DiMA, Motion Picture Association of America Oppose Download Royalties for Composers, Songwriters
The Digital Media Association (DiMA), the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and other industry organizations are opposing ASCAP’s claim for public performance royalties for digital downloads of sound recordings for their composer, publisher and songwriters members.
In an amicus brief filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, the six associations asked the court to affirm a lower court’s decision that digital downloads of music are not public performances, and that as a result RealNetworks and Yahoo! do not owe royalties to ASCAP when they digitally download entertainment content to consumers.
Joining DiMA in this brief are the Entertainment Software Association (ESA), the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), the National Association of Recording Merchandisers (NARM), the Entertainment Marketing Association (EMA), and the Independent Film and Television Alliance (IFTA).
“I am especially concerned to see the Motion Picture Association of America actively working against the interests of film composers in this regard,” said Film Music Magazine publisher Mark Northam. “These highly profitable companies are already getting a massive free pass on performing rights since movie theaters in the US don’t have to pay performance royalties to ASCAP and BMI as they do in most countries. This case will obviously have a direct impact on performing rights downloads for film and television productions, and the film companies now apparently want to make sure that composers aren’t paid a nickel in performance royalties for their music in these films and television shows. It’s a sad commentary on the industry when those who actually write the music that make all these productions come to life are systematically and deliberately excluded from continuing to benefit from residual royalty payments that so many others involved in the creation of these productions are routinely paid.”
“Innovative content producers and distributors are joining together today in an effort to halt ASCAP’s overreaching demand for undeserved royalties,” said DiMA Executive Director Jonathan Potter. “Songwriters and music publishers are paid fairly and fully for digital downloads when reproduction rights and distribution rights are licensed. There is simply no justification for characterizing downloads as performances or for demanding additional royalties, which is why ASCAP’s persistent efforts have been rejected so many times by U.S. Government agencies and the district court in this case.”
Comments
By Tracey Larvenz on September 1st, 2009 at 12:08
Potter’s statement is so preposterous that it hardly merits comment. Is he actually saying that just because a person downloads, it doesn’t meant that they are listening to it? How exactly is it different from radio stations (who pay royalties), other than the fact that digital delivery allows for more accurate tracking of what streams and songs are being distributed and to how many users. Is there a petition to sign against this?
By BLC on September 1st, 2009 at 17:06
Hey, if ascap’s pet judge, William Connor says no, ascap’s out of luck. Guess Reimer can’t get everyyhing he wants. If one reads Connor’s decision and its reasoning, one can understand why there is no perf royalty in a download. Is there a perf royalty in the purchase of a CD at your local record store? The argument by ascap was pure b.s. But what’s really funny is how some orgs are on both sides of this argument: warner publishing vs. warner records, for example. What next, ascap, a perf royalty if a person whistles a song from the ascap repertory? Maybe, all musicians ought to pay their plumbers a perf royalty every time they turn on a faucet, too?
Trackbacks