AEPO-ARTIS

AEPO-ARTIS “Acting Fairly?” report finds EU copyright rules still do not deliver fair remuneration for actors

AEPO-ARTIS — Tue, 05 May 2026 07:04:30 +0000

Brussels, 5 May 2026

AEPO-ARTIS announces the publication of “Acting Fairly?”, a new report assessing the impact of Chapter 3 of the Copyright in the Digital Single Market (CDSM) Directive on the fair remuneration of actors. The report is based on a survey completed by 2,382 professional actors across 11 EU Member States, making it the most extensive analysis of contractual practices affecting actors since the entry into force of the CDSM Directive.

When the CDSM Directive was adopted in 2019, it recognised that performers are often in a weaker contractual position when they transfer or license their rights. It therefore introduced a specific chapter on fair remuneration, including the principle that performers are entitled to “appropriate and proportionate remuneration”, as well as additional rights to transparency, contract adjustment, alternative dispute resolution and rights revocation.

Seven years later, the findings of “Acting Fairly?” show that – for actors – these provisions have not achieved their objective.

The report finds that lump sum contracts providing “buy-outs”, remain the dominant practice in the audiovisual sector. Only 19% of actors have ever worked under a contract entitling them to receive royalties or residuals directly from a producer, broadcaster or streaming platform. This means that the vast majority of actors receive no further payment when the productions in which they perform are successfully shown on TV or on streaming platforms.

The CDSM Directive states that “A lump sum payment can also constitute proportionate remuneration, but it should not be the rule.” According to the survey, 81% of actors consider that the lump sum they receive does not fairly remunerate them for their contribution to a production, while 93% state that receiving a lump sum is not a fair way of sharing streaming revenue in particular.

The Directive is not equipped to address this endemic issue. As one actor said:

“It is general practice that actors are made to sign a buy-out agreement even before the casting. If the actor does not accept the offered amount… they are not even invited to the casting.”

The report also identifies the continuing threat of blacklisting as both an insurmountable problem as well as an explanation why the rights introduced by Articles 19 to 22 of the Directive will never work in practice. A vast number of actors chose to comment on blacklisting with examples such as:

“In all cases, at the moment of hiring we are practically coerced into accepting the conditions imposed by the producer, under penalty of, if we do not accept, losing the work.”

This fear affects the practical use of all the contractual rights introduced by the Directive. On transparency, only 12% of actors working under contracts providing recurring remuneration received the information producers are required to provide at least once a year. One actor commented: “The last time I mentioned, in a project, to the production company, that I wanted more information about streaming revenues, or that I wanted an agreement if the series were sold to streaming, I was looked at badly in the production.”

The possibility to request the adjustment of an existing contract in order to obtain an additional remuneration has also had very limited impact. Only 6% of actors working under contracts providing recurring remuneration had attempted to use the contract adjustment mechanism. One actor stated:

“Disney reassigned me twice as a disciplinary measure after I sought additional remuneration.”

In order to lower the barrier for actors to act in the event of a contractual dispute, Article 21 o fthe directive made the system of alternative dispute resolution procedures mandatory in every Member State. However, only 11% of actors who had ever been involved in a dispute with their producer, broadcaster or streaming platform had used ADR. As one actor explained:

“Triggering any type of litigation or extra collection as suggested here always results in not being hired in the future. The actor who does it will no longer be called either by the studio/producer or by the client.”

The report finds that while the Directive was well intentioned, its contractual tools are of little practical value for actors in an industry where lump sum contracts remain the rule, and blacklisting threatens future employment opportunities.

Based on these findings, AEPO-ARTIS calls on Member States to focus on the effective implementation of Article 18. In particular, AEPO-ARTIS recommends that actors be granted an unwaivable right to equitable remuneration for on-demand streaming, subject to compulsory collective management and paid by the end-user. Such a mechanism would operate outside the individual contract, would not require the actor to initiate action against a producer and could not be waived or removed by contract.

As the review of the CDSM Directive is ongoing, it is hoped that the European Commission will listen to the voices of the 2,382 actors that contributed in the making of this report and recommend that Member States amend their legislation in this manner to ensure that goal of the Directive – fair remuneration – becomes a reality for all actors.

Ioan Kaes, General Secretary of AEPO-ARTIS, said:

“Actors are at the heart of Europe’s audiovisual culture, but the current contractual framework does not ensure that they share fairly in the value generated by their performances. The CDSM Directive recognised the problem, but this report shows that its contractual provisions have not worked for actors in practice and never will. A right that depends on an individual actor challenging a producer is worthless where the consequence may be the loss of future work. Actors need an unwaivable remuneration right that operates collectively and outside the individual contract.”

