Memorandum 12
Submission from the Design and Artists
Copyright Society
THE WORK AND OPERATION OF THE COPYRIGHT TRIBUNAL
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 DACS welcomes the inquiry of the Innovation,
Universities & Skills Select Committee into the Work and Operation
of the Copyright Tribunal, and in particular welcomes the recommendations
aiming to achieve a fair balance between the interests of copyright
creators and owners and copyright consumers before the Tribunal.
1.2 DACS was established in 1984 as a not-for-profit
organisation to promote and protect the copyright and related
rights of artists and visual creators.
1.3 DACS currently represents over 50,000
artists and their heirs, comprising 36,000 artists, in addition
to 16,000 photographers, illustrators, craftspeople, cartoonists,
architects, animators and designers, including some of the biggest
names in contemporary visual arts as well as many emerging and
unknown artists.
1.4 DACS belongs to an international network
of visual artists' organisations; we currently hold reciprocal
agreements with 32 other societies in 27 countries. In addition,
DACS belongs to the following international federations: EVA,
IFFRO, and CISAC.
1.5 Under our membership agreements right-holders
mandate DACS to act as an exclusive agent in the exercise of those
rights granted to creators of artistic works under s. 16 of the
Copyright, Design & Patents Act 1988 (as amended) on behalf
of its members.
1.6 DACS achieves its objectives of promoting
and protecting visual creators' intellectual property rights (IPRs)
by offering the following services:
— transactional licensing and individual
rights management as an agent for our UK and international membership;
— collective rights management for
the entire UK visual repertoire through participation in a range
of collective licensing schemes, with the addition of mandates
from fourteen professional associations and trade unions representing
visual creators. In some cases these rights are exercised on our
behalf by agencies such as the Educational Recording Agency (ERA),
and the Copyright Licensing Agency (CLA); and
— artist's resale right administration:
new service of collection and distribution of resale royalties
launched by DACS in 2006 as a result of the implementation of
the EU Directive 2001/84/EC on the resale right for the benefit
of the author of an original work of art.
For further information on DACS' activities,
please refer to our official website: www.dacs.org.uk.
2. REFERENCE
TO THE
BRITISH COPYRIGHT
COUNCIL'S
SUBMISSION
As noted, DACS largely welcomes the recommendations
of the Committee, and we find ourselves in agreement with the
points submitted by the British Copyright Council. Rather than
reiterate these points here, may we take the liberty of referring
you to the submission prepared by the Council on behalf of its
members (ourselves included).
3. COMMENT ON
RECOMMENDATION 25 OF
THE COMMITTEE'S
REPORT
3.1 We would like to take this opportunity
to comment on Recommendation 25, in which it is proposed that
licensing bodies should be able to make reference to the Copyright
Tribunal under sections 118 and 125 of the CDPA.
3.2 In agreement with the British Copyright
Council's description of the nature of collecting societies under
number 8 of their submission we would like to stress the importance
of the Tribunal to deal even-handedly with collecting societies
and users. To keep a fair and balanced position between licensors
and licensees it is vital for collecting societies to be able
to make references to the Tribunal under sections 118 and 125
of the CDPA. The current situation that collecting societies can
only act as defendants before the Tribunal rather then instigating
proceedings themselves has a negative effect on collecting societies
when negotiating licensing schemes or licences.
3.3 Paired with the weak enforcement provisions
of the CDPA and the very cost intensive enforcement proceedings
when members' rights are infringed, the licensee's bargaining
power is unjustly enhanced by the current situation caused through
sections 118 and 125 of the CDPA.
3.4 When negotiating licensing schemes or
licences, collecting societies are often confronted with the situation
to either redraft a proposal according to the stipulations of
the licensee or to risk a referral to the Tribunal, which results
in costly and lengthy proceedings or that member's rights will
be infringed without a real possibility of legally enforcing the
member's rights when the licensee is simply refusing to accept
the proposal.
3.5 The possibility for collecting societies
to refer proposed licensing schemes or licenses will therefore
adjust this imbalance and introduce a more fair and even-handedly
procedure which will support the collecting societies to avoid
delays and uncertainties for their members.
3.6 In agreement with the British Copyright
Council's description of collecting societies in their initial
submission that collecting societies are not large commercial
companies we would therefore like to fully support Recommendation
25 of the Committee Report to ensure a fair and balanced procedure
before the Copyright Tribunal, which ultimately will not only
benefit the individual creator but the whole creative industry.
January 2008
| 
