14,000 authors and composers requesting fair rules in the digital marketplace in order to stop the “transfer of value” on the internet. (Photo: CISAC / Iris Haidau)

The European Union (EU) had, for quite some time, established rules for the collective management of copyright and neighbouring rights via the collective management organisations. Initially, individual decisions were passed by the EU Commission and the European Court of Justice (ECJ) which were derived from EU Competition Laws. The EU bodies thus managed to break up the strict territorial demarcation between the collective management organisations (CMO) and the exclusivity of the rights assignment, to facilitate rightsholders’ switching to another CMO and to create more competition between the CMOs in general.

In the nascent age of online exploitation of music, the EU Commission set another milestone with its Recommendation of October 2005. It wanted to achieve the biggest possible competition between the CMOs regarding online rights management as well as improve transparency and equal treatment of all rights holders in the CMOs. The Recommendation resulted in the complete freedom of rightsholders to choose which CMO in Europe they wish to entrust with their online rights, in the creation of one-stop-shops for online licences and multi-territorial online licences.

Rules for collective management

But it didn’t stop there. Over the years, the needs grew for a comprehensive and standardised regulation of the collective management organisations’ activities in the EU and for a harmonised internal market as the basis for collective management. Thus, on 26 February 2014, the Directive on collective management of copyright and related rights and multi-territorial licensing of rights in musical works for online uses in the internal market (CRM Directive) was issued. Directives are paramount to laws in significance, but do not take direct effect; instead, they have to be implemented by individual EU member states into their national laws.

The CRM Directive has the aim to set minimal standards regarding an orderly mode of operation of collective management organisations (corporate governance), their finance management, transparency and accountability vis-a-vis members, sister societies and the public, the right of co-determination of members, equal treatment and non-discrimination of rights holders, sister societies and users, settlement of disputes, management and licensing of online rights as well as the supervision of CMOs by the authorities.

EU Directive authoritative for Liechtenstein

The CRM Directive of the EU was declared to be authoritative for the States of the European Economic Area (EEA), and thus also Liechtenstein. Liechtenstein therefore had to adopt the Directive and implement it into its national laws. For this purpose, a new, distinct law was created, the Liechtenstein Collecting Societies Act (VGG), which was passed on 29 March 2018 by the Landtag (Parliament). Previous provisions for the collective management in the copyright laws of Liechtenstein were taken over into the VGG.

SUISA has been active in the Principality of Liechtenstein for decades, since 1999 with its own state licence and under the supervision of the respective authority, the Office of Economic Affairs in Liechtenstein, as the supervisory authority. Authors and publishers from Liechtenstein are SUISA members, SUISA collects licence fees for copyright in Liechtenstein based on its tariffs for the music usages that take place there. Just like in Switzerland, the tariffs and the distribution rules valid for Liechtenstein require a state licence and SUISA has to be accountable to Liechtenstein’s supervisory authority each year regarding its business activities.

Adaptation of SUISA Articles of Association

With its activities and licence to operate in Liechtenstein, SUISA is subject to the provisions in Liechtenstein regarding collective management. We are therefore obliged to fulfil the specifications and requirements of the new VGG – and thus also the CRM Directive of the EU. The new provisions do not entail no earth-shattering or major innovations, we already adhere to the majority of the provisions which have been a matter of course for us for a long time. Nevertheless, there are still some areas that require adaptation.

The necessary changes of the SUISA Articles of Association will be presented to the General Assembly on 22 June 2018 for ratification so that they may enter into force from 01 January 2019.

The most important of the proposed changes to the Articles of Association are the following:

  • SUISA membership is no longer dependent on nationality, residence or any other link to Switzerland or Liechtenstein (authors) respectively a presence in Switzerland or Liechtenstein (publishers) (item 5.1);
  • extension of the competence of the General Assembly (item 9.2.2);
  • preparation and publication of a transparency report which shows various information and key figures in addition to the annual report (item 9.2.3);
  • facilitation of electronic participation at the GA, provided that the statutory provisions (in the Swiss OR, the Swiss Federal Code of Obligations) allow us to do so (item 9.2.10, new);
  • declarations by the Board and Management to the GA regarding conflicts of interest (items 9.3.11 and 9.6.4, new);
  • creation of a Complaints Committee (item 9.5, new).

Revision of the Articles of Association for online business

One important strategic business sector of SUISA that depends on the revision of the Articles of Association is the following: SUISA has been licensing music of SUISA members at pan-European level since 2013 in the online sector, partially even far beyond Europe’s borders. Pursuant to the EU Directive, collective management organisations must meet certain standards in order to be able to carry out cross-border licensing within the European Union.

