For socan, the first highlight of the year was the Copyright Board’s approval of a tariff covering the use of music on pay, specialty and other cable television services in April. Ironically, the second highlight of the year is the fact ‘that we have none of that money,’ says Michael Rock, gm of socan.

Before April, ‘Canada was one of the few countries in the western world that did not have any royalties paid to music creators for use of the music on cable television,’ Rock recalls. The tariff called for Canada’s cable systems to pay socan – the Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada – royalties from performances dating back to 1990. But still no money.

Several appeals have been made by the Canadian Cable Television Association and a variety of specialty channels. Initially, socan sought a tariff to be paid solely by the cable television systems, a tariff the Copyright Board approved. However, television systems insist payment should be split, with part of it paid by cable tv and part by specialty channels.

Rock maintains, ‘The cable television industry is in the nature of wanting to shift part of the burden of the tariff to other parties involved in the communication of the music.’

Specialty channels appealed on different grounds. Though Rock says the channels could ultimately share the cost anyway, he understands that ‘in their view, it would be simpler to have the split set by the Copyright Board than to have many, many negotiations between cable companies and specialty channels.’

The date for appeal hearings has been set for Jan. 15. Meanwhile, socan is losing money.

With cable companies refusing to acknowledge the tariff, no monetary compensation is being paid to socan members for the use of their music. In addition, the shift of audiences from conventional broadcast media to cable, satellite and specialty services is mounting.

Without an enforced cable tariff, socan cannot collect revenues from cable companies and cannot compensate for the loss of advertising revenue incurred when audiences switch from conventional broadcasting to newer specialty services. Rock’s concerns, however, exceed the immediate economic implications. He is further concerned that these proceedings could set a dangerous precedent for music tariffs already in play.

The organization maintains over 20 tariffs, each evolving from negotiations between socan, the licensees, and in some cases, the Copyright Board.

Rock argues, ‘The tariffs are structured in a way that seems to be the most easily applicable, the most easily administeredthe appeal of the Canadian Cable Television Associationreally goes to the heart of many of our tariffswe wouldn’t want to see all of our tariffs overturned.’

As the year comes to a close, socan’s greatest challenge will likely plague 1997 as well. Currently in its second passing, the House of Commons Bill C-32 proposes to amend the Copyright Act. In it, socan finds two main areas of contention; the proposed levy on blank tapes and the neighboring rights issue.

The Neighbouring Rights Act stipulates that performers and record producers would be able to seek a royalty from radio stations. socan’s concern is that money paid to performers and producers be new money, separate from the royalties presently paid to the organization by radio stations.

Rock argues, ‘We represent the creators. The creation of the song comes first, then come the recordings. It would be against common sense that money be taken from the creators to pay to the performers.’

Radio stations feel they should not be required to pay any additional fee, maintaining they presently pay enough for the use of the music, and whatever royalties are paid should be divided among socan members and music performers.

Rock retaliates, ‘It’s the government’s intention that it be a new right. Well, it should be accompanied by new money.’ That discussion closed, Rock delves into another.

It is estimated that 44 million blank tapes are sold in Canada each year. Most are used for home taping, the illegal transferring of copyright material without consent. The end result is record companies and all those protected under copyright law lose millions in sales. The proposed blank tape levy is an attempt at compensating copyright owners for the loss of sales due to home taping. The government has used, as example, a levy of 37 cents.

While Rock maintains socan does not necessarily support a levy of 37 cents, he says ‘it is impossible to stop people from taping, so the next best thing would be to have some way to compensate copyright owners for that home taping.’

Rock suggests the monitoring of levies: ‘If distribution was based on record sales and airplay, that might be reasonable.’

The government has proposed that the amount of the levy be decided by the Copyright Board. However, Rock concludes, ‘whether it’s 37 cents or a dollar thirty-seven, it would never, could never compensate the people involved in the recording business.’

Sonia Mendes is a second-year media writing student in the Radio and Television Arts program at Ryerson Polytechnic University, Toronto.