"Accumulated hundreds of millions of shekels that it does not distribute", the company claims the belief in copyright protection • ACUM in response: "False and delusional lawsuit" • First publication

• A lawsuit in the amount of a quarter of a billion shekels against ACUM

  Photo: 

  GettyImages

This morning (Monday), a class action lawsuit was filed against ACUM worth a quarter of a billion shekels for "royalties that have not yet been distributed." The lawsuit, filed by attorneys Tamir Afuri and Shai Glick of the law firm Shablat on behalf of a group of creators, The royalty money that has accumulated over the years and is not divided, according to the lawsuit.

These are royalties that are collected every year from international companies such as YouTube and Netflix, as well as from restaurants, hotels, banquet halls, etc., for playing music. The statement of claim states that about NIS 150 million is collected in this area each year. "After ACUM was forced to submit its financial statements for review by lawyers, it became clear beyond any doubt that the company had accumulated cash and assets worth hundreds of millions of shekels in its coffers, which it does not distribute to creators," the press release said.

• "There is nowhere to run": the rise and fall of Danny Mizrahi

• Who is trying to find a match for Moore Mahtonami?

• How does a 6 year old girl earn $ 18 million a year?

This lawsuit is particularly jarring against the backdrop of the Corona crisis, which has fatally damaged musicians in particular and the world of culture in general. As is well known, there have been hundreds of thousands of unemployed in about six months in this area alone. "Many artists who are currently suffering from difficulties due to the state of emergency in the economy do not know that the Akum fund has an estimated amount of NIS 250,000,000 and is not distributed to them," the lawsuit states. It was further alleged that ACUM owns apartments in Tel Aviv worth tens of millions of shekels, for rental purposes, instead of selling the apartments and distributing the funds to the creators.

The plaintiffs approached ACUM and demanded that the funds be distributed, but the company did not respond to it, it was alleged. According to the statement of claim, ACUM's refusal to distribute to the rights holders the royalties due to them is a breach of fiduciary duty under the Companies Act. , And a violation of the obligations imposed on ACUM as having a monopoly.

Full details of the amounts were submitted to the court under confidentiality, as required by ACUM. Although the plaintiffs are shareholders in ACUM, the company refused to provide them with financial statements unless they signed a letter of confidentiality, according to which the disclosure of the data by them would expose them to a lawsuit. Shablat claims that there is no "trade secret" in the financial statements of a company of a quasi-public nature such as ACUM, which serves thousands of creators who are also shareholders and are entitled to receive the financial statements, and that ACUM's demand for confidentiality is intended to hide the huge sums.

• "Manaich": better than "Tehran"

• Shem Tov HaAvi on the way to a "wonderful country"?

• Summer 2020 hits: disconnected, tired

ACUM responded: "In these minutes we have actually received the statement of claim and we are studying it. On the face of it, this is a false and delusional lawsuit. "