Difference between revisions of "Nanayakkara (2017)"

From Copyright EVIDENCE
(Created page with "{{MainSource |Source={{Source |Name of Study=Nanayakkara (2017) |Author=Nanayakkara, G.; |Title=Promise and Perils of Sri Lankan Performers' Rights: The Royalty Collection in...")
 
(No difference)

Latest revision as of 13:45, 5 November 2019

Advertising Architectural Publishing of books, periodicals and other publishing Programming and broadcasting Computer programming Computer consultancy Creative, arts and entertainment Cultural education

Film and motion pictures Sound recording and music publishing Photographic activities PR and communication Software publishing (including video games) Specialised design Television programmes Translation and interpretation

1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare 2. Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)? 3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors) 4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption) 5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)

A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right) B. Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction) C. Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing) D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability) E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts) F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Source Details

Nanayakkara (2017)
Title: Promise and Perils of Sri Lankan Performers' Rights: The Royalty Collection in Music
Author(s): Nanayakkara, G.
Year: 2017
Citation: Nanayakkara, G. (2017) ‘Promise and Perils of Sri Lankan Performers’ Rights: The Royalty Collection in Music’ European Journal of Current Legal Issues, 23(1).
Link(s): Open Access
Key Related Studies:
Discipline:
Linked by:
About the Data
Data Description: Data were obtained from 17 semi-structured interviews with singers, lyricists, music composers, entertainment lawyers, members of artists’ organisations, politicians and representatives of media companies from Sri Lanka. No specific analysis method is detailed, and instead the study focusses on using the interview data to substantiate the authors claims to the distinctiveness of the Sri Lankan music industry (with comparisons against the UK, USA and India).
Data Type: Primary data
Secondary Data Sources:
Data Collection Methods:
Data Analysis Methods:
Industry(ies):
Country(ies):
Cross Country Study?: No
Comparative Study?: No
Literature review?: No
Government or policy study?: No
Time Period(s) of Collection:
  • 2012-2013
Funder(s):

Abstract

“Royalty collection in music is considered as the 'holy grail' in resolving the remuneration issue of musical artists through copyright and performers' rights. Predominantly grounded on economic incentive theory, these intellectual property regimes promote extensive implementation and enforcement of royalty collection schemes coining the survival and sustainability of the relevant aesthetic industry and their participants. This article will examine the feasibility of musical performers' royalty collection under performers' rights in Sri Lanka while making reference to established schemes in other music industries such as USA, UK and India. In doing so, this paper attempts to highlight the perils of introducing a royalty collection scheme in a relatively smaller music industry in Sri Lanka that is heavily dependent on foreign music. Probing the capabilities of such a scheme to address the remuneration concerns of the country's aging artists, a commercially vulnerable group within the music industry, this paper attempts to demonstrate how a music royalty scheme would fall short of its promise if not implemented with appropriate sensitivities to the relevant domestic conditions and with realistic expectations.”

Main Results of the Study

There is no proper and consistent royalty collection or distribution with regards music in Sri Lanka, which interview participants blame as leading to a lack of adequate remuneration. Many of the participants believe that such a royalty scheme would improve market conditions in the music industry and promote fair remuneration for artists. In particular, participants point to several industry-specific practices which make fair remuneration difficult:

• whilst performers are hesitant to relinquish their IP rights, due to imbalances in bargaining power they are likely to assign these to record companies in order to achieve widespread distribution (if not remuneration).

• lack of transparency with the value chain in the digital market results in artists being under-remunerated.

• particular value is placed on the ability to perform live, and where this is not possible performers are under-remunerated. Performers express concerns about the ability of ageing artists to be remunerated in this context.

However, the author cautions that “it is very unlikely that a proper royalty collection scheme would deliver a reasonable mode of remuneration for the vocalists in the Sri Lankan music industry.”. This is due to a number of country-specific limitations, including a requirement to acquiesce to TRIPS, which may create an undue financial burden on local media companies to pay royalties for foreign works.

Policy Implications as Stated By Author

Whilst the author notes that a royalty collection scheme may be successful in Sri Lanka if implemented with “great caution and care”, they surmise that in its current state any such scheme would likely be unsuccessful in achieving fair remuneration for vocalists.


Coverage of Study

Coverage of Fundamental Issues
Issue Included within Study
Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare
Green-tick.png
Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)?
Green-tick.png
Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors)
Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption)
Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)
Coverage of Evidence Based Policies
Issue Included within Study
Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right)
Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction)
Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing)
Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability)
Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts)
Green-tick.png
Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Datasets

Sample size: 17
Level of aggregation: Individual
Period of material under study: 2012-2013