Business
Page: 199
Universal Music Group (UMG) says it will pull its entire music catalog from TikTok when its contract with the service expires on Wednesday (Jan. 31), accusing the platform of “trying to build a music-based business, without paying fair value for the music,” according to an open letter released Tuesday (Jan. 30).
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
In the letter, addressed to UMG artists and songwriters, the company states that it’s particularly concerned about the rates that TikTok is offering to pay for its catalog. Other points of contention include the amount of content on TikTok that infringes its artists’ and songwriters’ works without providing “meaningful solutions” to help them combat it, the level of hate and harassment on the platform and TikTok’s stances on artificial intelligence (AI).
According to UMG, during the negotiations, the ByteDance-owned social giant “demanded a contractual right which would allow [AI] content to massively dilute the royalty pool for human artists,” which UMG states is “nothing short of sponsoring artist replacement by AI.”
If UMG pulls its catalog, it would affect all music distributed and administered by its recorded-music division as well as Universal Music Publishing Group.
The last deal UMG struck with TikTok to license both its recorded music and publishing was announced on Feb. 8, 2021. In July, WMG inked a multi-year licensing deal with TikTok that allows the company to use WMG’s music on its app as well as CapCut and its new “social streaming platform” TikTok Music, which is currently available in Brazil, Indonesia, Australia, Singapore, and Mexico. At the time the deal was announced, WMG CEO/chairman Robert Kyncl and TikTok’s chief executive Shou Chew said the agreement would benefit artists.
This is not the first time the music business has had issues with TikTok. In 2019, when the platform was just getting started, the National Music Publishers’ Association (NMPA) called on Congress to investigate TikTok for potential copyright theft. It was also reported around that time that TikTok was operating on expired deal extensions that were grandfathered in from when it acquired Musical.ly in late 2017. In March 2020, Billboard reported that all three majors had struck short-term licensing deals with TikTok.
Read the full open letter below.
Our core mission is simple: to help our artists and songwriters attain their greatest creative and commercial potential. To achieve these goals, our teams employ their expertise and passion to strike deals with partners all around the world, partners who take seriously their responsibilities to fairly compensate our artists and songwriters and treat the user experience with respect
One of those partners is TikTok, an increasingly influential platform with powerful technology and a massive worldwide user base. As with many other platforms with whom we partner, TikTok’s success as one of the world’s largest social platforms has been built in large part on the music created by our artists and songwriters. Its senior executives proudly state publicly that “music is at the heart of the TikTok experience” and our analysis confirms that the majority of content on TikTok contains music, more than any other major social platform.
The terms of our relationship with TikTok are set by contract, which expires January 31, 2024. In our contract renewal discussions, we have been pressing them on three critical issues—appropriate compensation for our artists and songwriters, protecting human artists from the harmful effects of AI, and online safety for TikTok’s users.
We have been working to address these and related issues with our other platform partners. For example, our Artist-Centric initiative is designed to update streaming’s remuneration model and better reward artists for the value they deliver to platforms. In the months since its inception, we’re proud that this initiative has been received so positively and taken up by a range of partners, including the largest music platform in the world. We’ve also moved aggressively to embrace the promise of AI while fighting to ensure artists’ rights and interests are protected now and far into the future. In addition, we’ve engaged a number of our platform partners to try to drive positive change for their users and by extension, our artists, by addressing online safety issues, and we are recognized as the industry leader in focusing on music’s broader impact on health and wellness.
With respect to the issue of artist and songwriter compensation, TikTok proposed paying our artists and songwriters at a rate that is a fraction of the rate that similarly situated major social platforms pay. Today, as an indication of how little TikTok compensates artists and songwriters, despite its massive and growing user base, rapidly rising advertising revenue and increasing reliance on music-based content, TikTok accounts for only about 1% of our total revenue.
Ultimately TikTok is trying to build a music-based business, without paying fair value for the music.
On AI, TikTok is allowing the platform to be flooded with AI-generated recordings—as well as developing tools to enable, promote and encourage AI music creation on the platform itself – and then demanding a contractual right which would allow this content to massively dilute the royalty pool for human artists, in a move that is nothing short of sponsoring artist replacement by AI.