The full report is available on this link.

The post AEPO-ARTIS “Acting Fairly?” report finds EU copyright rules still do not deliver fair remuneration for actors first appeared on AEPO-ARTIS.

Performers on the agenda of the EU Japan IPA

AEPO-ARTIS — Thu, 30 Apr 2026 06:43:12 +0000

On April 27 and 28, AEPO-ARTIS participated in Tokyo in a conference on AI and IP, organised within the framework of the EU-Japan IP Action project.

The IPA project focusses on enhancing cooperation between Japan and the EU in the field of Intellectual Property, particularly in the digital space. Instigated by the EUIPO, the initiative aims to align IP policies and practices between the EU and Japan. The IPA started officially in October 2025 and will run for 48 months. The conference organised in Tokyo was a first step in bringing the focus of the IPA to the relationship between intellectual property and AI.

The conference took a particularly broad approach and touched upon the use of AI in trademark protection, ongoing lawsuits in both the EU and Japan, as well as the discussions known to us regarding the impact of generative AI on the creative sectors and the manner in which both regions are responding to this. A particularly interesting angle here, for example, was the possibility for performers in Japan to register their voice and likeness as a trademark in an attempt to combat unauthorised digital replicas.

The EU framework, consisting of the CDSM Directive, the AI Act and its implementation package of Code of Practice, Transparency Template and GPAI Guidelines, was presented as providing a proper basis for a balanced practice. In a panel focussing on the audiovisual sector, AEPO-ARTIS was able us to point out that the current EU framework, is far from satisfactory for our actors and that additional measures are needed to guarantee that performers’ rights are respected and that they can obtain remuneration when their work is used for AI purposes.

In a separate panel on the music industry, we confronted representatives of IFPI and the French producers’ CMO SCPP, with the need to develop new remuneration schemes that would avoid repeating the unfair practices existing in the streaming industry. Rather than working together on a search for better and more transparent systems, SCPP went on the offensive by stating that the streaming model was exemplary because performers are by far receiving the largest part of income generated by this mode of exploitation. This gave rise to a very lively discussion in which we were able to demonstrate how the most recent IFPI annual report – on which the panellists based their arguments – misrepresents the figures regarding payments to performers.

As a general conclusion, we can state that the conference has given the Japanese government a clear picture that, regarding AI, there are no lessons to be learned from the European adventure.

In addition to the conference we participated in a workshop on Public Performance Rights. This workshop was organised at the request of the Japanese Copyright Office (JPO) that has drafted a proposal to introduce the right for performers and producers to collect for the public performance of phonograms, a proposal which is currently being submitted to the Diet (Japanese Parliament).

The proposal is the result of pressure from the EU within the EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) signed in 2019, which includes specific commitments in the field of intellectual property. The workshop focussed on providing the Japanese Copyright Office with a clear view on the practice of the collection of remuneration for the public performance of music by authors, producers and performers. AEPO-ARTIS was able to partially remove the persistent reluctance regarding the right of performers to receive remuneration for this type of exploitation, by highlighting the importance of the collection for our performers’ income and providing insight into the long history that preceded this irreversible practice.

We thank the EUIPO for including AEPO-ARTIS in the EU’s delegation to this important mission and hope that this will soon unlock new revenues for our European performers.

The post Performers on the agenda of the EU Japan IPA first appeared on AEPO-ARTIS.

Generative AI vs Music: Safeguarding Human Creativity and the Respect of Intellectual Property

AEPO-ARTIS — Mon, 27 Apr 2026 07:42:32 +0000

The post Generative AI vs Music: Safeguarding Human Creativity and the Respect of Intellectual Property first appeared on AEPO-ARTIS.

7 Years On… Assessing the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive

AEPO-ARTIS — Mon, 13 Apr 2026 20:11:21 +0000

AEPO-ARTIS is pleased to invite you to a full-day conference titled “7 Years On… Assessing the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive”, taking place on Tuesday, 5 May 2026 in Brussels at the Thon Hotel EU.

Please see the programme below:

The post 7 Years On… Assessing the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive first appeared on AEPO-ARTIS.

European Parliament adopts INI-report “Copyright and generative artificial intelligence – opportunities and challenges”

AEPO-ARTIS — Tue, 31 Mar 2026 14:55:27 +0000

On 10 March the European Parliament adopted with a large majority the INI-report “Copyright and generative artificial intelligence – opportunities and challenges” as approved by the JURI Committee earlier this year.

