TRIBUNAL DECISION
In 2OO9 the Copyright Tribunal finally ruled on three of PPL’s public performance background music tariffs. The decision was not a favourable one to PPL in that our proposals were rejected, the Tribunal deciding to revert to the company’s old tariffs (subject to a 1O% uplift).
The historical background to the Copyright Tribunal decision dates back to 2003. Following legal action by PPL against the UK Government and a change in the law, the company was, for the first time, entitled to license the public performance of sound recordings contained in a broadcast. This meant that we were entitled to license the use by businesses of the radio and TV to play recorded music in public.
Following lengthy consultation with the relevant markets, PPL lodged three new tariffs with the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry on 1 December 2004 who in turn referred the three tariffs to the Copyright Tribunal under a new, fast-track regulatory approach.
‘’ WE ARE EXTREMELY DISAPPOINTED BY THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL WHICH, EVEN BY ITS OWN ADMISSION, IS ‘ILL-EQUIPPED’ TO PERFORM ITS NEW INVESTIGATORY ROLE. THE TRIBUNAL HAS FAILED TO HAVE PROPER REGARD FOR THE REAL VALUE OF MUSIC TO BUSINESSES.”
FRAN NEVRKLA 22 OCTOBER 2OO9
Finally, over four years later, the Tribunal sat for a one day hearing and, despite stating that it was “ill equipped to perform“ its statutory task of acting as an investigatory body, the Tribunal nonetheless decided it had enough representations before it to make its ‘one-size-fits-all’ decision across the three tariffs – despite there being no opposition from one sector, Factories and Offices, in regard to that tariff.
The Tribunal was placed in a very difficult situation by the new regulatory regime and, as mentioned, admitted that it was not set up to operate under this new investigatory process and the UK Government is now proposing to remove the regulatory regime.
In October 2009 PPL appealed the decision to the High Court though our appeal was limited to establishing an error of law. Unfortunately, while there were some aspects of the Tribunal’s decision with which the High Court Judge did not agree, he found that the Tribunal had a wide discretion and was entitled to come to the decision that it did. This has now left PPL in the unsatisfactory position, which is also unfair to music users, of effectively one price applying to the vast majority of the pubs market and the retail market. It is this ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach, coupled with the disregard for the value of our members’ rights which we strongly believe is not the correct approach moving forward.
As a consequence of the substantial delays, despite the new fast track procedure introduced by the Government, PPL is in the process of making refunds to licensees.
17
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52