As of the completion of sound film and disc, passed from sapphire to the 78 Turns, the large French editor Francis took on him the responsability to affirm in 1926, prophetic or excessive matter?: “The mechanical reproduction will replace the music paper, but the mechanical music is destined for such a development that the music very runs will find the greatest interest there”.
Thus, when before the second world war, the walker of the Grands Boulevards was attracted by the ensign , it was accommodated by hostesses; a pianist played last successes house to him and it set out again with the disc and the small size of the last success of or , Maurice Chevallier or Rossi.
Admittedly! Times changed. The knew to institute, by a recognized exclusive right with the author, the principle of the prior approval public performance reproduction of a work of the spirit. Then the legislator has stage by stage codified the whole of the rights of the intellectual property, there-understood the provisions concerning the rights and obligation of the editor of music.
For what is thus used now for an author, and to what thus will be used an editor as music, whereas there exists the SACEM, the , of the producers of sound records and audio-visual works and many other actors of the musical life?
The answer is simple and is as well on the side of the author as of the editor:
As regards author, to quote Etienne BROKE IN : “The destiny of a work is not to remain in a drawer”.
As regards editor: the editor of music is the only tradesman charged to exploit musical work commercially and to defend the rights of his authors in an environment to the more or less indifferent departure. However, despite everything the talent insufflated by its author, musical work can be known and disseminated only by one suitable commercial exploitation supposing a preliminary work of adequate presentation of work, which is not the role of a creator of a work of the spirit. The editor of music has for this purpose two essential obligations, in addition to the fact that it is in general the only one to defend the interest of the author vis-a-vis the specific counterfeit of his work:
1 - Obligation of result of the editor: the very first fixing of work.
It is the obligation for the editor of music to proceed or make proceed to the reproduction of work under the conditions specific provided for to the contract between itself and the authors of work (cf in particular Articles 022 19 and 822 31 of the Code of the Intellectual property). If it is about a song of variety for example, the editor will have to publish and put in provision of a public the partition of work. If it is about a music especially created for a cinematographic audio-visual work, this work will have to be reproduced synchronized with this audio-visual work.
2 - Obligation of means of the editor: to allow the public to know work.
With the difference of the preceding obligation which is to obtain a result, i.e. the first fixing of work, it is a question here of placing at the disposal of the authors of work the sufficient means so that work is likely to be known of the public, whatever the result obtained.
Article 132 02 of the code of the Intellectual property provides indeed that “the editor is held to ensure work a permanent and followed exploitation and a commercial dissemination in accordance with the uses of the profession”
In fact thus the uses of the profession delimit the field of this exploitation for a work of variety, a work of jazz. Let us say to be short, that the editor satisfies these uses at present if it started a process of exploitation of work other than the musical partition, so that this work is likely to be known media or of the public.
This process can be different according to the concrete cases, the editor being likely to contact as example according to the nature of work and the personality of the authors:
It must thus be established between the author of a musical work and his editor an affinity of thoughts, securities etc… which is due to a sixth direction, according to the nature of work, the personality of the author and the means suitable to implement. It is well indeed all the wealth of the trade of editor of music to be in contact, with its specific sensitivity, all the other professions related to the music, all in substituent not with those and by keeping its own identity, because the editor alone has interest with the author with the level of the property rights of author of the musical work of which he is the editor, the being the essential complementary instrument necessary in order to perceive the fruit of the efforts thus made.
Vis-a-vis accomplished immense year progress by year, of all the methods of dissemination, vis-a-vis the civilization of the information highways and the electronic and numerical transmission, the editor of music is and will remain the only entity ready to manage the interests of the author, while bringing a solution specific to each concrete cases, the individual management of the editor being the instrument allowing collective management society of perception of copyrights to become all his extensive in the context of century.
Thus, the editor contributes it a share determining to the dissemination and the protection of the musical inheritance thus of the Crop. “
Pierre Henry, former chief executive of the