The History And Evolution Of American Blanket Licensing

In 1897,the U.S.Congress passed a bill granting composers the right to publicly perform musical works.It is mainly aimed at places where bands perform,such as ballrooms,theaters and concert halls.At this stage,the act of publicly playing musical works was scattered throughout the United States.Its unorganized and extensive nature made it difficult for composers to know when and where their works would be played publicly without permission.Until 1914,the American Society of Composers,Authors and Publishers(ASCAP)was established.It launched a series of litigation activities to safeguard copyright and managed to distribute members ' public performance rights through the issuance of a blanket license.The situation was improved.However,the rise of radio broadcasting changed all this.After the rise of radio broadcasting and becoming the licensee of the blanket license,the licensing fees paid by it gradually became ASCAP's main source of income.However,radio broadcasts were dissatisfied with the amount of license fees proposed by ASCAP,and they established their own public performance rights management organization,Broadcast Music,Inc.(BMI),to compete with ASCAP and issued a blanket license.During this period,a blanket license was expanded in practice.But at the same time,the monopoly issue of blanket licensing began to appear.In order to break the monopoly of the package license,in 1941,the U.S.Department of Justice filed an anti-monopoly lawsuit against ASCAP and BMI.The two organizations quickly reached a settlement agreement with the Ministry of Justice(Consent Decrees).The settlement agreement of 1941 prohibits ASCAP and BMIfrom acquiring exclusive licensing rights,breaking the monopoly of the package license from both the issue subject and the license form,and stipulating in subsequent amendments that music users should license the package license.If the amount of fees is not satisfied,you can ask the Federal District Court in New York for a reasonable price.This makes it difficult for a blanket license to violate the anti-monopoly law to fix prices.However,the monopoly issue of the package license did not disappear.After the settlement agreement was revised,there were still music users expressing dissatisfaction with the package of licenses issued by ASCAP and BMI,and filed anti-monopoly lawsuits against them.They believe that the settlement agreement did not eliminate the monopoly of the blanket license,and ASCAP and BMI issued a blanket license that still violates antitrust laws.In these cases,the US court applied the principle of reasonableness to fully discuss the legality of the blanket license.The CBS v.ASCAP is a typical case that supports the legality of a package license.In this case,the U.S.Supreme Court held that: The rationality principle should be applied to examine whether a package license violates the anti-monopoly law.In the end,however,the appellate court directly confirmed the district court's original verdict and grounds for the verdict.In its opinion,if an alternative package of licenses did exist,then the blanket license did not restrict the transaction.The 1982 Buffalo Broadcasting Company,Inc.v.ASCAP decided against the CBS case and the court agreed with the CBS case's view as a "practical alternative".When there is and is available,the blanket license does not restrict the transaction.However,the court held that for the local television broadcasting station,the alternatives currently available in the market are not realistic and feasible.Therefore,the blanket license violates the anti-monopoly law.There was an objection to the verdict in the case.The legitimacy of the package license is still full of controversy,but it is important to learn from the United States experience that we can learn from reference.