Sony Music routinely presents itself as a “champion of intellectual property rights” and a “crusader against piracy”, when in fact it is “wilfully committing blatant, ongoing and massive piracy” of compositions controlled by a former business partner “on a global scale, without justification or remorse”. Or so says that former business partner, Patrick Moxey’s Ultra Music Publishing.
The bold claim is made in a new lawsuit filed by UMP against Sony. It claims that, because audits have demonstrated that Sony-owned labels have underpaid or failed to pay royalties due to the publisher and its songwriters in the past, UMP “no longer grants licences” to any Sony labels for the use of its compositions.
And yet, despite knowing it doesn’t have those licences, Sony labels continue to exploit UMP works, the publisher claims, meaning the major is engaged in “wilful and utterly inexcusable copyright infringement”.
Specifically, the lawsuit says, Sony labels “upload unlicensed sound recordings of Ultra compositions to digital service providers for on-demand streaming”; they sell “infringing recordings as digital downloads and in physical configurations”; and “wrongfully synchronise” the publisher’s compositions into “so-called music videos and lyric videos”.
Moxey used to be in business with Sony, which bought into the Ultra record label in 2012. UMP was not part of that deal, though it did work with Sony Music Publishing for a time. In 2022, Sony bought the Ultra label outright and Moxey stepped down from his role running it. However, he continues to head up the publishing company, which then entered into a partnership with Warner Chappell.
Things seemed to sour between Moxey and his former business partner quite quickly, with Sony suing him at the end of 2022 over allegations the Ultra publishing company was infringing the Ultra label’s trademark, which was now owned by the major. Moxey denied there was any case for trademark infringement.
In terms of the new copyright infringement lawsuit, although the legal filing itself doesn’t go into much detail, there is a certain amount to unpack, given there are allegations of copyright infringement in relation to streaming, downloads, physical discs and music videos.
With on-demand streaming, it is usually the digital platforms that secure licences covering the rights in the songs contained in recordings uploaded by the labels. However, with discs and - in the US - downloads, it is the label that needs to get a licence and pay over the royalties.
In the US, labels can rely on the compulsory licence that covers the mechanical rights in songs. Though relying on that licence requires the label to complete various admin tasks and it is likely that UMP is arguing that those tasks are not being properly completed. Which would mean the compulsory licence does not apply and therefore copyrights have been infringed.
Regarding streaming, UMP specifically accuses Sony of infringing its compositions by uploading recordings to the digital platforms without getting a specific licence.
That does take us into a slightly grey area, in that it’s the platforms that get licences with streaming, yet labels do make copies of songs when they upload recordings to those platforms’ servers. It seems UMP is arguing that, in that grey area, there is some copyright infringement.
If this lawsuit were to get to court, that would be a particularly interesting part of the case, though settlement outside of court seems likely. But we should get Sony’s formal response in the meantime.