The report demonstrates a good understanding of the issues at hand and provides a strong but balanced signal to the Commission that copyright dependent sectors require additional action to guarantee that their contribution to the development of AI results in a sharing of added value.

The report recognises the key role our creative and cultural sector plays in the EU and the great diversity in contractual practices that exists in our sector. It condemns the widespread violation of copyright rules by GenAI providers and acknowledges that current copyright law is insufficient to address the challenge of licensing copyrighted material for GenAI.

With this in mind, it calls on the Commission to facilitate a working licensing market that ensures the fair remuneration of rights holders. And in this regard, Parliament expresses itself particularly positively regarding collective management and sends a clear signal to the Commission through a multitude of references that collective management of rights is part of the solution.

However, that role remains limited to being “voluntary”. AEPO-ARTIS remains critical of the fact that a presumption of collective management – as included in Paragraph 6 for journalists – was not granted to performers.

It should be noted here that the notion of “voluntary” primarily refers to the choice not to opt for a levy system under which rights holders would be obliged to grant a license whose price is determined by the government. The voluntary nature lies primarily in the freedom to choose whether or not to offer a license and to determine the price oneself. This could just as easily occur within a system where collective management would be mandatory for certain categories of rights holders—such as journalists and performers. In that case, the mandatory nature would safeguard the freedom to determine the price oneself (as a collective) rather than jeopardise it.

The report also instructs the Commission to examine whether there is a possible solution for the immediate, fair and proportionate remuneration for past uses of copyright-protected works by providers of general-purpose AI models.

Furthermore, the resolution places strong emphasis on transparency. It calls for the strengthening of the transparency obligations for AI developers and proposes the establishment of a rebuttable presumption of use where full transparency obligations have not been fully complied with. It should be noted here that in France, the Conseil d’État expressed a positive opinion last week regarding the Senate’s proposal to introduce such a presumption.

Finally, the issues surrounding digital avatars are also mentioned by the report that instructs the Commission to investigate measures to protect artists against the dissemination of manipulated and AI-generated digital image, audio or video content, imitating their personal characteristics without consent.

You can read the full resolution following this link. While the resolution has no legislative force whatsoever, the Commission is nevertheless obliged to respond to it. In this way, Parliamentary resolutions are of great value for adjusting the Commission’s work plan. If the Commission does not wish to act on the matters raised by Parliament, it will have to provide sound reasons for this.

AEPO-ARTIS has thanked rapporteur Axel Voss (EPP) and his shadow rapporteurs for the enormous work put into getting this balanced text adopted by the Parliament.

The post European Parliament adopts INI-report “Copyright and generative artificial intelligence – opportunities and challenges” first appeared on AEPO-ARTIS.

Performers, Policy, and Progress: what the Irish EU Presidency can unlock

AEPO-ARTIS — Fri, 13 Mar 2026 09:31:24 +0000

Kindly note that the registration is mandatory – please register via this link.

The post Performers, Policy, and Progress: what the Irish EU Presidency can unlock first appeared on AEPO-ARTIS.

Music360 at the European Parliament: A 360-Degree Perspective on the Value of Music

AEPO-ARTIS — Fri, 27 Feb 2026 13:10:26 +0000

On 25 February 2026, AEPO-ARTIS organised an event at the European Parliament, hosted by MEP Hélder Sousa Silva, presenting the results of the Horizon Europe Music360 project.

Music360 is a project that aims to examine the value of the public performance of music and brings together a number of partners, including AEPO-ARTIS members, GDA, SENA and Gramex Finland (via music licensing body GTM).

The meeting, hosted in collaboration with MEP Hélder Sousa Silva — member of the Budget (BUDG) and Culture and Education (CULT) Committees was the final event of the Music360 project, at which its findings and recommendations were presented, in the presence of a delegation of the Commission, led by Mr. Patrico Ortiz De La Torre, head of sector at the European Research Executive Agency (REA).

A significant part of the event focused on the Living Labs carried out in the Netherlands and Spain. The Dutch experiments, presented by representatives from SENA and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, explored the impact of music tempo on retail environments. Results indicated that while music tempo did not directly increase turnover, it had measurable effects on employee mood and job satisfaction.

The Spanish Living Lab, led by Professor Conrado Carrascosa López (Universitat Politècnica de València) looked at the therapeutic use of music during chemotherapy sessions. Data collected showed music improved patient wellbeing and was greatly appreciated by staff.