Further, TikTok makes little effort to deal with the vast amounts of content on its platform that infringe our artists’ music and it has offered no meaningful solutions to the rising tide of content adjacency issues, let alone the tidal wave of hate speech, bigotry, bullying and harassment on the platform. The only means available to seek the removal of infringing or problematic content (such as pornographic deepfakes of artists) is through the monumentally cumbersome and inefficient process which equates to the digital equivalent of “Whack-a-Mole.”
But when we proposed that TikTok takes similar steps as our other platform partners to try to address these issues, it responded first with indifference, and then with intimidation.
As our negotiations continued, TikTok attempted to bully us into accepting a deal worth less than the previous deal, far less than fair market value and not reflective of their exponential growth. How did it try to intimidate us? By selectively removing the music of certain of our developing artists, while keeping on the platform our audience-driving global stars.
TikTok’s tactics are obvious: use its platform power to hurt vulnerable artists and try to intimidate us into conceding to a bad deal that undervalues music and shortchanges artists and songwriters as well as their fans.
We will never do that.
We will always fight for our artists and songwriters and stand up for the creative and commercial value of music.
We recognize the challenges that TikTok’s actions will cause, and do not underestimate what this will mean to our artists and their fans who, unfortunately, will be among those subjected to the near-term consequences of TikTok’s unwillingness to strike anything close to a market-rate deal and meaningfully address its obligations as a social platform. But we have an overriding responsibility to our artists to fight for a new agreement under which they are appropriately compensated for their work, on a platform that respects human creativity, in an environment that is safe for all, and effectively moderated.
We honor our responsibilities with the utmost seriousness. Intimidation and threats will never cause us to shirk those responsibilities.
The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) welcomed the latest edition of the United States Trade Representative’s (USTR) Notorious Markets Report on Tuesday (Jan. 30), which provides an annual run-down of various forms of copyright infringement, including digital music piracy.
Digital music piracy is not front-of-mind for many listeners in the age of streaming; even the industry itself has focused more of its recent frustration on streaming fraud and the popularity of rain sounds, at least in public comments made in the last year.
However, global music piracy inched up in 2022, according to a March 2023 report from MUSO, a U.K. technology company, which tracked over 15 billion visits to music piracy sites that year.
The USTR’s new report highlighted a handful of sites — including 1337X, Krakenfiles, Rapidgator and Ssyoutube — where people go to stream or download songs illegally. “Ssyoutube is reportedly the most popular YouTube ripping site globally, with over 343 million visitors just in April 2023,” the USTR noted in one example.
“We appreciate the report’s prioritization of thefts that target the music community such as stream-ripping,” said George York, the RIAA’s senior vp of international policy, in a statement.
Overall, music is less of a concern in this year’s USTR report relative to 2023’s. The document’s primary focus is the “potential health and safety risks posed by counterfeit trademark goods.”
The USTR was heartened by the fact that “this year many e-commerce and social commerce platforms took solid steps toward initiating additional anti-counterfeiting practices and adapting to new circumvention techniques used by counterfeiters.”
“Several platforms filed public submissions outlining their implementation of new anti-counterfeiting tools, including releasing educational campaigns, increasing identity verification requirements, and implementing faster and more transparent notice-and-takedown processes,” the report continued. “Additionally, several platforms have invested in artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning technologies as a way to scale up and quickly adapt traditional anti-counterfeiting measures such as text and image screening.”
The RIAA had asked the USTR to highlight another aspect of AI, according to comments submitted in October, though it was not ultimately included in the report.
At the time, the RIAA noted that “the year 2023 saw an eruption of unauthorized AI vocal clone services that infringe not only the rights of the artists whose voices are being cloned but also the rights of those that own the sound recordings in each underlying musical track. This has led to an explosion of unauthorized derivative works of our members’ sound recordings which harm sound recording artists and copyright owners.”
In a statement following the USTR’s latest release, York “urge[d] the organization to take “a close look in the future at emerging piracy challenges presented by AI, including the widespread illegal use of copyrighted sound recordings and artist names, images, and likenesses to generate invasive and unlawful voice clones and deepfakes.”
No Doubt and Sublime will each reunite at this year’s Coachella Valley Music and Arts Festival for the first time in years, but there’s one massive reunion promoters couldn’t pull together: the Talking Heads.
