Saturday, 11th October 2008
One Productions broadcast music without a licence
The Labour Party's multimedia company One Productions Ltd will have to pay damages to The Performing Right Society of London after having been found guilty of broadcasting music without the necessary licence and without paying royalties.
Dingli Co. International Ltd, the local representative of The Performing Right Society, claimed in its writ that the station had broadcast musical works that were covered by copyright starting in 1994.
One Productions had not applied for a licence from The Performing Right Society to broadcast the music, which licence was required in terms of the law governing copyright in Malta.
As a result, One Productions violated the authors' copyright and failed to pay the royalties that were due when the work was played on the radio station.
One Productions admitted to broadcasting the music but said that it was common for it to receive CDs from their producers to be broadcast. As a result the company did not feel it was bound to pay copyright fees when it was the authors of the musical works who had given the discs to it free of charge.
One Productions also pointed out that it did not make any profit from broadcasting music.
However, Mr Justice Gino Camilleri said it was the responsibility of the radio station to ensure that the performing rights were covered by a licence.
In conclusion the Court found that One Productions had broadcast music without a licence. The case was put off for the liquidation of damages due.
RSS
Comments
I would hold lengthy debates on this matter too. The EU should work on a Directive in this manner. We cannot have a stations sued for not having a licence and others are left scott free cause of the discretion of an individual. The matter has to be holistic. Im sure music costs alot of money to compose and licenses and royalties have to be paid , but one needs to know what these expenses are as surely many stations would be non starters if they consider these expenses prior to setting up.
It s important that the office of fair competition is also aware of this matter. I strongly believe in a fair level playing field from base, even if its a radio or a broadcasting station. The licence issued by the regulator should include the same terms and conditions( which are enforced and checked from time to time) for the interest of one and all. I wonder how far we go!
A car dealer gives a car free to benefit from advertising purposes. The receiver is obliged to pay for road licence.
Laws are to be obeyed but in our Island seems that Laws are there to be broken.
A TV company can itself be the publisher of music used in its productions. Mediaset and RAI are huge publishers here in Italy. They finance and produce a lot of the music they use on their TV stations. That way they pay performing rights but get a lot of them back. They can also profit through use on other channels, radio, cd sales, legal web downloads, live performances and other ways.
These rights do not go to the singer or performing musicians. They go to the writers of the music and lyrics. They go to the publishers. They are often the only source of income for composers, lyricists and publishers. Usually these people work behind the scenes and get little "advertising" benefits from the use of their work.
The TV company might not directly make profits from the use of music, but can you imagine a tv channel without music? It is essential - a vital component that contributes to the success of a program.
(continues)
If I give you my house key to go and look at something, it doesn't mean yu can walk out with it.
How shameless can they be?
How low can they go?