Posts Tagged: "music licensing"

Copyright Office Issues NPRM to Correct MLC’s ‘Erroneous’ Dispute Policy on Post-Termination Blanket License Royalties

On October 25, the U.S. Copyright Office issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register to clarify the application of the derivative works exception to copyright termination rights within the context of blanket licenses administered under the Music Modernization Act (MMA). The Office is hoping to correct what it sees as a legally erroneous dispute resolution policy established by the Mechanical Licensing Collective (MLC), which administers the MMA’s blanket licenses to digital music providers, regarding the payment of royalties after songwriters exercise their termination rights to regain copyright ownership from music publishers.

Roblox is Latest Online Platform to Settle NMPA Copyright Claims with Collaborative Music Licensing Agreement

On September 27, the National Music Publishers’ Association (NMPA) and online game platform provider Roblox announced that the two parties had settled ongoing copyright litigation in the Central District of California over Roblox’s unauthorized use of copyrighted music on its online gaming platform. The settlement also creates an opt-in mechanism for eligible NMPA publishers and opens a negotiation period for individual publishers to engage Roblox in go-forward licensing deals.

Artists Urge Bezos to Take Action Against the Streaming of Unlicensed Music on Twitch

On August 10, the Executive Board of the nonprofit organization Artist Rights Alliance (ARA) published a letter to Jeff Bezos, the Founder and Chief Executive Officer of Amazon.com, Inc. In the letter, the ARA asked Bezos to answer the question of whether the Twitch platform allows users to post or stream unlicensed music and to take necessary actions to stop such activity. The ARA advocates for a healthy music economy and for the rights of musicians, performers, and songwriters in the digital world. The letter expressed the ARA’s respect for Amazon and its products and services, but noted its disapproval of Amazon’s Twitch subsidiary, which allegedly hosts and delivers unlicensed music. Twitch is an online service owned by Amazon since 2014 that is used to watch and stream digital video broadcasts, such as streams dedicated to artwork creation, music, talk shows, and TV series.

The Katy Perry Verdict Proves Our Music Copyright Laws Need a Tune Up

Our music copyright law is out of tune in several ways. The recent multi-million-dollar jury verdict this summer against Katy Perry and Capitol Records illustrates a lack of harmony between music creation and the copyright law that is designed to “protect” it. According to a California jury, Perry’s runaway smash hit “Dark Horse” infringed a Christian rap “Joyful Noise” by the rapper, Flame. The jury awarded Flame nearly $2.8 million in damages. If that verdict withstands an appeal, it will be a dark day for the music industry. I fear the clouds are already brewing. The verdict exposes some major structural problems with how our music copyright law works.  

Compromise on Music Modernization Act Leads to Unconditional Support From Music Industry Organizations

A collection of trade organizations representing music publishers and songwriters recently released a joint statement in which all announced unconditional support for S.2823, the Music Modernization Act (MMA). These organizations include SESAC, the National Music Publishers’ Association (NMPA), the Nashville Songwriters Association International (NSAI) and the Songwriters of North America (SONA). The support of the bill from these collective entities comes after an amendment to the act designed to improve private competition in the market for music licensing after a contentious period of negotiating that amendment.

Increasing Fairness For Independent Songwriters By Improving The Music Modernization Act

As advocates for all music creators, including independent songwriters, we have endorsed the Music Modernization Act, along with other organizations spanning the music industry, as part of a package of important reforms that will better the lives of people who make music for a living and strengthen the music economy overall.

Largest Ever Copyright Royalty Board Ruling Transforms How Songwriters are Paid

Less than 48 hours before the 60th Annual Grammy Awards in New York City, the Copyright Royalty Board (CRB) ruled to increase royalty payments to songwriters and music publishers from music streaming companies by nearly 44 percent, the biggest rate increase granted in CRB history. These rates will go into effect for interactive streaming and limited download services like Amazon, Apple, Google, and Spotify for the years 2018-2022, and will transform how songwriters are paid by these interactive streaming services.

