The Fountainhead case, a case between DODA and Ekblom, not TONO and Gramart

Since the case was brought to TONO in November 2007, TONO and NCB (which manages the recording rights) have used their sister society network, in an attempt to resolve the case at the lowest possible level. TONO and NCB in Copenhagen immediately contacted Zaiks (TONO in Poland), where the infringement had taken place, to determine whether Zaiks had had the plagiarism registered in the system. The case concerns the fact that a well-known Polish artist - DODA, has released as his own, Ola Per Ekblom's work "Circles" under the name "To jest To" on the record company Universal Music Polska. It must be noted that TONO has not itself made any assessment of the similarity of the works, but has assumed that there is plagiarism, illegally published in Poland, on the basis of documentation submitted to us by Harald Sommerstad, Ekblom and Gramart's lawyer.

Zaiks has informed the NCB that neither DODA nor others have registered "To jest To" as a work through the Zaiks/TONO system, and therefore remuneration is not incorrectly calculated either for recording and making copies, or for performance. In line with the usual practice of management companies, all payment of remuneration is put on hold until the question of who is the rightful author of the work has been clarified, either directly between the parties involved or by a court decision. TONO has also approached the record company Universal Music Polska in an attempt to push for a sufficiently good solution. In the letter sent on 17 June 2008, it is requested that the author be duly compensated for the infringement he has been subjected to. See excerpts from the letter:

In addition, the case was presented to TONO's board, where a decision was made as to whether TONO could assume responsibility for any legal costs with Gramart, if a plagiarism case was filed. The board did not find it possible to assume such responsibility, as the case is not a dispute within TONO/NCB's areas of management, but they naturally wanted to assist Ekblom out of court, by, among other things, making an inquiry from TONO to the record company Universal. See above. It has been highlighted through press reports that the wording of TONO's management agreement is such that it should indicate that such cases are within TONO/NCB's tasks. In our opinion, this is clearly incorrect and changing practice in this field could result in a costly precedent at the expense of funds for community cases. The wording should always be interpreted in light of relevant sources, in this case TONO/NCB's tasks, which are to manage performance and recording rights, not to track down plagiarism. Allegations of plagiarism are an issue that must be decided by the courts. Therefore, TONO requires that there be a final judgment if we are to change the ownership of a work. As mentioned, there is neither a competing work in the system nor any court decision. Nor is it within TONO/NCB's mandate to pursue compensation cases for individual members as a result of plagiarism. TONO must prioritize the use of members' funds so that we take legal action within our mandate areas for matters of importance to the community, i.e. matters of fundamental importance. TONO is a non-profit organization with 16,000 Norwegian and 2 million foreign members and therefore cannot assume the financial responsibility for pursuing individual civil or criminal cases for an individual member. TONO has naturally been in contact with Ekblom to explain why this is "not a TONO case", and to avoid this. Ekblom himself seemed clearly committed to this. TONO naturally wants to advise its members in the best possible way and does so daily. However, it is not possible for us to act as the financially responsible party on behalf of the individual member in a legal process in all the disputes that are ongoing in this area.