Online music should avoid the impact of exclusive copyright: end the war of divisions, new platform opportunities are coming

Music copyright should not be exclusively authorized.

Recently, the National Copyright Administration has made a high-profile statement, aiming to monopolize music copyright. A few days ago, the National Copyright Administration first interviewed domestic and foreign music companies and several major domestic online music service providers, requesting that online music works should be fully authorized and exclusive authorization should be avoided. In particular, on October 26, Duan Yuping, deputy director of the Copyright Management Department of the National Copyright Administration, also revealed in the People's Daily that online entertainment service providers must not use exclusive music copyrights to drive up licensing prices.

Legally, music copyright is a private right. Whether it is an exclusive license or a non-exclusive license is generally decided by the copyright holder of the work. However, online music platforms have built industry barriers by obtaining "exclusive authorization" or purchasing "exclusive copyrights", forming an "oligopoly" effect on the online music service market.

In fact, whether it is an exclusive authorization or a non-exclusive authorization, it is necessary to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the copyright holder and take into account the market order of the dissemination of musical works. This should be the key to the intervention of relevant departments.

So, what is the current landscape of domestic online music platforms? What new issues have been exposed by online music copyright licensing?

Many powers compete for hegemony: Tencent, Alibaba, and NetEase "separate" the online music service market

At the beginning of the Internet, music that could be downloaded and played for free was everywhere on the Internet. This kind of network Piracy not only has a huge impact on traditional records, but also brings fatal damage to the music industry chain including lyrics, composition and singing.

Once upon a time, the recording industry collectively denounced and even sued Internet platforms for infringement incidents.

This antagonism was not alleviated until the two parties reached a new form of cooperation, ushering in a new format in the online music service market.

According to the "Regulations on the Protection of Information Network Communication Rights", the information network communication right refers to the provision of works, performances or audio and video products to the public through wired or wireless means, so that the public can rights to a work, performance or sound or video recording at the time and place.

To put it simply, the currently controversial online music service is ultimately about the licensing and authorization of the information network dissemination rights of musical works or audio-visual products.

Currently, the online music service market has formed an obvious "multiple-dominated" effect. Among them, the three major global record companies, Universal, Warner, and Sony, as well as YG Entertainment, Jewel Music, LOEN and other music copyrights are owned by Tencent Music Entertainment Group is the exclusive agent; music copyrights such as Rolling Stone, Huayan, Believe, and Media Asia are exclusively represented by Alibaba Music; Japanese music copyrights such as avex are represented by NetEase Cloud Music; Taihe Maitian, Haidie Music, Music copyrights such as Dashi’s copyright and The Orchard’s are represented by Baidu Music.

War between princes: NetEase Cloud Music is involved in online music copyright licensing disputes

NetEase Cloud Music was sued twice within a month for providing online music playback services without permission. court.

On the one hand, major music platforms are using "exclusive procurement" methods to divide online music copyrights from the source; on the other hand, major music platforms rely on the exclusive authorization they have obtained to purchase music without permission. Use the platform to initiate litigation and rights protection.

For a time, the online music service market was in turmoil. The manifestations include: 1) On the Internet client side, music that could previously be played on demand has been removed from the shelves or cannot be played on some platforms. 2) On the music copyright side, based on irrational competition strategies, the price of music copyright licenses has been continuously increased or driven up, reaching new highs repeatedly.

In the short term, the upstream rights holders will benefit from the "gouging" of music copyright prices, but in the long term, there are big variables as to whether they will definitely benefit.

On the one hand, the profit model or profitability of online music services is still being explored. Simply put, no platform has yet achieved good performance or income based on music copyright operations. On the other hand, if Due to the lack of profitability, online music service platforms may stop injecting capital, which may lead to a sharp decline in music copyright licensing prices in the future. This possible wide-ranging shock of "high at first and then low" will obviously have a negative impact on the music industry. The long-term interests of the work rights holders and the music market are harmed.

Therefore, under the premise of certain basic investigation or industry understanding, it is necessary to make appropriate intervention based on maintaining good market order.

Avoid exclusivity: The left hand prevents the monopoly of online music services, and the right hand prevents role misplacement

According to Article 8 of the Copyright Law, “The copyright owner and copyright-related rights holders may authorize "Copyright collective management organizations exercise copyright or copyright-related rights", "Copyright collective management organizations are non-profit organizations, their establishment methods, rights and obligations, collection and distribution of copyright licensing fees, as well as their supervision and management, etc. shall be separately determined by the State Council "

It can be seen that according to the structural design of the Copyright Law, in order to facilitate the rights protection of rights holders, the role of a copyright collective management organization has been set up, and it can prosecute and defend authorized works in its own name. , claims, etc., and there are special management methods for the establishment and supervision of such organizations.

At present, when major online music platforms obtain exclusive licenses or exclusive copyrights, it is not ruled out that some platforms also form agency rights protection and other cooperation with upstream copyright parties.

Under this model, major online music platforms may have role conflicts with the China Music Copyright Association, a copyright collective management organization in the field of musical works, in the agency protection of information network dissemination rights.

In addition, from an anti-monopoly perspective, if the exclusive copyright procurement or exclusive licensing of online music service platforms is allowed, the emergence of a "one dominant" competition pattern in the future cannot be ruled out.

And when the online music service market is "monopolized" by a certain platform, when it subsequently purchases music copyrights, due to the lack of effective competition, abuse such as "purchasing at unfairly low prices" cannot be ruled out. market dominance behavior.

Industry changes: The era of the online music service market is coming

It is worth mentioning that after the introduction of the requirement to avoid exclusive copyrights or exclusive licenses, it will be more difficult for those who are interested in entering this field. This is a major benefit for the new platform.

Take NetEase Cloud Music as an example. Disputes arising from sublicensing with other platforms will be resolved quickly. It can choose to reach sublicensing cooperation with other platforms, or it can reach upstream copyright parties as needed. Direct license cooperation.

For other platforms that plan to enter this field, the inappropriate industry barriers previously established by online music platforms have been broken down. On the one hand, in the future, they will have the opportunity to directly obtain licenses from the source music copyright owners. On the other hand, it will become easier to reach cross-licensing or sub-licensing with other music platforms based on the music copyrights it has obtained.

To put it simply, the online music service market will benefit from the "avoiding exclusive licensing" and ushering in the "letting a hundred flowers bloom" era with more platform participation.

Of course, there is no problem in preventing or avoiding vicious competition or unfair competition in the industry. However, the methods, timing and means of intervention also need to be accurately determined to avoid excessive interference that damages the rights of upstream copyright holders. Legitimate interests.

Exclusive operation will definitely have many disadvantages, but now it is better.