"Who Owns the Sound?" Understanding Music Copyright in Malaysia (Part 2)

Types of Music License

When using music in various settings, it's crucial to obtain the appropriate licenses to ensure legal compliance and fair compensation to rights holders.

  1. Public Performance License: Required when music is played in public spaces such as restaurants, malls, or events.

  2. Synchronization (Sync) License: Needed when music is used in conjunction with visual media, like films, advertisements, or online videos.

  3. Mechanical License: Allows for the reproduction of music, such as in CDs or digital downloads.

  4. Master License: Grants rights to use a specific recording of a song, often used alongside a sync license.

  5. Print Rights License: Covers the reproduction of sheet music.

  6. Grand Rights License: Pertains to the performance of musical works within theatrical productions.

How to get Music Licensing in Malaysia

  • Identify the Appropriate License: Determine the type of license needed based on how the music will be used.

  • Contact the Relevant CMO:

  • MACP: For composers and publishers.

  • PPM: For recording companies.

  • RPM: For performing artists.

  • Submit an Application: Provide details about the intended use, venue size, and duration.

  • Pay the Required Fees: Fees vary depending on factors like venue size and audience capacity.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Case Study: Sony Music Malaysia vs. Pesona Cipta Sdn Bhd (2000)

Case Study Background: In this landmark case, Sony Music Entertainment Malaysia filed a lawsuit against Pesona Cipta Sdn Bhd, a local production company, for unauthorized reproduction and distribution of Sony’s copyrighted music content. What Happened? Pesona Cipta was found to have duplicated and sold several audio CDs containing songs that were originally produced and owned by Sony Music without obtaining proper licenses or permission. These CDs were distributed to the public, resulting in profit from copyrighted content. Legal Action & Outcome: Sony Music sued under the Copyright Act 1987. The court found that Pesona Cipta violated Sony’s copyright and ordered the company to pay damages and stop distributing the copied materials. This case highlighted the seriousness of copyright infringement and the strength of copyright laws in Malaysia. Why This Case Matters This case sends a clear message that intellectual property rights must be respected, and even companies can face heavy ...
Read more

Case Study: Sara Nadzirah binti Zulkifli v Khirulanuar bin Mohamadiah (2023)

This case seems to be recent, with the rise in popularity of quick platform such as Instagram, and netizens posting without knowledge of copyright infringement. What's it about? The plaintiff named Sara Nadzirah is a social media influencer. The initial action that sparked the case was of her recording a 51-second video of herself eating durian as a "mukbang" and uploaded it to her Instagram account. The clip/video gain significant attention, as she had a following alongside platform algorithm. ​ Infringement The defendant named Khirulanuar was the reason as to why attention went to the video and Sara Nadzirah. He posted her video on his own platform without her permission, Ezydurian Services , as an opportunity to promote his brand over the plaintiff's image of being a small content creator. Legal Action Sara Nadzirah had demanded Khirulanuar to remove the video off of his brand platform, but he rejected her request. She later filed a lawsuit for copyright i...
Read more

Warner Music Malaysia Sdn Bhd v. Metro Music Sdn Bhd (2005)

Case Study: Warner Music Malaysia vs. Metro Music Sdn Bhd (2005) Date: 8th March 2005 Type: Copyright Infringement – Illegal Distribution of Music Background Warner Music Malaysia filed a case against Metro Music Sdn Bhd, a retail and wholesale business, for distributing pirated VCDs and audio CDs of copyrighted songs owned by Warner Music and its affiliated labels. What Happened? Metro Music was caught selling and wholesaling large quantities of unlicensed music recordings in local markets and through unofficial channels. The recordings were traced back to Warner's catalog, including international and domestic artists. Legal Action & Outcome Warner Music brought the action under the Copyright Act 1987, claiming substantial commercial loss and damage to reputation. The High Court found Metro Music guilty of infringement of copyright and ordered the company to pay statutory damages and legal costs. An injunction was also issued to prevent all other infringing activities. Why Thi...
Read more