Last September, festival curator and Goldenvoice president Paul Tollett traveled to the Toronto International Film Festival for a celebration of the 40th anniversary of the Talking Heads’ seminal concert film, Stop Making Sense. For the first time in over 30 years, David Byrne sat alongside his former bandmates Jerry Harrison, Chris Frantz and Tina Weymouth to discuss the film project in a live panel moderated by Spike Lee.
Tollett tells Billboard he had traveled to Toronto to potentially discuss having the Talking Heads perform at Coachella and met with members of the band and their representatives, but that he “sensed there were no shows happening, so I didn’t make an offer.”
Tollett emphasized that he never broached the subject of payment with the band and ultimately went home empty-handed. He would not discuss how much he was willing to pay for a reunion show at Coachella, though a source familiar with how much artists are paid to headline the mega-festival says the gig could have earned the group as much as $10 million.
Shortly after Tollett returned from his trip, a second offer came through, this time from Live Nation. The promoter told the Talking Heads it was willing to pay the band $80 million to headline six to eight festival gigs and headlining slots, sources close to the group say. The Talking Heads ultimately rejected that offer as well. Live Nation declined to comment when asked about the offer.
Ever since Jane’s Addiction agreed to reunite at Coachella in 2001, the Indio, Calif., music festival has become the go-to platform for reunion gigs, with acts like Siouxsie and the Banshees, the Pixies, Rage Against the Machine, The Specials and dozens more all finding a way to come back together for one more show in the desert. But as the event ages — it’s now in its 23rd year — and competition in the festival market intensifies, pulling these kinds of comeback concerts together has become increasingly difficult.
More than two months after the Toronto Film Festival, in early December, Tollett found himself at the center of a controversial dispute around Sublime’s reunion. Mike “Cheez” Brown, who managed the group Sublime with Rome, had learned that music manager Kevin Zinger with Regime Music Group had joined forces with Vandals bassist and musician-turned-executive Joe Escalante to stage an official Sublime reunion with original bassist Eric Wilson, original drummer Bud Gaugh and late singer Bradley’s Nowell’s son, Jakob Nowell, on vocals.
Brown also learned that Zinger and Escalante were targeting Coachella for the band’s first major reunion show and called Tollett to discuss. Just months earlier, Tollett had booked Sublime with Rome atop the Cali Vibes reggae festival, slated for this February in the band’s hometown of Long Beach, Calif.
While Tollett and many other festival talent buyers had heard about the effort to launch a Jacob Nowell-fronted reunion, at the time Brown called him, Tollett had not yet submitted any offers for the group, who had not yet performed live together. A test gig eventually came together weeks later as part of a charity event, and by late December, Sublime with Rome and the new Sublime had reached a settlement. Brown and Sublime with Rome agreed to end the band’s 13-year run after it played the festivals and dates they had already booked for 2024, while the newly re-formed Sublime would prepare for its first comeback gig as a band, scheduled for Apr. 13 at Coachella.
The No Doubt reunion, largely negotiated in late December and early January, would turn out to be easier and more straightforward than Sublime and the Talking Heads.
It was Tollett who initiated talks with Stefani’s manager, Irving Azoff, about the idea. The discussion with bandmates dragged out longer than expected as talks delved into band business outside of the reunion, but eventually, the group agreed to reunite in large part because of its long relationship with Goldenvoice, who promoted some of the band’s first shows. The $10 million payday would be significant for bandmates Adrian Young, Tony Kanal and Tom Dumont, whose current band, DREAMCAR, is led by AFI singer Davy Havoc and booked to play Goldenvoice’s Cruel World festival in May.
For her part, Stefani was already booked to play Cali Vibes in February when she agreed to play Coachella. A source close to Stefani tells Billboard not to expect a major No Doubt tour to follow the one-time reunion set, as she already has plans in place for the second half of the year to promote new solo music she plans to release this summer.
Big Machine Label Group has promoted two executives, with Mike Rittberg rising to COO and Clay Hunnicutt rising to executive vp of label operations. Both are already in their new roles and report to Big Machine Label Group president of label operations Andrew Kautz. Rittberg most recently served as Big Machine’s executive vp of label […]
This is The Legal Beat, a weekly newsletter about music law from Billboard Pro, offering you a one-stop cheat sheet of big new cases, important rulings and all the fun stuff in between.