The meeting also included a demonstration of the Music360 digital dashboard by Bruno Gaminha of GDA. The dashboard shows how data on music use can be aggregated and analysed to the benefit of both rightsholders and policymakers.

AEPO-ARTIS’ Head of Legal, Nick Yule presented policy recommendations arising from the project, notably the creation of a dedicated music section within a future EU Cultural Data Hub and the establishment of a stakeholder group to continue work done, but to also encompass the impact of generative AI, especially on the public performance of music.

The session concluded with reflections from MEP Hannes Heide who expressed positive views on several elements of the project, including the importance of reliable data for future cultural policy initiatives and the creation of an EU Cultural Data Hub.

Sincere thanks go to MEP Hélder Sousa Silva who has shown himself in recent months to be a true fighter for the cultural sector, and particularly for his statement that his “door is always open for AEPO-ARTIS”.

The post Music360 at the European Parliament: A 360-Degree Perspective on the Value of Music first appeared on AEPO-ARTIS.

Commission states that GPAI models trained without respecting rights reservations cannot be deployed within the EU

AEPO-ARTIS — Mon, 23 Feb 2026 15:10:15 +0000

On Friday 20 February, Commissioner Henna Virkkunen responded to a written question on the respect of EU based opt-outs by non-EU Generative AI developers that deploy their models within the EU market. For the Commission, the EU legislation is clear. AI providers need to respect rights reservations made in accordance with article 4 of the CDSM directive and this applies regardless of the jurisdiction in which the copyright-relevant acts underpinning the training of those GPAI models take place.

The clarification comes in response to a written question tabled by MEPs Emma Rafowicz, Laurence Farreng (Renew), Sabine Verheyen (PPE), Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski (PPE), Hannes Heide (S&D), Sandro Ruotolo (S&D) and David Cormand (Verts/ALE). Taking France as an example of a country where all collective management organisations (CMOs) representing performers and authors in the music sector have made use of the rights reservation possibility under article 4 of the CDSM (also know as the opt-out), they asked whether services such as UDIO and SUNO could be offered to EU citizens.

The question arises after the recent series of legal proceedings, settlements, and agreements between these services and the US divisions of the three major labels, Sony, Warner, and Universal. The deals drew fierce criticism from musicians who felt unrepresented in these agreements. Not only was there no transparency on the amounts received, nor clarity on how (or whether) the money paid by SUNO and UDIO would be shared with the recording artists, musicians were particularly upset that their explicit choice to reserve their rights was not taken into account.

It is especially the latter where musicians can count on the Commission’s clear support. In no uncertain terms Virkkunen states that when collective management organisations have appropriately exercised the rights reservation in accordance with the criteria established in Article 4(3) of the CDSM directive, “TDM processing would henceforth require prior authorisation from the concerned rightsholders, including when it is used for the training of AI models.”

In addition, she adds that “This obligation applies regardless of the jurisdiction in which the copyright-relevant acts underpinning the training of those GPAI models take place.” In doing so, she makes it undeniably clear that the EU copyright rules do indeed have an international effect and apply to anyone who wants to offer products or services within the EU. The Commission thus endorses the position prepared by the JURI Committee in the so-called Voss Report, which will be submitted to the Plenary next month.

The answer comes at a timely moment also with regard to the assessment of the 2019 CDSM Directive currently being prepared by the Commission, which will specifically examine the effectiveness of the highly contested Article 4.

The demand is no longer limited to France, as authors and performers in more and more countries are reserving their rights through their CMOs. It is also no longer limited to the music sector, as authors and performers in other sectors are also making themselves heard. For example, last week, British actors announced their decision to only allow AI training with explicit consent.

The strong statement in defense of our European rights holders, however, does not offer a solution to an ongoing problem, the problem of inaccessible protocols. Individual authors and performers have the right to not authorise the use of their work for AI purposes by means of a rights reservation. But they face a very practical impracticality. Once their performance has been incorporated in a phonogram or videogram, they have no control of whether any metadata or other means of identification will be attached. This problem is not solved by collectively announcing a rights reservation via a CMO.

In her response, Virkkunen refers to the current Code of Practice on GPAI and the Commission’s recent initiatives into identifying opt-out protocols that can be considered as state-of-the-art, technically implementable, and widely adopted by rightsholders across different cultural and creative sectors. The Commission’s further work on this matter should therefore focus on how collectively expressed rights reservations are better respected by producers and distributors who control the assets and locations through which the work of our creatives is accessible.

