Joop Daalmeijer Marathon (4): 'Broadcasters squeeze out artists'

Wijbrand Schaap: 'Next hot issue. Copyright is mentioned in a few passages of the Cultural Exploration. I am also affected by that in various ways. There is, of course, that new copyright law, which is going to be debated in the chamber at some point, maybe. Nice about that is that the creator's position in that law has been strengthened.'

Joop Daalmeijer: 'Rightly so.'

Wijbrand Schaap: 'But in my opinion, not enough yet, although we are on the right track. How, for example, does the council stand on the sampleculture? Everyone assumes that what is online is public domain is, anyway. The people from Image rights organisation Pictoright Are spending all day tracking down All those pictures that but by anyone be used. The Regional Archief Leiden places pieces of journalists sundthere permission and payment on the website. That is note government. There is quite a lot going on.‘

Joop Daalmeijer: 'The council has never actually paid attention to that.'

Wijbrand Schaap: 'Isn't it about time, then?'

Joop Daalmeijer: 'I personally think so. I'm a journalist myself. And I think in any case, if you copy something from someone, you should have permission to do so. Then you, as the author, can say: "You can have it, or for a tenner, or for a hundred euros, or you can have it for nothing, but with acknowledgement of the source." But that right belongs to you. You are the one who came up with that, this is where it originated. And then it subsequently finds its way. That applies to everything. Whether it's pop music, or contemporary music. And that also applies to the people who play it. Those also have a right. Those have derivative rights.'

'For example, I look with concern at broadcasters. They acquire all the rights of an author who has written a play, and all those rights that broadcaster then pulls to themselves. They are going to exploit that, without paying. Yes, thank the hell! You can make a deal, and say, "OK, we're going to exploit your rights, and then we'll talk about the distribution of the proceeds." But no. Broadcasters demand all the rights. I saw that in a piece by the Tros the other day. How can that be?

Wijbrand Schaap: 'We have of course had the case around the cable charges. A battle has been won.'

Joop Daalmeijer: 'But I am not very positive about that.'

Wijbrand Schaap: 'Neither do I. Copyright organisation Lira is in danger, and with it all the writers, playwrights, screenwriters of the Netherlands. The problem is big: newspapers have handed in their printing press, and the cable company has taken over the job of the printing press: they do the distribution. They sometimes have a deal with the publishers, but not with the creators. Would a general internet charge payable through the cable companies be a way of offsetting that?'

Joop Daalmeijer: 'There have also been discussions with radio and television, to introduce a new form of listening and viewing fees. We as a council are not taking a position on that yet, but it would be good if we look into it. Because it is obviously a source of income for a lot of people in the cultural sector. If that gets watered down...'

Wijbrand Schaap: 'One and a half billion euros a year now disappears to the Cayman Islands, via Liberty Global, which owns UPC and ZIGGO.

Joop Daalmeijer: 'Screenwriter Robert Albertdink Thyme is a friend of mine. He really fought his ass off to get those rights for his series. He has settled that now. I also don't know how that's going with the whole lira procedure that's going on now, but you have to settle something somewhere.'

'I am not a lawyer. I have no idea. But I do watch broadcasters with care, because that is the closest thing to me. Thank the thunder say! Why? "Because we pay for everything." Yes. You don't pay for someone's brain. You don't pay that. You don't just suck that dry.'

Wijbrand Schaap: 'And it's public money.'

Joop Daalmeijer: 'It is also public money. But they feel they are entitled to it. I also, when we wrote that piece on the media law, had a very long talk with Henk Hagoort about it: "You have to organise a rights office centrally, at the public broadcaster." Central. Where agreements are made with the sector about how rights are going to be regulated. How rights revenues are going to be arranged. And how payment will run. If you do that as a whole sector, you also stand strong enough towards the cable. Although, of course, cable is no longer interesting at all as a means."

Wijbrand Schaap: 'The internet also goes by cable.'

Joop Daalmeijer: 'We now have fibre optics in our village. I just cancelled cable. I now get eighty channels via fibre, for a few euros more. So you have to talk to KPN about the rights. If I then pay 38 euros a month instead of 32 euros: that doesn't interest me at all anyway.'

'But you need to have very strong, heavy central bodies for that. Because now everyone is far too fragmented. Lira is of course interesting, but not everyone is a member. There are people around it again, who are with the Endemolls, who again don't participate because they hand over their rights. And if you are employed by and newspaper, then it is also regulated.'

Wijbrand Schaap: 'Not if you are a freelancer.'

Joop Daalmeijer: 'But then you have to get it right. At Blendle it's not well regulated, eh. There, I think you get a penny or so.'

Wijbrand Schaap: ‘As a freelancer at a newspaper, you get nothing at all at Blendle.‘

Joop Daalmeijer: 'Helse nothing at all? Even if they delivered to a newspaper with conditions?'

Wijbrand Schaap: 'The existing contracts with the newspapers are such that the newspaper is allowed to exploit your stuff within its own domain. But Blendle is not the newspapers' own domain, which is resale. That makes Blendle a new publisher and not a newsstand. So Blendle is publishing freelancers' work without permission. Blendle puts the blame for this on the newspaper, which allegedly gave an indemnity. Which therefore makes it a very nasty impasse, because if it is not settled now, the right to compensation of freelancers on resale is lost forever and ever.'

'Marten Blankesteijn and Alexander Klopping are obviously very nice guys, but it's not about them personally. They have a case in hand, which, if they can get it through, will invalidate freelancers' rights forever.'

Joop Daalmeijer: 'With television, that was a problem, and that is now regulated again through cable fees, but this is just re-disclosure. The first disclosure is the newspaper. Then you get Blendle, which is the re-disclosure of the work. This puts you in the same case position as with cable at the time. That was paid for.'

Wijbrand Schaap: 'The problem now is that the sides are reviewing their contracts with the freelancers, which means the freelancers have a new sign or die offered a contract in which they have to waive their rights at Blendle. So you are expected to save the newspaper with your income of 10,000 euros a year as well.'

Joop Daalmeijer: 'I hope that happens for a long time, saving that newspaper. For me, that's a lifeline with what is happening in society. And those are also struggling. But yes. What amounts are we talking about at all?'

Wijbrand Schaap: 'Does the Council have a plan for the copyright debate? After all, it is about the position of creators?'

Joop Daalmeijer: 'No, we haven't. While we also do media. So maybe we should look into it for our annual programme.'

Joop Daalmeijer Marathon (5) "All balls on Amsterdam", I'm not into that at all.