US efficiency rights group BMI has launched a marketing campaign urging its associates (songwriters, composers, and publishers) to make their voices heard within the US Copyright Workplace’s inquiry into PROs.
The USCO launched an investigation on Monday (February 10) in an effort to reply “questions associated to the rise within the variety of PROs and the licensing income distribution practices of PROs.”
The inquiry was triggered by a letter despatched final 12 months by three US Home representatives on the Home Judiciary Committee. The letter echoed issues from small companies that new PROs arrange in recent times are making it harder to make sure that music performed publicly by these companies is correctly licensed.
“Licensees have reported receiving calls for for royalties from new entities claiming to signify songwriters, and threatening litigation if the calls for aren’t met,” the letter said.
“Contemplating that the opportunity of substantial statutory copyright damages poses an existential danger for many bars, eating places, and different small companies, many really feel compelled to pay these entities on high of what they already pay for blanket licenses from the standard PROs.”
BMI, which counts as a type of “conventional PROs,” has requested its associates – songwriters and music publishers – to submit feedback to the USCO, urging it to not introduce new rules on efficiency rights orgs.
“We consider the objective of those licensees [businesses that license music from PROs] is to not query how {the marketplace} capabilities or name consideration to new PROs who’ve really gained little or no traction within the business, however in the end to pay you much less to your inventive work,” BMI stated to songwriters and publishers.
“Sadly, this isn’t new. Licensees and their lobbying organizations have been making false and deceptive arguments like these with that very objective in thoughts for years. And as we at all times have, BMI will proceed to advocate tirelessly in your behalf to cease that from occurring.”
“We consider the objective of those licensees [is] in the end to pay you much less to your inventive work.”
BMI
BMI ready a kind letter that its associates can undergo the USCO forward of an April 11, 2025, submission deadline. The total textual content of the letter is beneath.
Of the six PROs working within the US, one – ASCAP – is a not-for-profit operation. The remaining 5 – BMI, SESAC, and comparatively new entrants International Music Rights (GMR), PRO Music Rights, and AllTrack – are run for revenue.
BMI was run as a not-for-profit for a lot of its eight-decade historical past till the group shifted to a for-profit mannequin in 2022. The next 12 months, it introduced it was being bought to non-public fairness agency New Mountain Capital, a transfer that raised issues amongst some songwriters that such a transfer may negatively influence their royalties.
Shortly earlier than the sale to New Mountain was made public, BMI introduced that it might cut back the payouts to songwriters and publishers from 90% of royalties collected to 85%. Following the sale, BMI allotted $100 million of the proceeds to its songwriter and writer associates.
Beneath is the total textual content of BMI’s letter, which it’s urging associates to undergo the USCO.
February 11, 2025
Ms. Shira Perlmutter
Register of Copyrights
United States Copyright Workplace
Washington, D.C. 20559-6000
Expensive Register Perlmutter:
We’re writing in response to the Discover of Inquiry (NOI) printed by the U.S. Copyright Workplace within the Federal Register on February 10, 2025, titled “Points Associated to Performing Rights Organizations.” We acknowledge this inquiry was initiated in response to a September 2024 letter despatched to you by three Members of Congress. We strongly consider that letter centered solely on the attitude of music licensees and failed to think about our perspective as songwriters, composers and music publishers who earn our dwelling from the general public efficiency royalties collected by PROs. We’re equally upset that the questions posed in your inquiry additionally concentrate on music customers, and never music creators.
That is regarding as a result of it’s obvious that the Congressional letter’s intention was to query the efficacy of the music licensing market with a purpose to additional a selected agenda of extra regulation of PROs and in the end allow licensees to pay much less to music creators and copyright house owners for using our inventive work.
Sadly, this isn’t new. Licensees and their lobbying organizations have been making the identical false and deceptive arguments with that very objective in thoughts for years. Now they’re utilizing the emergence of recent PROs—who’ve gained little or no traction in buying any share of repertoire really utilized by licensees—because the centerpiece of their renewed push for regulation.
We all know that new entrants are proof of a aggressive, vibrant and useful market. Competitors, significantly for creators, is constructive. Furthermore, we admire that it’s crucial for licensees to know who represents the music they use of their companies and—as representatives of our repertoire—for PROs to be clear about their catalogs. To this finish, BMI and ASCAP have already delivered an business resolution referred to as Songview, which offers transparency round copyright possession. If different organizations aren’t as dedicated to transparency, there are already state legal guidelines throughout the nation governing PROs that shield customers from misleading enterprise practices. We don’t consider new regulation or oversight on us as creators or on BMI, the PRO that collects and pays our royalties, is required. What’s required is solely enforcement of present legal guidelines and rules.
In right this moment’s music business, streaming companies and the fractions of pennies they pay per-stream have made it much more tough for us to earn a dwelling. We depend on public efficiency royalties for our livelihoods now greater than ever. Because of this we additionally famous with curiosity the request for the Workplace to guage the gathering and distribution of basic licensing {dollars}. As , it is a broad class that features, amongst others, bars, eating places, and different smaller venues with dwell performances, and it’s well-known that music utilization on this class is essentially the most tough to seize. Furthermore, each greenback PROs spend monitoring information means {dollars} popping out of our royalty pool.
Once more, we consider it is a false situation raised by music customers for the particular goal of lowering license charges. Nevertheless, even accepting this concern as honest, it’s clear that the answer to this purported downside shouldn’t fall on us and our PROs. The duty of music customers to pay for the suitable of public efficiency exists no matter and with out relation to the distribution practices of PROs. If licensees actually are involved about royalty distribution, we and our PRO would welcome extra reporting from them to higher seize their utilization of our music of their companies.
Lastly, concerning dwell live performance venues, it’s normal observe that these licensees deduct public efficiency licensing charges straight out of the pockets of the artists acting at their venues (artists who’re fairly often songwriters). We consider it might be helpful to know the way widespread this observe is, and whether or not the overall charges they deduct exceed what they pay for his or her public efficiency licenses, if and when a venue has really even taken the required licenses.
Importantly, songwriters are the final word small enterprise house owners who work onerous at their occupation and deserve truthful compensation. We’re already essentially the most closely regulated phase of the music business. PROs exist to make sure we are able to proceed to earn a dwelling by our craft and preserve creating the music that’s each a strong driver of the U.S. financial system and broadly loved around the globe.
Thanks to your consideration to our ideas on this matter.Music Enterprise Worldwide