The full question and answer can be consulted on the EP website.

The post Commission states that GPAI models trained without respecting rights reservations cannot be deployed within the EU first appeared on AEPO-ARTIS.

BECS Acts to Protect Audiovisual Performers’ Rights from Unauthorised AI Training

AEPO-ARTIS — Thu, 19 Feb 2026 11:17:37 +0000

The British Equity Collecting Society (BECS) today announced decisive action to safeguard the rights of its members, audiovisual performers, whose recorded performances are used without consent or payment to train artificial intelligence systems.

AI developers have used performers’ recorded work to train their systems and generate new content. In the UK, this practice infringes performers’ exclusive rights under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Across the European Union, it similarly breaches performers’ exclusive rights. Despite this, some AI developers have attempted to justify such use under the EU text and data mining exception set out in Article 4 of Directive (EU) 2019/790 and its national implementations.

At BECS’ recent Annual General Meeting, members voted overwhelmingly to grant the organisation a clear mandate to defend their rights in relation to AI training. As part of this mandate, BECS has formally exercised an opt out from the EU Article 4 text and data mining exception on behalf of its members.

The BECS opt out can be found here.

This opt out unequivocally asserts that audiovisual performers reserve the exclusive right to authorise or refuse the reproduction of their performances for text and data mining within the EU. This sends a clear message that: AI developers may not use BECS members’ performances for training or incorporate them into AI-generated outputs without explicit permission.

This is an essential and timely step towards ensuring that performers retain control over their work in the face of rapidly advancing technologies. Nonetheless, BECS stresses that further urgent political action is required to ensure a fair and sustainable balance between the rights of human creators and performers, and the commercial interests of the technology companies whose systems rely on their work – often to produce content that may ultimately compete with them.

Tayyiba Nasser, BECS CEO stated: “Our performers pour their craft, their voice, and often a part of their identity into the work they create. That work should never be taken for granted. This opt‑out makes our position unequivocal: our members’ performances cannot be reproduced or repurposed without clear authorisation, fair remuneration, and full transparency.

We support innovation, but it must respect the people whose creativity fuels it. We urge policymakers and developers to work with us to put those principles at the heart of how AI is built and deployed.”

BECS Members Sanjeev Bhashkar O.B.E. and Meera Syal D.B.E. added: “In the rapidly changing technology of AI, it’s essential that we have the legal and moral right to choose if and how our voice, likeness and works are used to create, train or further any AI models. We totally support the BECS mandate to safeguard all its members.”

AEPO-ARTIS would like to congratulate BECS for this essential and timely step towards ensuring that performers retain control over their work in the face of rapidly advancing technologies. Nevertheless, BECS stresses that further urgent political action is required to ensure a fair and sustainable balance between the rights of human creators and performers, and the commercial interests of the technology companies whose systems rely on their work – often to produce content that may ultimately compete with them.

The post BECS Acts to Protect Audiovisual Performers’ Rights from Unauthorised AI Training first appeared on AEPO-ARTIS.

Joint call for a strong budget and an ambitious sectoral approach for music within the future AgoraEU programme

AEPO-ARTIS — Mon, 09 Feb 2026 13:31:53 +0000

Joint call for a strong budget and an ambitious sectoral approach for music within the future AgoraEU programme

9 February 2025

We, the undersigned organisations from across Europe’s music ecosystem, call on the EU institutions to adopt a sector-specific strategic approach for European music, with increased funding, alongside the horizontal actions in the future AgoraEU programme 2028-2034.

Echoing the statement published in September 2025 by 21 European music organisations, we strongly welcome the European Commission’s proposal to establish AgoraEU and the proposed increased budget allocated to the programme, which should be regarded as an absolute minimum. A strong budget for culture would be in line with the European Commission’s ambition, with its Culture Compass, “to ensure culture is central to European unity, diversity and excellence”.

While artistic freedom, fair working conditions, and cultural diversity are under increasing pressure and should remain central to the programme, the proposed increased budget offers a unique opportunity to develop a sectoral approach to address the specific and concrete challenges faced by the European music sector. As it stands, the AgoraEU proposal fails to mention any dedicated measures for music or follow-up to the Music Moves Europe (MME) initiatives, even though the current Creative Europe regulation (2021-2027) explicitly includes a sectoral action for music (1) .