This week: A long-simmering feud between the families of Joey Ramone and Johnny Ramone has erupted into a new lawsuit over a proposed Netflix biopic; Madonna’s team vows to “vigorously” fight a lawsuit over her late concert starts; a man stalking Taylor Swift is arrested three times before he’s kept behind bars; and much more.
THE BIG STORY: Hey, Ho, Let’s Go … To Court
Joey Ramone and Johnny Ramone — who were very much not actual brothers — didn’t like each other much in life. And guess what? Their heirs don’t like each other much either.
In a lawsuit filed last week in Manhattan court, Johnny’s widow, Linda Ramone, sued Joey’s brother, Mickey Leigh, over allegations that he had “covertly” developed a planned Netflix movie starring Pete Davidson as Joey. She says that any movie based on the pioneering punk band requires her sign-off.
“To permit defendants alone to tell the authoritative story of the Ramones would be an injustice to the band and its legacy,” Linda’s lawyers wrote.
The case is the latest in years of battles between Linda and Mickey, who split 50-50 ownership of the Ramones IP. And it raises interesting legal questions about so-called life rights deals — and how they raise unique challenges in the context of musical biopics.
To learn more, go read our full story, featuring the full backstory, legal analysis and access to the actual court docs.
Other top stories this week…
LATE DEBATE – Madonna’s management team and Live Nation responded to a high-profile lawsuit claiming the music legend harmed her fans by starting New York City concerts later than scheduled, disputing some allegations and saying they plan to “defend this case vigorously.”
TAYLOR’S STALKER HELD IN JAIL – David Crowe, the man charged with stalking Taylor Swift outside her Manhattan home, was ordered by a New York judge to remain in custody after he was arrested for a third time shortly after being released from jail the first time.
JAM MASTER JAY MURDER TRIAL – Two men accused of murdering Run-DMC‘s Jam Master Jay, Karl Jordan, Jr. and Ronald Washington, finally headed to trial this week, more than 21 years after the rap icon’s killing. Prosecutors say the two men killed Jay as payback after a failed cocaine deal; if convicted, they each face the possibility of life in prison.
JIMI HENDRIX ROYALTIES CASE – A London judge issued a ruling that the heirs of Jimi Hendrix’s former bandmates could continue to sue Sony Music over the rights to three classic albums, clearing the way for a trial next year to resolve the contentious lawsuit.
RIDESHARING … A GLOCK? – Chicago rapper Lil Zay Osama was indicted on two federal charges of illegal firearm possession after he allegedly left an automatic Glock pistol in the back of an Uber after a ride in New York City.
50 CENT SUED OVER MIC TOSS – The rapper was hit with a civil lawsuit over an incident last summer in which he was captured on video throwing a microphone at a concert, filed by a Los Angeles radio host who says she was struck by the mic and suffered “severe and permanent injuries.”
FUGEE LAWYER LEAKS – David Kenner, the attorney who unsuccessfully represented Fugees rapper Pras Michel in his criminal trial case year, pleaded guilty to a criminal contempt charge over allegations that he leaked grand jury materials to reporters ahead of the trial. The lawyer was sentenced to one year of unsupervised probation and will have to pay a fine.
KAT VON D CLEARED – A jury found that celebrity tattoo artist Kat Von D did not violate a photographer’s copyrights when she used his portrait of Miles Davis as the basis for a tattoo she put on the arm of a friend, capping off a closely-watched case against the LA Ink star.
A judge on Monday rejected Cher’s request that her adult son be put into a court conservatorship controlling his money.
The Oscar- and Grammy-winning singer and actor had argued in a petition that 47-year-old Elijah Blue Allman’s large payments from the trust of his late father, rocker Gregg Allman, are putting him in danger because of his struggles with mental health and substance abuse.
But Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Jessica A. Uzcategui was not convinced that a conservatorship was urgently needed and declined the petition, though she will still consider a larger, long-term conservatorship at a hearing in March.
Cher observed the hearing remotely. She appeared on a large screen in the courtroom throughout, but did not take part in the arguments.
