Text Size

EU orders pan-European music licensing

updated 12:30 pm EDT, Wed July 16, 2008

Pan-European music OK'd

The European Commission has ordered music copyright organizations to allow pan-European licensing schemes, says the Associated Press. At present, companies looking to sell music throughout Europe must negotiate agreements with 24 separate collecting societies, scattered throughout the European Union. While this may protect national industries and culture, the Commission has ruled that it also breaks antitrust regulations, giving the societies monopolies in their respective homelands.

The licensing scheme has additionally posed an obstacle to online music stores such as the Apple-run iTunes, which has had to found separate storefronts across the EU even though they all rely on a single currency, the Euro.

Resistance to pan-European licensing has been fought by artist groups like the ECSA, which argues that it will result in diminished royalties for musicians, and may force small- and medium-sized businesses out of the market as obstacles to multinationals are lowered.

 
Previous Comments

Why an obstacle?

07/16, 01:19pm reply

Why is this an "obstacle" for iTunes? It's unfortunate that they "had to" create multiple storefronts, but they didn't do it because they wanted to fragment the iTunes store, and being able to consolidate the storefronts will be a benefit for Apple.

resuna

Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jan 2005

-2

obstacle

07/16, 01:38pm (2 replies) reply

The old licensing scheme (the current one) is the obstacle - it was really hard (and slow) for Apple to set up all those separate stores, with different content in each one.

A pan-European licensing deal would remove that obstacle.

elroth

Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2006

+1

Bad decision

07/16, 01:47pm (1 reply) reply

This will pave the way for multi-national record companies to plow through Europe and destroy the cultural diversity that exists right now.

They whiners that don't like the pricing should move elsewhere for a while and come to see how good they actually had it before.

aristotles

Senior User

Joined: Jul 2004

-1

Cultural diversity?

07/16, 02:20pm reply

It may destroy the network of licensing organisations and companies that hinder distribution of material. Currently some material is not available in all markets because the local licensing hasn't been agreed.

It may not be, say, Universal Music withholding the license, it may be whoever holds the license for Universal Music properties in that country.

People wishing to perform certain famous musicals in France must negotiate with the rights holders in New York, as they are the "local" agents for that nation, not the people who license performances in London who deal with Great Britain and some other areas on the continent.

muso_rah

Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jan 2008

0

Cultural diversity?

07/16, 02:22pm reply

It may destroy the network of licensing organisations and companies that hinder distribution of material. Currently some material is not available in all markets because the local licensing hasn't been agreed. The artist and the publishers may be desperate to enter that market, but unless the local agent makes they deal, they are out of that market except via the "grey market".

It may not be, say, Universal Music withholding the license, it may be whoever holds the license for Universal Music properties in that country.

People wishing to perform certain famous musicals in France must negotiate with the rights holders in New York, as they are the "local" agents for that nation, not the people who license performances in London who deal with Great Britain and some other areas on the continent.

muso_rah

Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jan 2008

-1

stuff

07/16, 02:36pm reply

Why is this an "obstacle" for iTunes?

You misread the article. The current system is an obstacle. As you say, the proposed one would be much better (in theory).

As a professional musician, however, I think it's the absolute worst decision the EU has made so far (and they've made a lot), because the licensing rates will be drastically reduced for composers and lyricists

But I think there's two arguments here. I think the order itself is a valid and good order, for all involved. It is the associated licensing rates that you seem concerned with, and which should be argued about.

testudo

Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

+1

And yet

07/16, 03:11pm reply

the major labels will still prevent Apple from offering DRM-free music... That also has an large negative effect on music sales...

Guest

Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 1999

0

Popular News