All issues > Volume 16 > Issue 16:1 (1-102)

In this article I examine the experience of UK performers using collective management organisation PPL, a UK CMO established by record companies that also manages the rights of performers. I consider the effect of the regulatory framework on the provision of transparency to PPL’s performer members by drawing on primary sources including interviews with performers, PPL’s regulation and its public-facing material. I demonstrate that PPL marshals social, financial, legal and technological resources to prioritise the interests of record companies over those of performers. Considering that the current legal framework supports PPL’s actions, I discuss two alternatives: i) tightening regulation of individual CMOs whilst respecting their monopoly status, and ii) opening up the sector to competition. Despite difficulties faced by performers vis-à-vis PPL, I ultimately side with a large body of literature suggesting that performers are best off in an environment that supports CMO’s monopoly status. However, in an environment where regulators resist tightening regulation, performers are forced to support a competitive market for CMOs.

The majority of reactions to the Commission’s decision to impose a fine on Google because of its anticompetitive practices regarding the mobile operating system Android were mainly focused on the record-breaking size of the penalty on the company and the political message that some analysists see in the context of the tense EU – USA economic relations. However, the importance of the proceeding against Google’s commercial conduct reaches far beyond. The arguments of the Commission have the potential to show to what degree the settled understanding and practice on the abuse of dominant position can be applied in the digital technology markets. From a broader perspective the approach of the authority could also shape the role of the antitrust policy and rules for the innovation process and can potentially influence the way technology companies do business in Europe. Having something to learn from its experience with other proceedings against USA big tech companies, the EU watchdog has to seize the opportunity to prove that it is fit to provide robust application of antitrust rules in the digital 21st century.