As of 5 November 2012, the
German parliament had already received 1863 petitions against GEMA.
From members • GEMA members with voting rights, who are responsible for the majority of performances, received 62.99% of the disbursements in 2008. Event-organizer Marcus Gloria characterizes these payouts as a non-transparent distribution process. Independent artist complains that the rental costs of the same concert hall have fluctuated from €2,007 (2004) to €459 (2005) to €1,233 (2006). • According to contract terms, every member is obligated to register every single one of his/her works that will be released publicly. According to Article 1 of the GEMA
deed of assignment, the rights-holder grants GEMA comprehensive exclusive usage rights as a trustee to all of his/her current and future creative works. It is thereafter impossible to publish single works under another license (e.g., a free license). It is likewise impossible to release works for non-commercial use—such as the "nc" varieties available through
Creative Commons—which is currently possible in France. In GEMA's view, such arrangements would prevent the society from ensuring the effective and commercial exercise of legal rights, which the EU-Commission should also recognize (according to evidence and business decisions from 1971 to 1974). One can only revoke the transfer of usage rights and manage them oneself in individual law sectors () and/or territories—and for all works. • The conventional term of a contract for members of
EU-member states is three months. As a general rule, works registered at one point cannot simply be de-registered, because it comes into conflict with other already-standing contracts with its clients. The original six-year term of contract was forbidden by the
European Commission in two decisions (1971; 1972), due to the abusive exploitation of monopoly positions, which was confirmed in a verdict by the
European Court of Justice. However, six-year contracts remain the norm for citizens of non-EU states. • Another charge against GEMA is that there is a disparity between the revenues and disbursements for the playback of (
Unterhaltungsmusik; , or
pop music) versus live musical performances. GEMA explains this difference by pointing out the high acquisition efforts for the latter events. "Playlists" must always be prepared manually and require a signature, in order to count as a legally-valid document. • In 1998, GEMA introduced new
PRO extrapolation procedures. This system for dividing up royalties led to drastic deficits for a portion of members, since oft-played but seldom-reported works became more expensive during the settlement process. Dance bands, solo entertainers, etc. play the standard repertoire but rarely feel compelled to fill out "playlists," since, as non-authors, they will not receive any royalties for the performance. On the other hand, performers of their own works report nearly 100% of their performances, since they are bound to earn royalties from them. • Authors who perform their own works must also pay music event fees to GEMA, if they are also organizing the event themselves. If more than 80% of their performance consists of their own works, they can use a "net individual invoice" () to get these fees back—less the handling fees. However, this only applies when all authors participating in the same event are included, which makes no provisions for festivals and supporting acts. • If an author wishes to make their music available on their own website, they must still pay GEMA fees and fill out the corresponding information sheet, even if the royalties are to be disbursed to them afterwards. This is somewhat different from the policy of the US performing rights societies
ASCAP and
BMI. • Since organizers pay concert fees that are calculated using the event venue's size and the admission price, there is a danger that organizer will be saddled with the costs, should the actual sales for the appearance of an artist not cover the incurred GEMA charges. GEMA has implemented a "hardship abatement provision" (), with which one can apply for a retroactive reduction in licensing costs when an unprofitable event fulfills certain conditions. • The spokesperson for the , , charges that the
PRO process was introduced by the executive board in a "hush-hush operation" () without a resolution from the General Assembly—and which just happened to benefit the members of the executive board, including its chairman at the time, Otto Krause. He accused him of exploitation and personal enrichment, because he sometimes collected sums that were 100 times the incoming licensing fees collected for his old
Schlager songs, while rock musicians only earned 10% of the licensing fees their music earned. Furthermore, he claimed that a statistics professor that had been appointed to assess the rationale for the distribution process had had absolutely no expertise in the field of live music and was deliberately misinformed by the executive board. Furthermore, a 2005 verdict by the federal court demanded that the PRO process be subject to a vote by the membership, which has yet to occur. Seelenmeyer also sharply criticized the term "solidarity principle" (), arguing that it disguises and sugarcoats a planned- and intentionally-unfair distribution process. He cited the former chairman of the GEMA board of directors , who wrote regarding the introduction of the PRO process that, "For an extrapolation process heavily impacting the income distribution of members to be introduced without a membership resolution is simply intolerable and furthermore against regulations, according to the opinion of many legal experts." Evers further charged: "This paternalism would rob GEMA members of their voting rights regarding an essential domain of their assets. They are almost being deprived of their right of decision by their own trustees!" Evers demanded that: "The only way that the executive board and directorial board can get out of this crisis of confidence that has arisen through the patronization of members lies in the immediate dismissal of the PRO process and the development of a new process with the participation and approval of its members!" •
Edgar Berger, President and international CEO of
Sony Music Entertainment outside of the US, criticized the authors' rights practices of GEMA in an interview with the daily newspaper
Die Welt on 23 February 2012, questioning why in Germany, in contrast with other countries, no
official music videos can be viewed on YouTube: "It's not because of us. We have licensed our content to market players. You need to ask this question to the collecting society GEMA, who is very restrictive in its copyright licensing. We're losing millions in revenue as a result. By the way, this is one of the main reasons why digital music sales in Germany are less prevalent than elsewhere."