Allman was in the courtroom with his his attorneys, who acknowledged his previous struggles but argued that he is in a good place now, attending meetings, getting treatment and reconciling with his previously estranged wife.
“We are thrilled that the court saw that he does not need a temporary conservatorship,” Allman’s lawyer said as he stood alongside him outside the courthouse. “He’s got a lot of support, he’s doing great.”
Cher’s attorneys argued that the support Allman was getting was from people who tell him what he wants to hear and downplay the size of his problems. They said his current apparent sobriety and mental health were illusory. They said he suffers from bipolar disorder, has been recently homeless, and that having large amounts of money might lead to access to drugs that could endanger his life.
Blue and his attorneys have consistently argued since the petition was first filed in December that none of this is true.
Uzcategui had already signaled at a hearing on January 5 that she wasn’t inclined to establish a conservatorship, delaying the decision until Monday because documents had not been shared in time with Allman’s attorneys.
Cher’s attorneys said that she was not necessarily seeking any direct control over Allman’s money, and would be happy to have a court-appointed fiduciary manage his finances. They did not immediately reply to a request for comment on the judge’s decision.
Court conservatorships, known as guardianships in some states, have come under far greater scrutiny in recent years after a temporary conservatorship imposed on Britney Spears in 2008 would end up leaving her without control of her money and major life affairs for nearly 14 years.
LONDON — A U.K. Parliament committee is calling on the British government to address the “endemic” misogyny and discrimination that many female artists face in the music industry.
A report from the Women and Equalities Committee (WEC) published Tuesday (Jan. 30) urges ministers to take legislative steps to protect musicians and creators from sexual harassment, including banning the use of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) in cases involving sexual abuse, bullying or misconduct.
The highly critical 70-page report acknowledges that female representation is improving in many areas of the business but warns that progress remains slow with sexual harassment and abuse against women common occurrences in an industry “still routinely described as a boys club.”
“People in the industry who attend awards shows and parties currently do so sitting alongside sexual abusers who remain protected by the system and by colleagues,” said the cross-party committee of MPs.
Their inquiry found a “culture of silence” existed across the music industry with many victims of sexual harassment or abuse afraid to report such incidents.
Victims who do speak out struggle to be believed or may find their career ends as a consequence, the committee found. They said that much of the evidence they had received had to remain undisclosed, “including commentary on television shows and household names,” due to confidentially and legal clauses.
The report follows an inquiry into misogyny in the U.K. music industry, which began in June 2022 and saw a number of artists and executives give evidence, including senior executives from all three major labels, representatives of the live industry, former BBC Radio 1 DJ Annie Mac and British pop singer and Ivors Academy board director Rebecca Ferguson.
Giving evidence in September, Ferguson, who first shot to fame on the U.K. version of The X Factor, said that misogyny in music was just “the tip of the iceberg of the things that are happening behind the scenes.”
She said that women in the music business who experience abuse often feel that they “can’t speak up” because “they are scared they will never work again.” Ferguson told MPs that she had been informed rapes were going unreported.
In addition to sexual abuse and harassment, the inquiry found that women pursuing careers in music face limited opportunities compared to men, a lack of support and persistent unequal pay, while female artists are “routinely undervalued and undermined.”
The committee recommends that ministers introduce legislation to give freelance workers the same protections from discrimination as employees, as well as imposing a legal duty on companies and employers to protect workers from sexual harassment by third parties.
On the subject of non-disclosure agreements, the report said the government should consider a retrospective moratorium on NDAs signed by victims of sexual abuse.
The report also called for stronger safety requirements for industry sectors where harassment and abuse are known to take place, such as recording studios and music venues.
Additionally, managers of artists should be licensed, while record labels were recommended to regularly publish information about the diversity of their creative rosters, workforce and gender and ethnicity pay gaps – a practice that many labels and large music companies already do.
The committee said the music industry and the British government should increase investment and support in diverse talent, particularly in male-dominated areas such as A&R, sound engineering and production.
“Women’s creative and career potential should not have limits placed upon it by ‘endemic’ misogyny which has persisted for far too long within the music industry,” Caroline Nokes, chair of the Women and Equalities Committee, said in a statement.
Responding to Tuesday’s report, Jo Twist, CEO of U.K. labels trade body BPI, and Yolanda Brown, BPI chair, said all parts of the music industry have “a shared responsibility” to tackle misogyny in music “head on.”
