THE hitherto little known CASH organisation is now making news trying to justify its functions, but I think it is preposterous that 'royalties' are due for playing music not for profit (at one's Christmas party) and at a charity show.
If CASH as a non-government organisation has a licence to collect money from the public, without the exchange of a product, then its accounts must be open to public scrutiny, so the public can be assured the money goes to the right recipients.
I seek the following information from CASH management: What mechanism is there to ensure royalties collected in Hong Kong go to, say, Paul McCartney, Vladimir Ashkenazy, Danny McGill or Lau Tak-wah? How are royalties apportioned? As far as I know, royalties collected are not artist specific; so does a little-known artist collect the same royalties as a well-known artist, even though the works of the former are rarely played? If CASH thinks it has an ordinance to control most aspects of the enjoyment of music, then it should make its administration, accounts etc, known to the public, or else what it does at best seems to be a licence to print money, or worse an extortion racket. CHAN CHONG-HENG North Point