From users • For the public use of "entertainment" music () or dance music (), GEMA assumes that all songs/tracks belong to the GEMA Repertoire by default—until such time as the user submits a completed playlist that indicates which authors are either non-members and/or which tracks are in
public domain. In doing so, GEMA is exercising a legally-sanctioned and much-debated reversal of the
burden of proof, which is usually termed the
GEMA-Vermutung ().
From club managers and disco owners • In April 2012, disco owners were angered by the announcement of GEMA's new licensing fee scheme (dubbed the
Tarifreform), because they predicted a more than 1000% increase for them in the year 2013. GEMA did not deny that the new tariffs could mean ten-fold fee hikes for certain venues—especially
discotheques—but they were of the opinion that such cases would be isolated. The tariff reforms were based on requests made to GEMA for a simplified tariff structure and a fairer distribution of tariffs between cultural event-organizers and discos. For years discos have paid much less than cultural event-organizers, and there has been a great deal of criticism—including from the political sphere—of the subvention of discos. GEMA also criticized for their one-sided misrepresentation of the issue, charging them with having concealed the impact of the
Angemessenheitsregel () cost-abatement, which is based on the actual audience turnout at events. GEMA also argues that 60% of event organizers will pay the same or less under the new tariff system. In particular, smaller clubs will be relieved of paying fees. • A table on the GEMA website indicates that most of the licensing fees will go down in 2013, but nevertheless a club in Frankfurt with a surface area of 300 m2 (3230 sq. ft.) will currently pay a yearly lump sum between €8,000 and €10,000 for GEMA fees. This would constitute a 500% increase in tariffs. According to a fee-calculator on the website of the
Bundesverband Deutscher Discotheken und Tanzbetriebe (), the tariffs will be far higher. However, the estimates generated by this calculator indicate the theoretical maximum flat-rate charge per event. • By way of a sample fee-estimate, the
Bundesvereinigung der Musikveranstalter () calculated that a club with two dance-floors of a combined total surface area of 720 m2 (7750 sq. ft.) charging €8 at the door will see a rise in GEMA fees from €21,553 yearly to €147,916. Under the new system, event licensing fees increase by 50% if the music runs longer than five hours. Many other model calculations made the rounds as well, according to which only one-time events such as a marksmanship festivals and very small clubs would actually profit from the new tariff scheme. • 20 dance club owners came together for the initiative, "Clubs am Main," in order to oppose the new tariff regulations. According to Matthias Morgenstern, the leader of this association and the owner of
Tanzhaus West, this new fee structure would lead to
Clubsterben (). The yearly payments of Frankfurt club
Cocoon (club) were slated to jump from €14,000 to €165,000. Another club called Travolta would also see a rise in fee payments from €10,000 to more than €50,000. Tanzhaus West foresees a yearly increase from €1,500 to more than €50,000. Berghain later announced in mid-August that the club would not shut its doors in the new year, but instead would cancel their planned expansion project, the cultural event-space
Kubus. • On 30 June 2012, the
Bundesverband Deutscher Discotheken und Tanzbetriebe () organized a "moment of silence" protest, in which the music of 500 clubs and discos in Germany fell silent between 23:55 and midnight. The manager of the association, Stephan Büttner, intended to use this collective gesture of protest to inform patrons and spectators about the impact of the new tariff system. • According to Ralf Scheffler, owner of the
Frankfurt cultural center
Batschkapp, GEMA presumes maximum occupancy at events in clubs and discos. But this does not reflect actual/typical turnout. For example, Scheffler's venue has a capacity of 2,000 people, but nonetheless turnout usually hovers at around 500 visitors. But with the new tariff reforms, he will have to pay for 2000 guests, even if they do not show up in those numbers. Due to this, Scheffler plans to quit organizing disco-format events, since he will have to pay €60,000 instead of €3,000 starting in 2013. • In a letter to GEMA, the head of the
Senatskanzlei Berlin (), state secretary
Björn Böhning, called for a reconsideration of their plans. According to Böhning, Berlin has a creative and innovative music scene, for which clubs and concerts are important. These require affordable licensing fee rates as a basis for their business operations. • An online petition protesting the GEMA tariff reforms, initiated by event promoter Matthias Rauh (of
giga event), was launched shortly after the announcement of the new tariffs in April 2012, closed on 3 October with 305,122 signatures (of which 284,569 were signed with a German address), and presented to Justice Minister
Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger on 13 December 2012. A week later, on 20 December 2012, both GEMA and announced in press statements that they had reached an interim agreement that would delay the implementation of the tariff reforms for a year (until 1 January 2014)—allowing another year to negotiate further over the licensing fee structures—and during the year 2013 all flat-rate event licensing fees will go up by 5% (and, on 1 April 2013, fees will rise a further 10% for discos and clubs). == German Music Authors' Prize ==