A US court has said it will not force Apple to reinstate music streaming app Musi to its App Store. In a ruling last week, Judge Eumi K Lee concludes that Apple can basically do whatever it likes on its App Store, and even if it did need a specific reason to remove Musi, doing so in response to multiple copyright complaints was “reasonable”.
Apple’s terms for developers distributing apps through the App Store give the tech giant “broad discretion to remove applications at any time, with or without cause”, providing it sends a developer a “notice of termination”, notes Lee.
And, she adds, “it is undisputed that Apple gave Musi notice of termination” before kicking it out of the App Store in September after receiving multiple copyright complaints from the music industry. On that basis, Lee has declined to issue a preliminary injunction ordering Apple to restate Musi.
Musi sources its music from YouTube, stripping out YouTube’s ads in the process. It offers its users a free version, where it inserts its own ads, or a premium ad-free subscription package.
The music industry has long argued that Musi breaches YouTube’s terms and conditions, and likely infringes the copyrights of record labels and music publishers. Both global record industry trade group IFPI and US music publisher organisation NMPA have in the past submitted complaints about Musi to Apple.
Musi sued Apple in October in a bid to get its app back on the Apple platform, while also requesting a preliminary injunction forcing Apple to reinstate the Musi app in the short term while the legal battle goes through the motions. Last week’s ruling was in relation to the preliminary injunction.
Despite Apple’s developer terms allowing it to remove apps “at any time, with or without cause”, Musi argued that - because there is another term in the developer agreement that specifically says Apple can remove an app if it “reasonably believes” it infringes copyright - in this case the broad discretion rule does not apply, and Apple needs to show reasonable belief of copyright infringement. Which it has failed to do.
Lee disagrees with Musi twice over. The term relating to copyright infringement does not interfere with Apple’s more general right to remove an app at “any time, with or without cause”, she says. And anyway, the various music industry copyright complaints, some of which remain unresolved, constitute “reasonable belief”.
The judge is keen to stress that she isn’t ruling on the merits of the music industry’s copyright claims. But, under Apple’s developer terms, it was within its rights to remove Musi. And, she adds, there are no “public interest” reasons for forcing Apple to restate the Musi app while the legal dispute progresses.
Last week’s ruling suggests that Musi’s wider lawsuit against Apple will likely fail too, though for now it proceeds. Lee will next rule on Apple’s motion to dismiss that lawsuit.