Why music requires dedicated attention in AgoraEU

The economic importance of the music sector in Europe is undeniable: it contributes €81.9 billion in gross value added to the GDP of the EU27 and UK, provides direct employment for more than 1.3 million people across the EU and generates €9.7 billion in export revenue (2) . Micro, small and medium-sized businesses account for most of the European music sector’s jobs and generate most of its added value.

At the crossroads of social, economic, and cultural policies, music is also one of Europe’s most accessible and influential cultural forms and remains at the very core of what Europeans value and experience together. It fosters inclusion, strengthens democratic values, and enhances Europe’s global cultural presence and international collaboration.

Yet, the sector is confronted with significant challenges and major disruption:

● Generative AI is accelerating at unprecedented speed, reshaping music creation, distribution, and business models, putting at risk creators’ and rights holders’ revenues, as well as the integrity of musical works.

● Market concentration across the sector is a growing issue, further exacerbating power imbalances along the value chain, limiting market access for small actors and jeopardising Europe’s competitiveness, cultural diversity and capacity to thrive internationally.

● European repertoire essentially struggles to travel across borders due to fragmented markets, double taxation, complex administrative frameworks, and cultural barriers, all of which hinder cross‑border mobility and limit Europe’s musical diversity.

● Music streaming has become the main avenue for listening to music but fraudulent practices as well as the lack of transparency of algorithms and playlists have a detrimental impact on discoverability and on the economic sustainability of the European music sector, as identified by the European Parliament in its resolution on music streaming in 2024. (3) Payment thresholds have led to revenue shifts and even complete demonetisation, harming in particular emerging artists and repertoire from smaller countries and languages or even more established artists in more niche genres.

AgoraEU should play an important role in helping the European music sector to address these challenges. Sector specific support for music would contribute to increasing the competitiveness, diversity and sustainability of Europe’s music sector, in line with the general objectives of AgoraEU.

In 2024, the European Parliament called on the Commission to “further improve the Creative Europe programme, in particular through comprehensive action on music” and supported a “European industrial strategy for music”, In January 2025, in a letter to the European Commission (4) , the EU’s 27 Ministers for

Culture underlined the need for sector-tailored incentives, stressing that EU strategies and funding must be flexible and responsive to the rapidly evolving needs of the cultural and creative ecosystem. At the end of 2025, the interim evaluation of the Creative Europe programme 2021-2027 (5) found that “the dual (horizontal and sectorial) approach introduced in the Culture strand is successful and both approaches are complementary”, and “it is advised to keep a similar approach in the next programming period”.

AgoraEU now offers a unique opportunity to finally deliver a meaningful strategic sector-specific support for the European music sector.

Our recommendations for AgoraEU 2028-2034

In line with the EU’s ambition to enhance the competitiveness and innovation potential of the music sector6 , we call for the inclusion of the following measures in the AgoraEU regulation:

– Secure earmarked funding for music in the AgoraEU regulation (as a minimum budget), alongside the horizontal actions.

– Reintroduce in AgoraEU a dedicated sectoral action for music with meaningful, structural and strategic sectoral actions tailored to the sector’s specific needs.

– Ensure a structured and regular dialogue between the European Commission and the music sector on the future annual work programmes as well as the calls and programme dedicated to music, to guarantee they align with the needs of the sector across the entire value chain.

– Support sector-specific studies and enhanced data collection to monitor and analyse the music sector’s trends and challenges, providing policy makers and stakeholders with the evidence and data they need to inform the right policies and programmes. The establishment of a European Music Observatory (or equivalent monitoring body) – as called for by the European Parliament and building on the insights of the 2018-2020 Music Moves Europe preparatory action – would play a key role to achieve those objectives.

We count on the European Parliament and the Council to support the introduction of a comprehensive strategy for music, along with an appropriate dedicated budget, to give the music sector the visibility, investment, and policy recognition it deserves.

We stand ready to engage constructively and provide our expertise throughout the entire legislative process.

(1) Regulation (EU) 2021/818 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2021 establishing the Creative Europe Programme (2021 to 2027) and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1295/2013

(2) “The Economic Impact of Music in Europe” study by Oxford Economics, commissioned by the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) (2020)

(3) European Parliament resolution of 17 January 2024 on cultural diversity and the conditions for authors in the European music streaming market

(4) https://cultureactioneurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Letter_CreativeEurope_final.pdf

(5) https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52025SC0418

(6) Culture Compass for Europe from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, November 2025

The post Joint call for a strong budget and an ambitious sectoral approach for music within the future AgoraEU programme first appeared on AEPO-ARTIS.