Here is a full article by Frédérique Doyon published in Le Devoir on June 16, 2004. This problem persists and must be resolved.

In the wake of the reactions to the Superior Court judgment clarifying the concept of show producer, the Union des artistes (UDA) is reaching out to ADISQ, the watchdog for the concept of broadcaster, to resolve the show industry's troubles. The two organizations were interveners in the case between the Guilde des musiciens du Québec and the Hippodrome de Montréal.

"Let's sit down and clear up the situation because it's chaos," Pierre Curzi, president of the UDA, suggested to ADISQ, which is considering challenging the decision making the Hippodrome a producer when it hires artists to entertain its customers. "Let's stop going to court to try to use case law to define something that makes sense: when artists are hired, they must benefit from contracts and a minimal safety net."

The judgment handed down last week ruled in favor of the Guild by refusing the Hippodrome the broadcaster status it had requested. A status that ADISQ has vigorously defended for several years and which means that no royalties (social benefits, retirement funds, etc.) are ultimately paid to the artists, since only the producer is bound by the contracts of the Guild and the UDA. The problem in this case is that the notion of broadcaster does not appear in the law, a situation that all the protagonists seem to be comfortable with, while each pulling the blanket to their own side.

"The principle of retaining artists' services [at the heart of the judgment] is the argument that we have always developed with ADISQ, RIDEAU and the festivals," explains the man who deplores the spirit of "irresponsibility" that hangs over the sector. The UDA has been trying in vain for seven years to reach an agreement with ADISQ to regularize contractual relations. The Guild pointed out the day before yesterday that agreements of this type already existed with several organizations (Festival d'été and Carnaval de Québec, Montreal hotels) and worked very well. Even current members of ADISQ have already been bound by such agreements.

"If the next ADISQ Gala could be one where artists are finally in a respectful relationship with producers, that would be great," Mr. Curzi emphasizes. "But what I would like above all is for us to sit down now to get out of this impasse."

Different judgment, same morals
In addition, another judgment, rendered at the end of May and left in the shadows, could serve as a tool to better define the relationships between the different players in the music industry. The case pitted the Guild against the bar La Place à côté, at the time when the Guild, led by Émile Subirana, was hunting down disguised producers. However, the Commission for the Recognition of Artists' Associations and Producers' Associations concluded that the bar was only a venue renter here, and therefore had no accountability to the union.

"La Place à côté does not assume any of the roles assigned to a producer in that it does not participate in the development, implementation or financing of shows and does not retain the services of artists," the judgment states. The role of Mr. Boudreau (owner of the bar) is limited to running a drinking establishment and renting a performance hall to artists, without taking any financial risks with regard to their performance."

"It's an interesting decision because it sets out a bit of a standard for the industry by specifying what a room lessor is," acknowledges Luc Fortin, administrator of the Guild, who wants to distance himself from the former administrators of the union. The current team would never have filed a lawsuit against this bar, according to him.

But the Guild intends to use the decision to track down those who are really abusing this status. "There are bars that say they are renting their room but are really doing programming," explains Mr. Fortin. "They take $100 from ticket sales [the price of which they set], keep all the revenue from drink sales and advertise to attract customers."