New rights for performers and producers:
The World Intellectual Property Organization’s Summit — Take 2
After 12 years of waiting, the Diplomatic Conference on the protection of audiovisual performances will meet at last in Beijing from June 20th to 26th 2012. Based on the articles provisionally approved in 2000 (19 items out of 20), Member States will have to confirm the new article on the transfer of rights, agree on three additional joint statements and finalize the administrative arrangements of the new treaty.
“The stumbling block to agreement in both 1996 and 2000 was a stand-off between the USA and the European Union over the transfer of rights. In audiovisual productions the transfer of rights from performers to producers is essential so that producers can negotiate commercial deals with cinema chains, broadcasters, DVD retailers and so on without having to seek authorization from each individual performer.”[1]
The need to transfer rights is not disputed, but different countries have different systems for doing this. And it is precisely the article on copyright transfer that was hobbling the proposed audiovisual treaty in 2000.
For some of our members, this Treaty is of a particular importance.
Raymond Legault, the president of Union des artistes, hopes that the diplomatic conference will be successful. The 1996 Performances and Phonograms Treaty exists, but it “creates a disparity between the different performers depending on the pieces in which they participate. In addition, one artist may be protected when participating in an audio recording but be devoid of protection where the provision is incorporated in an audiovisual production. Let’s agree that such a situation is unfair.”
Will this Treaty change anything in your negotiations between performers and producers?
“It will be possible for UDA to invoke the” moral “authority that comes from such a treaty to support its claims, but let’s be clear, as long as the Copyright Bill remains unchanged it does not incorporate the protections offered by the new treaty. The impact on negotiations in the audiovisual sector is therefore negligible. Furthermore, the amendments to the Copyright Act proposed by Bill C-11 does not extend the protection to performers taking part in audiovisual works and as the next revision of the Act will only ‘occur in a few years, the benefits of such a treaty will not be realized until much later. ”
The debate will continue for years to come in the context of yet another Copyright Act reform!