So that SUISA may continue its pan-European licensing in the online sector, the provisions of the EU Directive must be adhered to. The online business is a focus of SUISA’s strategy for the immediate future. By way of revising the Articles of Association, the conditions will be met that SUISA can directly negotiate with and collect from online providers such as iTunes or Spotify regarding exploitations outside Switzerland and Liechtenstein, too.

Related articles
SUISA General Assembly 2018: Your opinion counts!SUISA General Assembly 2018: Your opinion counts! SUISA’s ordinary General Assembly takes place on 22 June 2018 in the Bierhübeli in Bern. It will be opened with a music performance by the ad hoc formation Swiss Ländlermix in line with the theme; “Folk music – Switzerland crossways”. Important business items on the agenda are the review of the Articles of Association, the new Complaints Committee and an election of a substitute for the Distribution and Works Committee. Danièle Wüthrich-Meyer, President of Swissperform will attend as guest speaker. Read more
Copyright law revision: work starts in the parliamentary committeesCopyright 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. 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. Read more
Publishers’ participation at SUISA not at riskPublishers’ participation at SUISA not at risk A decision by the European Court of Justice dating back to 2015 and two German court decisions made last year have challenged the basic principle of a participation of publishers with respect to remuneration paid out by collective management organisations. Here are the reasons why what happened at Gema cannot repeat itself at SUISA. 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.

Liechtenstein has been – other than Switzerland – a member of the European Economic Area since 1995 and must, as such, accept a major proportion of the European Union legal provisions. What do EU exploitation rights have to do with the revision of the SUISA Articles of Association? Text by Bernhard Wittweiler

Exploitation rights in the EU and review of SUISA’s Articles of Association

Copyright developments in Europe are of importance for Switzerland’s SUISA, too: The image shows CISAC President Jean-Michel Jarre on 06 March 2018 handing a petition to the European Parliament. It had been signed by 14,000 authors and composers requesting fair rules in the digital marketplace in order to stop the “transfer of value” on the internet. (Photo: CISAC / Iris Haidau)

The European Union (EU) had, for quite some time, established rules for the collective management of copyright and neighbouring rights...read more

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

M4music copyright debate: Streaming = Goldmine?

At the M4music 2018, SUISA is going to hold a panel discussion on Streaming. Participants discuss, among other subjects, whether artists get their fair shares in a booming streaming market and – if not – what needs to change. Text by Erika Weibel

M4music copyright debate: Streaming = Goldmine?

The 21st M4music takes place between 22 and 24 March 2018. (Photo: M4music)

The turnover of Streaming providers are on the rise: Videos, text and lyrics, images and music files are used via the internet as intensively as never before. It’s not just authors of the works that benefit from this but also big players such as Google, Facebook etc. What does it look like in future if the value creation is mainly happening at the big internet companies while the providers of the contents i.e. the creators and artists remain empty-handed?

What would potential scenarios and paths that could guarantee a fair – or at least fairer – income for creators and artists?

We are looking forward to a large audience which is of course invited to participate in the conversation.

Event details:

Friday, 23 March 2018 at 5.00pm
Matchbox in the Schiffbau, Zurich

The panel will be held in German and translated into French.

The 21st M4music takes place between 22 and 24 March 2018. The pop music festival of the Migros-Kulturprozent in Lausanne and Zurich provides a diverse programme again: Concerts by over 50 national and international acts, panel discussions and workshops on current topics of the music business.

www.m4music.ch/en/conference

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
Stream ripping – tape recorders on the internetStream ripping – tape recorders on the internet Stream ripping software records audio and video streams. A copy of the entire stream can thus be saved as a file. Swiss copyright legislation provides for a private copy remuneration which is applicable to recording and storage media. Stream ripping apps are not covered by the statutory obligation to pay a levy – just like the tape recorders in the past. 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.

At the M4music 2018, SUISA is going to hold a panel discussion on Streaming. Participants discuss, among other subjects, whether artists get their fair shares in a booming streaming market and – if not – what needs to change. Text by Erika Weibel

M4music copyright debate: Streaming = Goldmine?

The 21st M4music takes place between 22 and 24 March 2018. (Photo: M4music)

The turnover of Streaming providers are on the rise: Videos, text and lyrics, images and music files are used via the internet as intensively as never before. It’s not just authors of the works that benefit from this but also big players such as Google, Facebook etc. What does it look like in future if the value creation is mainly happening at the big internet companies while the providers of the contents i.e. the creators and artists...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