The Dept. of Justice’s antitrust office has issued a statement explaining the reasons it believes 100 percent licensing, or “full-works licensing,” is required under the consent decree. Songwriters and music publishers, as well as the US Copyright Office, have voiced vehement oppositionto the mandate since word of the DoJ’s rule change first came down in June of last year.
Previously, songwriters and the performance rights organizations (PROs) that represent them — primarily ASCAP, BMI and SESAC — were only allowed to license the portion of a song they controlled to users, like Spotify, of those works, in what’s called fractional licensing. Under the new rule, any co-author or PRO of a song can license that entire (“full”) work. Digital services have countered publishers’ and songwriters’ opposition to the change by saying it doesn’t change in any practical way how their businesses operate.
“As our investigation proceeded,” the DoJ writes in a statement released this morning, “we discovered that there was significant disagreement in the industry about what rights must be conveyed by the blanket licenses (as well as other categories of licenses) that the consent decrees require ASCAP and BMI to offer,” the DoJ writes. “Some argued that, in order to effectuate the purpose of the consent decrees, the blanket license must grant licensees (also called ‘users’) the right to publicly perform all songs in the ASCAP and BMI repertories. Others believe that the blanket licenses offered by ASCAP and BMI instead confer only rights to the fractional interests in songs owned by ASCAP’s and BMI’s members and that music users must obtain separate licenses to the remaining fractional interests before playing the songs.”
In the end, the DoJ concluded only full-work licenses could fulfill the meaning and purpose of the consent decrees. “We think the evidence favors the full-work side,” the DoJ said.
Full Content: LA Times
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
China Summons Delivery Giants Over Unfair Competition Concerns
May 13, 2025 by
CPI
Judge Orders Sanctions Against Missouri for Noncompliance in Price-Fixing Probe
May 13, 2025 by
CPI
Confusion Reigns In AI Policy In US and Europe
May 13, 2025 by
CPI
EU Clears ADNOC’s $16.3 Billion Acquisition of Covestro
May 13, 2025 by
CPI
Spanish Antitrust Chief Says BBVA-Sabadell Merger Won’t Stifle Competition
May 13, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Mergers in Digital Markets
Apr 21, 2025 by
CPI
Catching a Killer? Six “Genetic Markers” to Assess Nascent Competitor Acquisitions
Apr 21, 2025 by
John Taladay & Christine Ryu-Naya
Digital Decoded: Is There More Scope for Digital Mergers In 2025?
Apr 21, 2025 by
Colin Raftery, Michele Davis, Sarah Jensen & Martin Dickson
AI In the Mix – An Ever-Evolving Approach to Jurisdiction Over Digital Mergers in Europe
Apr 21, 2025 by
Ingrid Vandenborre & Ketevan Zukakishvili
Antitrust Enforcement Errors Due to a Failure to Understand Organizational Capabilities and Dynamic Competition
Apr 21, 2025 by
Magdalena Kuyterink & David J. Teece