According to foreign media reports,The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) chose to retain the 80-year-old authorization statute related to music authorization rules. This decision keeps Apple Music’s way of obtaining songs and song authorizations unchanged.It is understood that the agency has been paying close attention to whether the consent agreement promulgated in 1941 is applicable to the modern music industry, because it may change the way the license fee is determined.
–
access:
Tmall’s 2021 New Year’s Festival Super Red Envelopes: Up to 2021 yuan 3 times a day
–
On Friday, local time, DOJ decided to continue to implement the previous version.
This 80-year-old decree stipulates the functions of the American Association of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP) and Broadcasting Music Corporation (BMI) performance rights organizations, especially with regard to music licensing matters. The two PRO agencies can provide companies, broadcasters, and streaming services with licenses to use the music, including use rights held by songwriters, composers, and others. This also includes music service platforms like Apple Music and Spotify, which need to pay an authorization fee to PRO to provide users with music for listening.
According to these rules, copyright is centralized and collectively licensed toappleAnd other companies, so that music can be played without having to sign a separate license agreement with each composer or publisher. These laws oblige lawyers to abide by certain rules, such as the cancellation of exclusive licenses, and to ensure that fees are negotiated or determined by federal judges in the “rate court.”
Now, the DOJ’s decision to maintain the current rules rather than repeal the consent decree will force the parties to engage in renegotiations that may be costly and time-consuming. This may include PRO increasing the licensing fees charged by Apple Music and other companies or even refusing to authorize.
Critics have been complaining about these laws for years, ranging from the law’s age limit not taking into account new technologies such as streaming music to the law’s enforcement of specific licensing terms in negotiations, which hinders innovation.
In addition, since the Informed Consent Act only applies to the two companies ASCAP and BMI, and the combined market shares of these two companies account for 90%, it will not affect those who can work without the same restrictions. Small professional company. This includes the Pro Music Rights (PMR) organization, which sued Apple in 2019, saying it played copyrighted music on its streaming platform without proper authorization.
It is reported that the last major update to music authorization in the United States occurred in 2018, when the “Music Modernization Act” combined multiple acts and refined the court’s procedures for determining the payment ratio.
ASCAP and BMI CEOs Elizabeth Matthews and Mike O’Neill said in a joint statement: “Although we are disappointed that no action has been taken, we have seen how the Department of Justice’s approach to these issues has changed. It is encouraging to us. Although BMI and ASCAP have long advocated updating our Informed Consent Act, in the past 8 years, two different Ministry of Justice governments have conducted two different reviews. It is obvious that the amendment or termination Our law will be very challenging.”
David Israel, chairman of the National Music Publishers Association, also expressed disappointment over this decision. In addition, he hopes that the incoming Biden administration will take decisive action to allow songwriters and publishers to negotiate directly with Apple and technology companies.
– .
