“NEEDLETIME” WHO, WHAT, HOW AND WHEN?

COPYRIGHT AND PERFORMERS’ PROTECTION ACTS ENABLING LEGISLATION PASSED IN 2002 COLLECTIVE ADMINISTRATION SUBJECT TO REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

WHAT RIGHTS? SECTION 9 OF THE COPYRIGHT ACT SECTION 5 OF THE PERFORMERS’ PROTECTION ACT –BROADCAST –DIFFUSION –COMMUNICATING TO THE PUBLIC

WHOSE RIGHTS? THE “AUTHOR” –EXCLUSIVE RIGHT –INDIVIDUAL RIGHT THE PERFORMER –RIGHT TO SHARE IN THE ROYALTY –INDIVIDUAL RIGHT

THE COLLECTING SOCIETY REGULATIONS SUBSIDIARY LEGISLATION - WHAT IS IT? COLLECTING SOCIETIES FOR COPYRIGHT OWNERS, PERFORMERS, OR JOINTLY ACCREDITATION IS REQUIRED WHEN REPRESENTING 50 OR MORE COPYRIGHT OWNERS / PERFORMERS SAMPRA ACCREDITED AS A COLLECTING SOCIETY REPRESENTING A BODY OF 50 OR MORE RIGHTSHOLDERS BENEFITS OF ACCREDITATION

THE NATURE OF THE RIGHTS ADMINISTERED BY SAMPRA PERFORMERS’ COLLECTING SOCIETY DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO COLLECT ROYALTY FROM USERS DIRECTLY A PERFORMERS’ COLLECTING SOCIETY’S ROLE IS LIMITED TO NEGOTIATING A ROYALTY WITH THE COPYRIGHT OWNER WHERE THERE IS NO AGREEMENT REGARDING THE SHARING OF THE ROYALTY SAMPRA DOES NOT TAKE ASSIGNMENT OF RIGHTS FROM THE MEMBERS OF RISA WHAT IS AN ASSIGNMENT OF RIGHTS?

THE AMOUNT OF THE ROYALTY IN TERMS OF SECTION 9A OF THE COPYRIGHT ACT THE AMOUNT OF THE ROYALTY IS TO BE AGREED BETWEEN: –THE COPYRIGHTHOLDER, –THE PERFORMER AND –THE USER, OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVE COLLECTING SOCIETIES IN THE ABSENCE OF AGREEMENT, THE MATTER CAN BE DETERMINED BY –ARBITRATION OR –A REFERRAL TO THE COPYRIGHT TRIBUNAL SAMRO AND SARRAL, IN THEIR RESPECTIVE CAPACITIES AS CIPRO ACCREDITED COLLECTING SOCIETIES, AGREED WITH SAMPRA’S TARIFFS

THE RATIO OF THE SHARING OF THE ROYALTY SECTION 9A OF THE COPYRIGHT ACT PROVIDES FOR THE RATIO OF THE SHARING OF THE ROYALTY TO BE DETERMINED BY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COPYRIGHT OWNER AND PERFORMER OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVE COLLECTING SOCIETIES IN THE ABSENCE OF AN AGREEMENT ON THE RATIO OF THE SHARING OF THE ROYALTY, THE MATTER CAN DETERMINED BY: –ARBITRATION OR –A REFERRAL TO THE COPYRIGHT TRIBUNAL

HISTORY OF THE SHARING OF THE ROYALTY RISA (ASAMI) LOBBIED WITH THE MUSICIAN’S UNION FOR THE RE-INTRODUCTION OF PERFORMANCE RIGHTS UNDER SECTION 9 OF THE COPYRIGHT ACT AND SECTION 5 OF THE PERFORMERS’ PROTECTION ACT AT ALL TIMES THE PARTIES LOBBIED FOR THE ROYALTY TO BE SHARED EQUALLY WHEN THE LEGISLATION WAS PROMULGATED IT DID NOT PROVIDE FOR AN EQUAL SHARING OF THE ROYALTY, BUT TO WHATEVER THE PARTIES AGREED TO