Not So Blurred Lines

Some IP commentators love to hate the Blurred Lines music copyright decision. A primary critique has stoked unnecessary fear in musicians that the decision blurs the line between protectable expression and unprotectable style or genre. Much of the animosity, however, is based on misunderstanding or misconstruing the law or facts. This post clarifies this aspect of the case to show why the district court decision was reasonable and should be affirmed in the current appeal at the Ninth Circuit.

China’s copyright regulator tells foreign and domestic music companies to improve copyright licensing, reducing piracy

In mid-September, the federal government of the People’s Republic of China issued statements which indicate that the country is looking to expand upon recent rhetoric over increased protections for intellectual property. According to state-controlled media outlet Xinhua, China’s National Copyright Administration (NCAC) informed a group of more than 20 domestic and foreign music companies that they must adhere to both market rules and international practices in order to widen licensing and improve the spread of copyrighted music online.

In the Era of Spotify and Pandora Where Do ASCAP and BMI Fit?

In traditional music recording, artists have had to choose to license their music through major music industry organizations like ASCAP and BMI. In the age of streaming music through Spotify, Pandora and other services what is the purpose of these organizations? The licensing groups have served as clearinghouses for smaller players in the music industry who cannot feasibly deal with multitudes of licensees on their own. But with Taylor Swift and other “major” artists choosing to deal—or not deal—with the streaming services that opens the question about blanket music performance licenses.

The Impact of Drake’s Fair Use Copyright Victory on Music Copyright Infringement

A few weeks ago, a New York federal judge ruled that Hip-Hop Artist Drake was protected by copyright’s fair use doctrine when he sampled a spoken-word jazz track on his 2013 song “Pound Cake,” saying the artist had transformed the purpose of the clip. Drake used 35 seconds of Jimmy Smith’s 1982 “Jimmy Smith Rap” without clearing the clip, but Judge William H. Pauley said Drake’s purpose in doing so was sharply different from the original artist’s goals in creating it.

Spotify, Pandora land top spots in growing online music streaming sector

A report issued in March of this year found that a full 45 percent of the 119 million people listening to online radio services were tuning into Pandora’s service. Pandora also had the greatest brand awareness, registering with 75 percent of survey respondents. The study also found that 73 percent of people accessing online streaming music services did so through their smartphones. However, in terms of paid subscribers, Pandora has to cede that crown to Spotify, headquartered in Stockholm, Sweden. In late October, the Spotify app became the top grossing app downloaded from the iPhone App Store. Of Spotify’s 60 million streaming music users, 25 percent of those users pay for the premium music subscription, gaining its 15 millionth paid subscriber just as the 2015 calendar year started. As of March 2014, Pandora only had 3.3 million paid subscribers in its total registered user base of 250 million people.

Jury Tells Robin Thicke to Give it Up

Thicke maintains that the Gaye family doesn’t own a genre, a style, or a groove and he’s right. The Gayes point out no other musicians or songs of the era were compared with “Blurred Lines,” and they’re right, too. A viable criticism of the verdict is that it could have a chilling effect on new music for fear of overzealous copyright owners attempting to expand this concept to their cases. Is it possible that a ruling of this nature would stifle creativity? Perhaps, but people were saying the same thing when the music sampling cases happened, and the industry adapted just fine.

Congress Seeks to Fix Unfair, Outdated Royalties for Songwriters and Composers

According to Congressman Collins, who I spoke with via telephone on Friday, March 6, 2015, there was a great deal of treatment of the SEA at the subcommittee level during the 113th Congress, but now during the 114th Congress consideration will move to the full Committee level, which suggests a seriousness about getting something done. ”Music licensing will be an area where something bubbles up this Congress,” Collins explained. ”I’m hoping the industry will come together.”

Robin Thicke Sues Marvin Gaye Because He’s Infringing?

Recently I was driving around between appointments and flipping through radio stations on Sirius XM. I came across a song that at first I thought was the summer hit by Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams – Blurred Lines. But that wasn’t the song at all, rather is was Marvin Gaye’s Got to Give it Up. I knew it would only be time before reading about some kind of settlement between Marvin Gaye’s family and Thicke/Williams, but Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams suing the family of Marvin Gaye asserting that they are not infringing the copyright in Got to Give it Up would be hilarious if it weren’t so utterly ridiculous.