{"id":9194,"date":"2020-12-03T16:34:17","date_gmt":"2020-12-03T16:34:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/vila.es\/?p=9194"},"modified":"2020-12-03T16:34:17","modified_gmt":"2020-12-03T16:34:17","slug":"reproduction-of-phonograms-is-there-a-right-to-compensation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/vila.es\/en\/intellectual-and-industrial-property\/reproduction-of-phonograms-is-there-a-right-to-compensation\/","title":{"rendered":"REPRODUCTION OF PHONOGRAMS: IS THERE A RIGHT TO COMPENSATION?"},"content":{"rendered":"

The purpose of this article is to analyse the content of the judgment issued by the Court of Justice of the European Uni\u00f3n (CJEU) in case C-147\/19. The conflicting parties of the dispute are, on one hand the entities Association of Management of Intellectual Assets (Asociaci\u00f3n de Gesti\u00f3n de Derechos Intelectuales \u2013 AGEDI) and Artists, Performers or Producers, Spanish Management Company (<\/strong>Artistas, Int\u00e9rpretes o Ejecutantes, Sociedad de Gesti\u00f3n de Espa\u00f1a \u2013 AIE), which are both entities that <\/strong>that manage the intellectual property rights of phonogram producers and such rights of performers. The defendant is Atresmedia <\/strong>Corporaci\u00f3n de Medios de Comunicaci\u00f3n, S.A. (Atresmedia \u2013 owner of a number of television channels<\/strong>).<\/p>\n

The claim filed by the plaintiffs is for compensation for carrying out communications to the public and the reproduction of synchronised phonograms in films broadcast by the television channels belonging to Atresmedia. For its part, the defendant denies that it has to pay any amount on its understanding that a phonogram ceases to be a phonogram once it is synchronised (incorporated into a work), as long as it is exploited together with the audio-visual work of which it forms a part, that is to say, not as an independent concept.<\/p>\n

In order to resolve this conflict, the Spanish Supreme Court raised two questions before the CJEU in a preliminary consultation:<\/p>\n