Meta has responded to the copyright infringement lawsuit filed against it by Eminem music publisher Eight Mile Style, which accuses the social media company of allowing the rapper’s music to appear in videos on Facebook and Instagram without the necessary licences. It also claims that Eminem’s compositions appeared in Meta’s in-built audio clip libraries without permission.
But Eight Mile Style’s $110 million copyright claim, says Meta, is “long on rhetoric” but “remarkably short on specifics”. It argues that the publisher’s lawsuit references 243 compositions that it controls, but - with just two exceptions - “never says which of them were allegedly infringed - let alone identifies when or where the infringement occurred, or by whom”.
This lack of information is sufficient to dismiss the entire lawsuit, Meta claims. Its new legal filing seeking dismissal of Eight Mile Style’s litigation goes on, “it’s not enough to claim that unidentified compositions were infringed somewhere on Meta’s services at some unknown time without a modicum of support identifying any - let alone ‘rampant’ - user infringement”.
Unlike audio services - which in the US can rely on the MLC-administered compulsory licence to cover mechanical rights in songs, and licences from collecting societies like BMI and ASCAP to cover performing rights - video services that use music need to sort out bespoke deals from music publishers or their licensing agents.
Eight Mile Style claims that those deals were not secured by Meta for Eminem’s works, and therefore the social media company is liable for copyright infringement. First for including his music in its online music libraries, and also for allowing Eminem compositions to appear in videos on Instagram and Facebook, with the music either inserted within Meta’s apps or externally.
Meta wants the Eight Mile Style lawsuit dismissed on the grounds the publisher has failed to make a valid claim against the company, having failed to provide sufficient information about the alleged infringements in its lawsuit.
However, it also argues that it did - in fact - have a licence covering Eminem’s compositions via a licensing deal with rights agency Audiam. The publisher is adamant that that deal did not cover its catalogue, but Meta argues that Audiam previously said that it did.
In its new filing, Meta claims that - in a letter earlier this year - Audiam confirmed that, back in 2020 when it and Meta were negotiating a licensing deal, “an Audiam representative told Meta that 'Audiam was authorised to represent EMS in its direct negotiation with Meta’”.