SAMPRA’s POSITION BECAUSE SAMPRA DOES NOT TAKE ASSIGNMENT OF RIGHTS FROM RISA’S MEMBERS, IT IS UNABLE TO AGREE WITH A THIRD PARTY TO OVERRIDE THE TERMS OF AN AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BETWEEN A RISA MEMBER AND A CONTRACTED PERFORMER THE FACT THAT SAMPRA IS AN ACCREDITED COLLECTING SOCIETY DOES NOT ENDOW SAMPRA WITH THE ABILITY TO CHANGE THE TERMS OF AN AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BETWEEN A RISA MEMBER AND A CONTRACTED PERFORMER BASIC PRINCIPLE OF SOUTH AFRICAN LAW - YOU CAN NOT TRANSFER MORE THAN YOU OWN

SAMPRA’s FIRST DISTRIBUTION SAMPRA’s FIRST DISTRIBUTION PLAN SUBMITTED ON MAY 28th 2009 ACCORDING TO THE COLLECTING SOCIETY REGULATIONS, THE REGISTRAR MUST APPROVE THE DISTRIBUTION PLAN UNLESS IT IS ARBITRARY OR DISCRETIONARY SAMRO OBJECTED TO THE DISTRIBUTION PLAN AND THE REGISTRAR DID NOT APPROVE THE DISTRIBUTION PLAN THE REGISTRAR RULED THAT THE ROYALTIES MUST BE SHARED EQUALLY BETWEEN THE COPYRIGHT OWNER AND THE PERFORMER THE REGULATOR IS NOT AUTHORISED IN LAW TO OVERRIDE THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 9A OF THE COPYRIGHT ACT WHICH PROVIDES FOR THE RATIO OF THE SHARING OF THE ROYALTY TO BE DETERMINED WITH REFERENCE ONLY TO AN AGREEMENT, ARBITRATION OR THE COPYRIGHT TRIBUNAL

CURRENT STATUS SAMPRA IS ACTING AS AN AGENT FOR ITS PRINCIPALS SAMPRA DOES NOT TAKE ASSIGNMENT OF RIGHTS SAMPRA CAN NOT ACT AS IF IT IS THE PRINCIPAL WHEN IT IS NOT LEGAL ACTION INSTITUTED TO HAVE THE REGISTRAR's RULING OVERTURNED SAMPRA REQUESTED SAMRO TO JOINTLY REFER THE MATTER OF THE SHARING OF THE ROYALTY TO THE COPYRIGHT TRIBUNAL

COPYRIGHT OWNERS AND PERFORMERS PREJUDICED FRUSTRATION RISA ALWAYS SUPPORTED THE EQUAL SHARING OF THE ROYALTY NO PARTY TO THE CURRENT LITIGATION IS LEGALLY COMPETENT TO IGNORE THE PROVISIONS OF THE COPYRIGHT ACT REGARDING THE SHARING OF THE ROYALTY SAMPRA’S SUGGESTION TO CIPRO AND SAMRO TO CIRCUMVENT THE IMPASSE

CURRENT MATTERS BEFORE THE COPYRIGHT TRIBUNAL COMMERCIAL RADIO BROADCASTERS –NO PAYMENT INTO ESCROW –DISPUTED THE LEGAL POWER OF THE COPYRIGHT TRIBUNAL TO CONSIDER SAMPRA’s REFERRAL –NAB BRINGING ITS OWN REFERRAL EDCON, FOSCHINI, NU-CLICKS, PEP, PICK ‘n PAY, TRUWORTHS, MR. PRICE –PAYMENTS INTO ESCROW –PROPOSING THAT SOUTH AFRICA FOLLOWS AUSTRALIA, WITH THE LOWEST RATES AROUND THE WORLD