Egyptian actor Bassem Samra has publicly endorsed the activation of “public performance rights” for creators, stating “Yes to public performance rights, and no to bullying artists.” This movement seeks to ensure actors and writers receive royalties when their work is broadcast on television channels, moving beyond a one-time payment.
This isn’t just a dispute over a few checks; it is a fundamental clash between the “work-for-hire” model and the evolving concept of intellectual property in the digital age. For decades, the Egyptian industry has operated on a flat-fee basis. But as content lives forever on streaming platforms and repeat-broadcast loops, the talent is starting to ask: why is the producer the only one getting a recurring dividend?
The Bottom Line
- The Conflict: Actors want recurring royalties (public performance rights) from broadcasters, while producers argue that contracts already cover all compensation.
- The Legal Gap: While a 2002 Intellectual Property Law exists, its application to actors—versus composers—has remained largely dormant.
Here is the kicker: the tension isn’t actually between the actors and the producers—at least not in the way the public thinks. According to Hesham Abdel Khaleq, head of the Cinema Industry Chamber, the real friction lies in the interpretation of the 2002 Intellectual Property Law. While the law recognizes public performance rights for authors and screenwriters, the application for performers has been a grey area.
But the math tells a different story when you look at the global landscape. Egypt is essentially attempting a localized version of this struggle, trying to modernize a system that still feels like it’s operating in the past.
The Producer’s Defense and the ‘Tom Cruise’ Precedent
Hesham Abdel Khaleq isn’t backing down. During a recent appearance on Amr Adib’s Al Heikaya, Abdel Khaleq pointed out a critical legal loophole: if a contract doesn’t explicitly mention public performance rights, the actor is typically paid a one-time fee. Period.
To drive his point home, Abdel Khaleq invoked the gold standard of global stardom. He noted that as a cinema owner, he screens Tom Cruise movies without the actor demanding any public performance rights because the matter is subject to contract terms. The argument is simple: if you want a piece of the backend, you negotiate it in the contract before the cameras roll.
However, the tide is shifting. Yasser Galal has clarified that the target isn’t the producers’ pockets, but the revenue generated by the channels airing the content. This is a crucial distinction. If the broadcasters—the ones profiting from the eyeballs—are the ones paying the royalties, the producers are out of the line of fire.
Decoding the Royalties Tug-of-War
To understand the stakes, we have to look at how these rights have been handled across different artistic disciplines in Egypt. Music has always had a head start thanks to the Society of Authors and Composers, which has been collecting royalties since 2005. Actors are essentially looking at the music industry’s blueprint and saying, “We want in.”
| Entity | Current Payment Model | Proposed Model (Public Performance) | Primary Funding Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Actors/Performers | One-time flat fee (per contract) | Recurring royalties per broadcast | TV Channels / Broadcasters |
| Composers/Lyricists | Royalties via Society of Authors and Composers | Established royalty system | Broadcasters/Public Venues |
| Producers | Ownership of Master/Copyright | Retain ownership + Distribution fees | Ad Revenue / Licensing |
By pushing for the activation of the 2002 law, Egyptian artists are trying to build a safety net.
The Senate Play and the Risk of ‘Financial Bullying’
Bassem Samra’s use of the word “bullying” (بلطجة) is a calculated emotional appeal. It frames the denial of these rights not as a legal disagreement, but as an act of aggression against the creative class.
But there is a looming question that the industry hasn’t answered: Will this actually happen? If the law is activated, there is a question of whether it will be according to internationally applied intellectual property rules, or if it will load producers with additional financial burdens.
Moreover, the influence of the artistic syndicates (النقابات الفنية) is reaching a fever pitch. When the syndicates began telling actors they would receive money every time a film aired, it created a wave of optimism. We are seeing a gap between the promise of the syndicate and the possibility of the law.
Ultimately, the Egyptian entertainment industry is at a crossroads. It can continue to rely on the “one-and-done” payment model, or it can evolve into a professionalized IP ecosystem where talent shares in the long-term success of their work.
What do you think? Should actors be paid every time their work hits the screen, or is the initial contract the final word? Let us know in the comments.
