In May 2015, Re:Sound, one of �䲹�Բ��岹’s various music licensing companies, published , a report about “the value of music to customers and businesses,” and the results are prominent: music does influence customers’ decisions. According to that report, 75% of��Canadians notice the music being played in bars and restaurants and 88% of Canadians enjoy hearing music in such establishments. Moreover, 80% of Canadians “feel that music in a bar [or] restaurant […] enhances their experience.” This appreciation often translates into very cogent actions such as making patrons stay longer, returning to the business in the future, and��recommending the place to others. Music, whether live or recorded, can be used as a powerful “marketing tool that adds value to businesses” and should therefore be carefully chosen.

This desire to hear music in eating and drinking establishments should emphasize, not trivialize, the source of that music. In fact, according to that report, “” Upon learning��that a business was not complying to music licensing laws,��almost 50% of Canadians would take some kind of action, including not recommending the establishment to others. And such reactions are not only true of Canadians. The report adds that��40% of��Swedish consumers would also have a negative opinion of a business if they discovered��it was using music illegally. Therefore, in order to take advantage of music as a means��to attract new clients, business owners must not only take in consideration what they play, but also its��legality. In Canada, that��means complying to the various rules surrounding performance rights.

�䲹�Բ��岹’s gives copyright owners the exclusive right to perform music works in public or to communicate them to the public by telecommunication. Such rights do not only include live performances but also the use of recorded music in a public setting. SOCAN (the Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada) and Re:Sound both provide business owners with multiple tariff licences applicable to various uses of music. Paying one copyright collective however licensees from paying the other.

�����䴡��'���� is a licence to play (publicly perform) live music in an eating/drinking establishment. The annual fee for this specific licence is 3% of the yearly compensation for entertainment, for a minimum of $83.65 per year. Compensation for entertainment includes the artist’s remuneration as well as any tips given by customers or in-kind contributions from the business owner (free meals, transportation, etc.).

, on the other hand, allows those establishments to play recorded music accompanying live entertainment. Licensees are required to pay 2% of the annual compensation for entertainment, for a minimum of $62.74 per year. Re:Sound's equivalent to this licence, , demands 0.9% of the aforementioned compensation, for a minimum of $37.64 per year.

is probably the SOCAN licence that applies to the highest number of businesses, as it covers the use of music for background purposes. The annual fee depends on the size of the establishment: $1.23 per square metre or 11.46 cents per square foot;��and a��minimum yearly fee of��$94.51. Seasonal establishments are only required to pay half of the aforementioned rate, provided they are operating under��six months per year, though��the minimum annual fee applies nonetheless. Keep in mind that paying for a streaming service or online radio will not exempt business owners from paying this licence (digital music services such as Spotify have reiterated this in their and do not allow, in most cases,��commercial use of their platform). However, no royalties will be collected for the use of a radio receiving set.

On the other hand, , the comparable Re:Sound tariff in this case, requires fees that can be calculated in : "1) the total annual tickets sold or admissions multiplied by $0.000831; or if that is not available, 2) the total capacity of the establishment, multiplied by the number of days of operation in a year, multiplied by $0.001558; or, if that too is not available, then 3) the area of the establishment in square metres or square feet, multiplied by the number of days of operation in a year, multiplied by the number of days in operation in a year, multiplied by $0.002597 (per m2) or $0.000239 (per ft2)."

Finally, �����䴡��'���� allows licensees to play recorded music for dancing. The annual fee is based on the establishment’s capacity as well as the days and months of operation. After a series of calculations based on those variables, the final number should be equal to the percentage required by SOCAN for this particular licence. , Re:Sound's comparable licence, also uses these variables to determine the required annual fee. The calculations will vary depending on whether the establishment can accommodate more than 100 patrons or not.

The Pan American Games will probably not have much of an impact on Toronto's already music scene, nor the way musicians are compensated for their work. But as they give restaurant and bar owners the chance to target a new consumer base, they also allow public performance rights to be discussed as an investment as opposed to a mandatory compensation. And as with most investments, rules need to be followed and content creators and performers��need to be remunerated.

��Aicha Tohry is an IPilogue Editor and a JD candidate at Université de Montréal.

The post Why Now is the Perfect Time to Discuss Performance Rights appeared first on IPOsgoode.

DRAM is a type of random access memory which uses separate capacitors within an integrated circuit to store each bit of data. DRAM is a category of dynamic memory because each capacitor within the circuit is recharged periodically. Recharging is necessary since real capacitors leak charge over time so the charge needs to be replenished in order to continue to store data. DRAM is in contrast to SRAM (static random access memory), which uses bistable latching circuitry to store each bit of data and thus it is not periodically recharged. DRAM's primary advantage over other types of memory such as SRAM is that it is structurally simplistic; only one transistor and one capacitor are required per bit as opposed to the four transistors required in SRAM. This key difference allows DRAM to reach high density and therefore hold a large amount of information in a relatively small space. As with all RAM, DRAM is volatile memory and therefore loses its data when the power supply is removed from the circuit.

Mosaid Technologies Inc. has a patent portfolio including over 1 700 patents and applications, some of which have been acquired from other corporations. Mosaid has licenses for virtually all of the global commodity DRAM industry. , President and CEO of Mosaid, stated that Mosaid is taking action against IBM "to protect our intellectual property because we have been unable to reach a reasonable settlement with IBM, despite many years of negotiation." that the patent infringement lawsuit is without merit and has expressed a desire to defend the case vigorously as opposed to settling. Mosaid has also initiated litigation against other companies for similar alleged infringements in the past, , but both of these suits settled.

Despite Mosaid's trend in acquiring valuable patents from (often) struggling companies, industry professionals have yet to claim that the corporation is a "patent-troll": a person or company that enforces its patents in an overly-aggressive manner with no intention to manufacture or market the invention. Companies often walk a fine line between accusations of patent-trolling and using patents successfully within their business models in order to maximize the IP's return for investors. An example of a company The company sued (RIM) for patent infringement involving the manufacture of Blackberry cellular devices which eventually resulted in RIM reluctantly accepting a $612.5 million settlement offer.

Patent portfolios are becoming an increasingly important aspect of business models. In the fiscal year ending April 30th, Mosaid reported their . As licensing fees become a larger source of revenue for many technology companies, investors have begun to realize the impact IP can have on business success. A clear of the importance of patent portfolios occurred in July 2005, when Mosaid announced it would be licensing a portion of its portfolio to Hitachi. Within one week of the announcement, Mosaid's share price went from $20 to over $60. Conversely, investors are also aware of the business risk of patent infringement claims, which Mosaid's recent lawsuit has highlighted for IBM. Some have gone so far as to say that corporations can no longer just exercise "prudent" IP management, but in fact have an obligation to shareholders to utilize IP to its maximum value. The increase in patent portfolio management within many companies such as Mosaid has left some people wondering as to how the law will develop in regards to fiduciary duties of officers to manage intellectual property. Rather than patenting solely for scientific merits, many corporations are looking to treat IP as any other important asset the company possesses and thus are patenting inventions which have business and marketing value as well. However, the true "value" of IP is often difficult to assess because it is usually intertwined with other aspects of the business. Businesses must also be careful to avoid developing a reputation for patent-trolling.

The widespread impact that intellectual property law has on most industries is highlighted by the idea that it is not only scientists and researchers that are interested in IP, but investors as well. For any business, IP will have an increasingly larger impact on a company's viability as science and technology frames the way we work, live and prosper.

The post Patent Prosecution as Part of Business Models? appeared first on IPOsgoode.