## Facts

- SUISA, a Swiss collective management organization for musical works, asserted rights in music embedded in radio and television broadcasts.
- Rediffusion AG operated a commercial cable distribution network in the Zurich region serving about 60,000 paying subscribers.
- Rediffusion received over-the-air radio and television broadcasts and simultaneously retransmitted the programs, unaltered, by wire to subscribers.
- Rediffusion did not pay SUISA additional royalties for the cable retransmissions, arguing it only facilitated reception and reached no new public because subscribers could theoretically receive the broadcasts directly.
- SUISA sought declaratory relief that Rediffusion could supply broadcast programs to its subscribers only with SUISA’s authorization.
- The Zurich Higher Court ruled for Rediffusion, reasoning that simultaneous, unaltered retransmission did not constitute a separate act requiring authorization and that a further fee would be impermissible double remuneration.
- SUISA appealed to the Swiss Federal Supreme Court.

## Issues

1. Whether simultaneous, unaltered cable retransmission of broadcast programs by a cable operator constitutes a distinct copyright-relevant “communication to the public” requiring authorization from rightsholders represented by SUISA.
2. Whether requiring separate remuneration for cable retransmission, in addition to broadcast-related remuneration, is abusive or amounts to impermissible double charging, including where subscribers use cable due to municipal antenna restrictions.

## Decision

- The Swiss Federal Supreme Court reversed the Zurich Higher Court.
- The court held that Rediffusion’s cable retransmission to subscribers is a distinct communication to the public by wire performed by an entity other than the original broadcaster.
- The court concluded that this separate act of exploitation requires authorization and supports separate remuneration payable to the rightsholders (through SUISA).
- The court rejected the “double payment” objection, reasoning that broadcasting and cable retransmission are different copyright-relevant acts.
- The court further held the claim for separate remuneration was not abusive even if municipal rules limiting antennas increased reliance on cable.

## Legal Principles

- A cable operator’s retransmission of broadcast programming to subscribers by wire constitutes a separate “communication to the public” when made by an organization other than the original broadcaster.
- Domestic copyright law should be interpreted consistently with Berne Convention Article 11bis(1)(ii), which grants authors an exclusive right to authorize wire communication to the public of a broadcast when carried out by a different organization.
- Separate remuneration is justified when two distinct copyright-relevant acts occur (initial broadcast and subsequent cable retransmission).
- A separate licensing fee for cable retransmission is not rendered abusive by the fact that broadcast reception might otherwise be possible, or by public-law restrictions that increase consumer demand for cable.

## Conclusion

The court recognized cable retransmission as an independent, licensable public communication distinct from the original broadcast, entitling rightsholders to separate authorization and remuneration and rejecting arguments of impermissible double payment or abuse of rights.


SUISA (Swiss Soc’y of Authors & Publishers) v. Rediffusion AG, BGE 107 II 57 (Switz. 1981)