Silvia Montello, CEO of the London-based Association of Independent Music (AIM), said the report “makes for uncomfortable but sadly unsurprising reading.”
“It should not still be this hard, here in 2024, for women to be supported to succeed and to be taken as seriously as our male counterparts,” said Montello in a statement.
BMG has entered into a strategic partnership with the TUM School of Management as it looks to fast-track the implementation of artificial intelligence across the Berlin-based company’s marketing campaigns for artists. BMG said in its announcement on Tuesday (Jan. 30) that it sees generative AI as a way to help manage the complex array of […]
After years of stagnancy, women are gaining ground on the charts and at the Grammys.
A report on gender equality in the music industry by Dr. Stacy L. Smith and the USC Annenberg Inclusion Initiative — which was supported by Spotify and is the latest in an annual series released by the groups — assessed 12 years and 1,200 songs from the Billboard Hot 100 Year-End Charts, looking at artists, songwriters and producers.
The study, Inclusion in the Recording Studio? Gender & Race/Ethnicity of Artists, Songwriters & Producers across 1,100 Popular Songs from 2012 to 2022, is out Tuesday (Jan. 30.)
The study’s key takeaway is that women’s participation in music creation, which has historically lagged, has improved across several metrics.
On the Billboard Hot 100 Year-End Charts, the percentage of women artists reached 35%, a 12-year high. The study attributes this change to the fact that 40.6% of spots on these charts in 2023 were occupied by individual women artists, an increase over 2022 when the number was 34.8%. Improvements were less significant for women-led bands or duos.
The number of women songwriters also increased, from 14.1% in 2022 to 19.5% in 2023. The study notes that this change was due “almost exclusively to the number of women of color credited as songwriters in 2023.” The reports cites 55 women of color receiving a songwriting credit in 2023, a jump from 33 women of color 2022 and 14 in 2012.
Fifty-six percent of songs in 2023 included at least one woman songwriter — an increase from 2022 and the highest percentage in 12 years.
“The changes for songwriters are doubtlessly due to the work of numerous groups working to support women in music,” Dr. Smith says in a statement. “Whether She Is The Music, Spotify Equal, Moving the Needle, Women’s Audio Mission, Be the Change, Keychange, Girls Make Beats, or others, there has been a groundswell of support for women across the last several years. This advocacy and activism is propelling change in the industry. While there is work to be done, these groups are well-positioned to keep fighting for change.”
In the producing realm, fourteen, or 6.5%, of the producers credited in 2023 were women. This surpassed the previous record of 4.9% in 2019. Nearly half, or six, of the women producers in 2023 were women of color. But, over the nine years the study has assessed gender equality in production, 94% of the evaluated songs did not include a single woman producer. Across nine years, there have been 29.8 men to every one woman working as a producer.
The race/ethnicity of artists is also a focus of the report. In 2023, 61% of the artists on the Hot 100 Year-End Charts were from an underrepresented racial/ethnic group, while 39% were white. This was a 12-year high and an increase from 2022, when the number was 50.6%, but not significantly greater than the percentage of underrepresented artists in 2020, when the number was 59%.
The study also assessed the six major Grammy categories: record of the year, album of the year, song of the year, best new artist, producer of the year and songwriter of the year.
The study found that nearly a quarter (24%) of nominations across these six categories went to women in 2024 — a jump from 15.5% in 2023. This overall change was reflected in four categories: record of the year, album of the year, song of the year, and best new artist. This year, nominees in these categories include Taylor Swift, Victoria Monét, SZA, Miley Cryus, boygenius, Billie Eilish and Olivia Rodrigo. In each of these categories, the percentage of women nominees increased significantly from 2023 to 2024 and from the first year the awards were evaluated in 2013.
For the fifth year in a row, no women were nominated for producer of the year.
“Awards like the Grammys show us how women’s contributions to the industry are received,” Dr. Smith says. “The increases in nominations this year are a positive step in recognizing the creative work that women did last year in competitive fields. The Recording Academy has clearly taken inclusion seriously and worked to increase the diversity of its membership, particularly its voting members.”
