Last year in November, the one paper that Chinese sound runs association like copyright collective one paper " cutout song announcement " cause heat to discuss. Phonic collect assist in announcement, inform KTV terminal of manufacturing management to business and card pull OK operator to delete many 6000 song that did not obtain authorization, will face the risk that is sued possibly otherwise. This theres is no lack of among them " 10 years " , " listen to the sea " etc wide suffer consumer gay to heat up the eye that sing song.
Nowadays, disturbance still is fermenting. March 21 in the morning, company of 9 KTV of Guangdong sues phonic collect assist forestall issue desk is tried in open a court session of court of Beijing intellectual property. Of accuser accuse begging is collect of square sound of requirement the accused assist sign copyright work with reasonable, coequal condition and accuser " copyright license uses a contract " , think phonic collect assist appoint tripartite, namely the day added up to a company to disobey " antitrust law " .
What is bilateral divergent focus?
This litigant general how wind up?
↓ ↓ ↓
Engage in a battle one: "Collect fees unreasonable " VS " by national level "
Accuser just says, its manage the sound that the place uses to resemble system of work music library is be bought through signing a contract with tripartite and come, be in bosom friend collect assist after the collective controller that is work of KTV song library, accuser for many times Xiang Yin collect assist cooperative unit -- Guangzhou city weather adds up to culture to develop limited company to put forward to sign " copyright license uses a contract " request, the day added up to a company to put forward unreasonable autograph to restrict a demand. Then, accuser collect of 3 Xiang Yin assist put forward to sign invite to beg directly, and phonic collect assist hold to requirement accuser and its collaboration company, namely the day adds up to company autograph to make an appointment with, bring about contract autograph to make an appointment with not if really.
Fang Jiade of accuser representative lawyer thinks, phonic collect assist cooperate the business that popularizes original music library and company, actual be commercialize business, and in this one process, raised a lot of unreasonable cost. "One is the everybody calculation that wants KTV place, when does your company establish, you were not signed with me inside those time before about, did not pay fee, you this charge fills to me hand in, you fill handed in me to be made an appointment with to your autograph, you do not fill hand in me to be not made an appointment with with your autograph, fill namely pay the fee that establishs to negotiate this paragraph of time from the company. This is a very high cost " .
And collect of the accused square sound assist Zhou Yaping of total a secretary in charge of sth points out, this charge is according to the announcement standard of national copyright bureau collection, nonexistent " unreasonable " say. The condition that arranges because of the autograph is the declared spending level according to copyright bureau, each area is sign according to a standard. Standard of region economy progress is same, unite a standard. "Now the announcement of copyright bureau is according to the unit price between the number between the bag, bag, take the time with using work. You had used 3 years, you cannot be not carried in vain black do not carry wiped completely. That is me irresponsible to copyright person, also be right other the use person that pays fee according to reasonable condition is irresponsible. Also be right other the use person that pays fee according to reasonable condition is irresponsible..
But Fang Jiade thinks, fill pay this fee cannot bear at all longer to establishing time KTV. Fang Jiade says, dispatch begins from 2006, had allowed to collect fees 2006, but some companies hold water antedate 6 years. Assume a company holds water 4 years, he finds this company to ask he collects fees now, so, begin to calculate from 2006 2019, altogether 13 years. "This kind of KTV of 50 rooms dimensions, be about to hand in probably millions of. A such number is told to a place, it is equal to indebted, it was not managed. " Fang Jiade expresses, except this charge, the working personnel that comes to serve is extra should close reconcile cost, autograph restricts the cost with the various items such as the cost, cost that drink tea. Accuser just requests a court to sentence your sound collect assist offer work of copyright of authorised edition of KTV song library to use a service to accuser, sign copyright work with reasonable, coequal condition and accuser " copyright license uses a contract " .
So, phonic collect assist give a company the package below business lawful? Beijing also enlighten Wu Zhenhua of attorney office executive director thinks: This should be an accredit, perhaps saying is concern of a contract. But have these accredit file, procedures all ready, bale so called tripartite, have reasonable, legal procedures, this is very crucial, below this premise condition, can go doing this business.
Engage in a battle 2: "Be suspected of forestall " VS " have the market to control a position "
In addition, accuser thinks phonic collect assist appoint cooperative unit to undertake signing agreement, make forestall conduct. Accuser thinks phonic collect assist add up to company cooperation with the day, run system of library of music of phonic resembling work to copyright collective carry out accredit autograph to make an appointment with, be seek profits the accused blame sexual copyright collective manages property, introduce a day to add up to what company business collective manages property to bind trade behavior, disobeyed " antitrust law " regulation. Be aimed at this one lawsuit, collect of the accused square sound assist think to sing the much home company such as Mai Song KTV also enjoys copyright of phonic resembling work, its do not have relevant market control a position. Phonic collect assist point out, accuser ought to to the State Council relevant section impeach, have no right to think with respect to its its are disobeyed " copyright collective regulation " the behavior of relevant provision mentions civil suit.
Collect of the accused square sound assist Zhou Yaping of total a secretary in charge of sth expresses: Accuser just did not clear up phonic collect assist concessionary position mixes law the management principal part that has the market to control a position, it is not a concept. If be to feel collective government organization has those act that violate byelaw regulation, so, he is should the regulation according to byelaw, the copyright administration mechanism to the State Council undertakes complaining, inform against, impeach is waited a moment, be checked next by mechanism of administration of copyright of the State Council solid. A such categories that say this is solved namely through administration so.
" copyright collective regulation " the 23rd regulation, obligee thinks copyright collective manages an organization to have one of following state, can to impeach of management department of copyright of the State Council. Among them a case is organization of copyright collective government not according to the regulation collection, turn pay use fee, perhaps do not extract according to the regulation, of use administration fee. Plaintiff attorney Fang Jiade thinks, here " can " it is alternative regulation. "Can complain to the State Council, also can be solved through other way. Now phonic collect assist saying this administration regulation is mandatory regulation, have to takes the department of the State Council, cannot take other department, this view is wrong. " Fang Jiade says, phonic collect assist it is a trade organization, itself is qualitative without economy, but when obligee entrusts the work collective that is engaged in obligee to it to manage, it has economic action. "It sells a family work, next collection charge, will allocate next, economic behavior is changeless. So it agrees with antitrust law. So it agrees with antitrust law..
Front courtyard careful is final, all express to be willing to accept judicial mediation when thing both sides. This case was not adjudged on the court. Beijing also enlighten Wu Zhenhua of attorney office executive director thinks, the possibility that this case mediates is very large, and if adjudicate, no matter how can the result make KTV news,resemble the important legal precedent of domain of goods dimension right. Wu Zhenhua expresses, resemble goods be being broadcasted between KTV without the sound of accredit, past is very common, but this affirmation involves tort action, just go everybody did not take the likelihood seriously rise, everybody begins to take seriously now. This is about to see a judge how measure condition of current whole dimension authority, include the each respect factor such as the evidence that both sides provides think, make a relatively reasonable judgement next. "This word that if speak,comes, that will be future a when very long period of time resembles respect of goods dimension authority in the sound of KTV domain important legal precedent. That will be future a when very long period of time resembles respect of goods dimension authority in the sound of KTV domain important legal precedent..
