They condemn SGAE for paying 10,092 euros in compensation to the author of the famous religious hymn “God is Here”.

However, Gacías’ defense considers the compensation to be completely inadequate and has filed an appeal with the Supreme Court, believing that the Court used this compensation. Using an “arbitrary” and “unreasonable” criterion in determining the amount to be paid, As revealed to El Periódico de España from the Prensa Ibérica group, lawyer Mónica Sevil requested a lump sum of 100,000 euros.

This story of success, disappointment and restoration begins In 1979 when Francisco Javier Gacías composed the famous song “God is here, as sure as the air I breathe,” he says in the song, and will play with his band Nueva Vida at the Christian festival ‘Jesus is calling’ in Zaragoza.

Since then, numerous versions have been added to the song and Tens of millions of views accumulated on different platforms such as Spotify or YouTube [algún vídeo llega a sumar 300 millones de visualizaciones]. The song has even been played during Pope Francis’ many visits abroad. [también lo hizo en alguna de Juan Pablo II].

The author of the work started to demand his rights from SGAE in 2013 and after seeing that his demands were not met, He recently applied to the court. On June 10, 2022, the ordinary Judge opened the case, but Gacías Mateo filed an appeal and the State Court has now ruled in the positive.

new writers

In his application, he showed that after its registration in 1990, SGAE tolerated the recording of the work by new authors into the association’s repertoire, which amounted to a violation of property rights. In total, according to demand; There would be 18 non-compliant recordings and their authors would receive corresponding royalties.

During this process, the plaintiff clearly stated that SGAE had not agreed on any rights until 2009 and “He has liquidated it several times since then and has liquidated a minimal portion of the operations he had undertaken.” Thus, the agreement signed with SGAE in November 1990 and “documentation, management and management of economic rights derived from copyright”.

According to the decision dated April 10, 2023, available to El Periódico de España, the plaintiff insisted in his appeal that one of the “relevant reasons” for the violation of the management rights agreement was “even after the repetition.” Registration complaints that harm their rights, “The organization consents to business-related property records continuing to be recorded with SGAE.”

Different studies

However, in Oda’s estimation, a certificate from the SGAE secretary dated February 16, 2022 states that the works titled ‘God is here’ “are either different from the works recorded by the actor.” or SGAE does not have scores, documentation, or audio of this work and is not available on the Internet by either the author or the publisher”, so the property defense is not considered to have been sufficiently violated in this case.

Despite the evidence presented by the plaintiff throughout the process, including a certificate obtained from a company in the audiovisual industry that mediates digital content Encrypting certain digital rights of the work costs at least 50,000 Euros.The Chamber accepts that in order to determine the amount of compensation, an expert opinion will be needed to determine the rights that may accrue in the plaintiff’s opinion with technical criteria.

For all these reasons, he concludes, it seems reasonable to think that he alone can. “estimated or approximate” compensation, and concludes that it should be 10,092 euros. The court also rejects the defendant’s claim that he paid non-pecuniary damages to the song’s author; his defense was demanding 30,000 euros. because there is “no evidence” that they occurred.

In contact with this newspaper, Gacías Mateo’s defense stated that he had appealed to the Supreme Court due to the “arbitrary and unreasonable parameters” used by the Court, while in their defense they presented “numerous evidence of abuse” of the work. . “With comparable parameters used with rates paid by SGAE.”

“The measurement made makes no sense,” says Mónica Sevil, adding that after winning this decision, SGAE “did not cancel the illegitimate recordings” and “other people around the world continue to be paid.” for his client’s employment rights. “Not a single finger was lifted to arrange the situation in favor of Javier Gacía,” the lawyer concludes.