Post by account_disabled on Mar 6, 2024 3:41:03 GMT -5
The money collected as a fee remunerates the artist and is sufficient to pay for the execution of his work. It is unreasonable to charge a copyright fee which in practical terms represents the interest of the artist himself. This is because it is a double charge for the same activity. With this understanding the São Paulo Court of Justice denied the request from the Central Collection and Distribution Office Ecad which intended to collect copyright on songs performed at an event that hired their performer.
The TJSP pointed out that “the artist is allowed to execute his own work that he created according to the exegesis of article of law 0 regardless of authorization from Ecad. Therefore whoever hires him is also exempt from such payment under penalty of unjust enrichment of the artist himself who in addition to earning the profit from the payment of the “cache” will also receive the amounts related to the Ecad charge”.
Ecad filed a lawsuit in the São Paulo Court to collect BTC Number Data copyright on the songs performed by the performers themselves during events promoted by the municipality of Águas de Santa Barbara Sp between 00 and 0. It did not prove that the hired artists performed other musical works musical literature and phonograms other than those produced by them nor that the municipality performed songs at the event that did not belong to those hired. “Obtaining authorization is only possible in the event of the performance of musical works by third parties who are not authorized or present at the event a fact that was not demonstrated in the records” stated the TJSP.
According to the rapporteur citing witnesses it was clear that there was no abusive conduct on the part of the financial institution since the reason for the calls was never revealed by bank employees to the neighbors of the plaintiffs.
''It appears that there is no evidence that the form of collection carried out by the financial institution has led to an embarrassing or embarrassing situation capable of configuring moral damage'' stated the rapporteur.
“Thus it is assumed that they only performed those belonging to the hired artists themselves. At this stage nothing was produced that justified the collection of the aforementioned amount. It is about honoring objective good faith. It cannot be assumed that musical works have been performed irregularly to impute to the Municipality the obligation to pay a certain amount” he concluded.
The TJSP pointed out that “the artist is allowed to execute his own work that he created according to the exegesis of article of law 0 regardless of authorization from Ecad. Therefore whoever hires him is also exempt from such payment under penalty of unjust enrichment of the artist himself who in addition to earning the profit from the payment of the “cache” will also receive the amounts related to the Ecad charge”.
Ecad filed a lawsuit in the São Paulo Court to collect BTC Number Data copyright on the songs performed by the performers themselves during events promoted by the municipality of Águas de Santa Barbara Sp between 00 and 0. It did not prove that the hired artists performed other musical works musical literature and phonograms other than those produced by them nor that the municipality performed songs at the event that did not belong to those hired. “Obtaining authorization is only possible in the event of the performance of musical works by third parties who are not authorized or present at the event a fact that was not demonstrated in the records” stated the TJSP.
According to the rapporteur citing witnesses it was clear that there was no abusive conduct on the part of the financial institution since the reason for the calls was never revealed by bank employees to the neighbors of the plaintiffs.
''It appears that there is no evidence that the form of collection carried out by the financial institution has led to an embarrassing or embarrassing situation capable of configuring moral damage'' stated the rapporteur.
“Thus it is assumed that they only performed those belonging to the hired artists themselves. At this stage nothing was produced that justified the collection of the aforementioned amount. It is about honoring objective good faith. It cannot be assumed that musical works have been performed irregularly to impute to the Municipality the obligation to pay a certain amount” he concluded.