Sanicki Lawyers Melbourne

  • Home
  • Services
    • Commercial Lawyers Melbourne
    • Music & Entertainment
    • Film & Television
    • Conveyancing Lawyers
    • Trade Marks & Intellectual Property
    • Defamation Lawyers
    • Copyright & Licensing
    • Debt Collection & Insolvency
    • Family Lawyer Melbourne
    • Wills & Estates
    • Franchising Lawyer Melbourne
    • Litigation & Dispute Resolution
    • New Technology & Start Ups
    • Fashion & Design
    • Trade Promotions
  • Clients
    • Music & Entertainment
    • Commercial
  • About
  • Careers
    • Work With Us
    • Intern With Us
  • Contact us
+61 3 9510 9888
High Court Upholds 1% Cap on Broadcast Royalties for Sound Recordings
March 29, 2012
  |  
Moira McKenzie

The High Court has today handed down its decision in Phonographic Performance Company of Australia Limited (PPCA) & Ors v Commonwealth of Australia & Ors.

The case concerns the cap in the Copyright Act 1968 for royalties payable for the radio broadcast of sound recordings. While price caps are a common form of economic regulation, the caps in the Copyright Act are unusual in that they are not underpinned by any discernable economic formula. For example, the cap for commercial radio broadcasts is 1% of the gross earnings of the broadcaster (section 152(8)(b)).

The Howard Government had announced its intention to lift the cap on broadcast royalties for sound recordings as part of its 2006 amendments to the Copyright Act. However, this change did not appear in the final draft of amendments.

PPCA, the copyright collecting society representing owners of copyright in sound recordings, brought the matter to the High Court. They argued that the inclusion of the cap in the 1968 Act amounted to an acquisition of the property of the owners of copyright in sound recordings other than on “just terms” and was therefore in contravention of section 51 (xxxi) of the Constitution. The Defendants (the Commonwealth, Commercial Radio Australia and the ABC) argued that there was no acquisition of property given that the legislation in force prior to the 1968 Act did not create a broadcast right. They further argued that even if there was an acquisition of property, it was consistent with the kind of adjustment envisaged by s 51(xxxi) of the Constitution.

The High Court has today confirmed the constitutional validity of the cap.

Back to news
 
  • Melbourne
    Level 2, 240 Chapel Street
    Prahran, VIC 3181
    Phone +61 3 9510 9888
  • Brisbane
    139 Gotha Street
    Fortitude Valley, QLD 4006
    Phone +61 7 3333 1844
  • General Enquiries
    hello@sanickilawyers.com.au
    Fax +61 3 9510 9888
Sanicki Lawyers Melbourne

Services

  • Commercial Lawyers Melbourne
  • Wills & Estates
  • Music & Entertainment
  • Franchising Lawyer Melbourne
  • Conveyancing Lawyers
  • Litigation & Dispute Resolution
  • Trade Promotions
  • New Technology & Start Ups
  • Defamation Lawyers
  • Fashion & Design
  • Copyright and Licensing
  • Trade Marks & Intellectual Property
  • Film & Television
  • Debt Collection & Insolvency
  • Family Lawyer Melbourne

Info

  • About Us
  • Clients
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Blog

Social

  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin

© Copyright 2020. Website & SEO Melbourne & Digital Marketing Melbourne by ZIB Digital | All Rights Reserved.