But, she continues, “There is still too little recognition for women producers and songwriters in those categories, and there are too few women of color nominated for their work. For music industry honors to truly reflect the creative workforce and the audience they serve, there must be a place for women and particularly women of color in these awards.”
Other key findings:
• In 2023, 164 artists appeared on the Hot 100 Billboard Year-End Chart. Of these, 64.6% were men, 34.8% were women, and 0.6% were gender non-binary.
• Across the 12-year sample, women artists were the most likely to work in pop (34.7%) and least likely in alternative (14.4%) and hip-hop (14.9%).
• Across 12 years, Drake had the most credits as a solo artist, appearing 52 times, double that of Justin Bieber, who appears on 25 songs. Nicki Minaj was the woman with the highest number of credits, appearing 25 times, while Ariana Grande followed with 23 songs and Rihanna with 22.
• The percentage of underrepresented women on the charts in 2023 was 65%, with this number the same as 2022 and and almost doubling since 2012, when it was 33.3%. “Put differently,” the study says, “women of color continue to dominate the charts.”
• In terms of genre, across 12 years, women were most likely to write pop (20.1%) and dance/electronic (19.6%) songs, and least likely to write hip-hop and rap (7.5%) and country (9.9%) songs. Even in pop music, where women songwriters most often appear, they were outnumbered by male songwriter by a ratio of 4 to 1.
The United States Copyright Office is giving the Mechanical Licensing Collective (MLC) and the Digital Licensee Coordinator (DLC) five-year check-ups with a re-designation process to ensure both are effectively fulfilling their purposes. Though this is the first time the organizations have been through this process, it is a routine occurrence that will take place every five years.
Under the review, both organizations must show compliance with the Music Modernization Act, which was passed in 2018 to replace the old song-by-song licensing system for digital streaming services with a new blanket license for musical work mechanicals. To administer the new blanket license, the MMA called for a mechanical licensing collective to be established.
At that time two entities applied, and the MLC was chosen because it was the only one that fit the MMA’s “endorsement” criteria, which said that the organization chosen as MLC had to have the support of much of the publishers and songwriters affected by the blanket license. The endorsement was meant to be “based on market share” and “measured by applicable licensing revenue.” Among others, the MLC was notably supported by the National Music Publishers Association (NMPA), which represents the major publishers and many of the sizable indie publishers, giving it a robust coalition of support.
Similarly, the Digital Licensee Collector was intended to represent the majority interests of digital music providers affected by the blanket license in matters related to its administration. The DLC was the sole applicant and was supported by the major music streamers and the Digital Media Association (DiMA) trade organization. Both the MLC and DLC assumed their roles in 2019.
The review process will begin with the MLC and DLC writing self-reports about their performances to date as well as developments they are planning in the future.
In their comments, the two organizations will need to address several key points, as mandated by the Copyright Office. Among them: whether they have ample endorsements for their different sectors, whether they have the administrative capabilities necessary to fulfill their roles, how they govern themselves and more. The MLC must also respond to whether it has made progress on implementing the Copyright Office’s suggestions in their ‘Unclaimed Royalties’ report, and the DLC must explain how it has participated in the Copyright Royalty Board.
This self-reporting will be made available for the public. Songwriters, publishers and digital music providers can also submit their feedback about whether or not the MLC and the DLC should continue as they have been. The MLC and the DLC will then be allowed to respond to public submissions. There could also be “informal” meetings between the copyright office and the organizations to address “discrete issues” prior to making the final re-designation determination.
Last June, Congress gave the MMA a five-year review — inviting a number of stakeholders, including the leaders of DiMA and the MLC — to speak to the strengths and weaknesses of the MMA and the MLC. The comments submitted in this proceeding will likely echo some of what was raised at this hearing.
If the MLC or DLC are rejected, the Copyright Office will ask for proposals for new offices that could handle these roles in the Federal Register. But it is not expected for either organization to be replaced.
“We welcome the announcement of the Register of Copyrights commencing the first review of The MLC’s designation as required by the MMA,” says MLC CEO Kris Ahrend about the re-designation. “We are confident that this review will confirm that The MLC continues to meet all of the criteria set out in the MMA, while affording us the opportunity to highlight the many successes our team and our stakeholders have achieved since launching The MLC’s full operations.”