licensing
Rapper Plies is suing Megan Thee Stallion, GloRilla, Cardi B and Souja Boy for copyright infringement over allegations that the 2024 song “Wanna Be” features an uncleared sample from his 2008 track “Me & My Goons.”
The lawsuit, filed Wednesday in Los Angeles federal court, says the Megan and GloRilla stole Plies’ material indirectly – that they used a legally-licensed sample of a Soulja Boy song that itself illegally borrowed from “Goons.”
“Defendant Soulja Boy authorized Megan thee Stallion and GloRilla to sample [his song,]” lawyers for Plies write. “[Wanna Be] incorporates substantial elements of the copyrighted material underlying ‘Me & My Goons,’ without authorization from plaintiffs.”
Trending on Billboard
“Wanna Be,” released by Megan and GloRilla in early April, debuted at No. 11 on the Hot 100. A remix, featuring Cardi, was released in late May. The song features a prominent sample of Soulja Boy’s 2010 track “Pretty Boy Swag,” which spent 16 weeks on the chart that summer.
Plies (Algernod Washington), best known for his 2007 singles “Shawty” and “Hypnotized,” names all four stars (Megan Pete, Gloria Woods, Belcalis Almanzar and Deandre Way) as defendants in the lawsuit, as well as various companies and labels allegedly involved in the song.
Reps for the defendants did not immediately return requests for comment.
Lawsuits like the one Plies filed Wednesday – claiming that a legal sample featured an unlicensed sample – sound strange but aren’t uncommon. In the modern music industry, all samples in major releases are strictly cleared, and even borderline interpolations are often licensed to avoid any risk of litigation. But copyrighted material featured within the sampled songs can be trickier to identify.
Last month, a lawsuit filed by Barry White’s estate claimed that Future and Metro Boomin’s “Like That” sampled from a 1980s hip-hop song that had ripped off White’s music. And in May, a little known New Orleans group sued Beyoncé for the same thing over a sample of Big Freedia featured in “Break My Soul,” though they dropped the case several months later. White’s case remains pending; the case against Beyoncé was quickly dropped.
Read the entire lawsuit here:
The arbitration process governing SESAC’s performance license rates has determined that for the 2023-2026 licensing period, a blanket fee of 0.2824% of revenue — or a 10.4% increase from the prior period’s rate of 0.2557% of revenue — will be set, according to a press release from the Radio Music License Committee (RLMC).
The rate represents the amount SESAC, a performing rights organization (PRO), can charge stations in exchange for playing works from their repertory over terrestrial radio.
Each side characterized the final rate determination differently, with the RLMC claiming victory because the arbitration panel rejected SESAC’s efforts to more than double the rate, and also substantially expand the license revenue base. But SESAC says the arbitration award reflects a failure by the RLMC in its attempt to lower the rate.
Trending on Billboard
The rate decision is retroactive to Jan. 1, 2023, which means that stations paying the SESAC interim licensing fee at 2022 rates will receive “a modest true-up adjustment.” The arbitration process governing SESAC’s rates came about as a result of a 2015 RMLC antitrust litigation settlement with SESAC that set forth a rate arbitration process for the next 20 years.
The RMLC announcement claims SESAC sought to justify its efforts to increase rates and expand the licensing revenue base by relying upon rates set for other music licensors.
Meanwhile, SESAC’s statement on the determination says the RMLC failed in its attempt to tie SESAC’s rates to those of BMI and ASCAP, the two U.S. PROs, which operate under consent decrees that mandate a rate trial in the Southern District of New York when negotiations fail.
“Despite the fact that no increase was warranted, the arbitration decision reported here constitutes a significant victory for RMLC-represented radio stations given SESAC’s demands, and comes at a challenging economic time for the industry,” RMLC chairman Ed Atsinger said in a statement. “The RMLC intends to continue to defend and protect the interests of its members at a time when all of the performing right organizations are seeking to aggressively increase their fees.”
In another aspect of the rate determination, the RLMC said that “long-form license terms are still being worked out but it is expected that the non-music format stations will continue to pay the same 77.5% discount” off of the above music stations’ headline rate. Mathematically speaking, that means the RMLC expects that the non-music rate fee will be set at 0.06354% of revenue, or a 10.5% increase from the prior rate of 0.0575%, Billboard estimates.
“The arbitration award reflects another failure of the RMLC to impose regulated rates on SESAC since SESAC and the RMLC concluded their settlement in 2015,” SESAC performing rights president and CEO Scott Jungmichel said in a statement. “The panel awarded SESAC an over 10% increase while rejecting the RMLC’s attempts to lower the rate, turn back the clock, and yoke SESAC to the regulated rates paid by ASCAP and BMI. In addition, the revenue base subject to the fee is significantly greater than the revenue upon which station groups had sought to pay under the 2017 award.”
UnitedMasters has reached a new multi-year licensing agreement with TikTok. News of the deal comes just weeks after Billboard broke the news that TikTok “walked away” from talks to renew its license with Merlin, a collective that negotiates digital licensing deals for more than 30,000 indie labels and distributors.
Instead, TikTok noted that it wished to forge deals with most of the labels and distributors individually and cited previous issues with Merlin’s members delivering “fraudulent content” as the reason why they were not renewing with Merlin. Merlin read this move as TikTok “fragmenting” its membership to try to “minimize” licensing payments for indie music.
UnitedMasters — which has worked with more than 2 million independent artists, including FloyyMenor, Brent Faiyaz, BigXthaPlug, Tobe Nwigwe and Anycia — will include its full, expansive catalog in the new deal. The agreement will also provide additional commercial opportunities for UnitedMasters artists via TikTok’s Commercial Music Library.
Trending on Billboard
A press release states that TikTok and UnitedMasters “share the vision and understanding that commercial use of music on platforms offers significant revenue and promotional opportunities for artists” — and that having access to TikTok’s Commercial Music Library will give UnitedMasters talent access to new revenue and promotional streams for their talent.
Beyond just TikTok, licensing music for commercial purposes is a crucial focus for UnitedMasters. Previously, it has landed its artists deals with major brands like Bose, Walmart, ESPN, Coca-Cola, IKEA, Dove and more.
“Our partnership with TikTok provides UnitedMasters artists unparalleled access to a vast global audience, while TikTok creators and users gain early exposure to some of the most impactful independent music today,” said Steve Stoute, founder/CEO of UnitedMasters, in a statement. “TikTok recognizes the power of music and creativity, which is why we are excited to formalize this partnership.”
“TikTok has proven that it’s a launchpad for artists, turning viral moments into chart-topping hits,” Stoute added. “With this partnership, I look forward to seeing our artists thrive on TikTok and extend their reach and influence across the music industry. We’re building a future where they can own their success and grow their careers on their own terms.”
“We want to make the world’s best music available to our global community of over a billion music fans,” added Ole Obermann, head of music business development at TikTok. “That’s why we are so excited to be entering into a direct deal with a prominent independent label like UnitedMasters, with its deep, diverse roster of independent artists. Together, we’re ready to amplify these voices and bring their music to a global stage, unlocking new opportunities for discovery.”
Merlin’s license with TikTok is set to expire on Oct. 31. Labels or distributors that have not reached an individual agreement with TikTok by then will become unlicensed and removed from the platform.
TikTok’s decision to boycott Merlin and pursue direct deals with Merlin’s member labels is a troubling move that undermines the rights of labels to choose how their music is licensed. While TikTok frames this shift as a way to tackle streaming fraud, it’s clear that the real motive is to weaken the bargaining power of independent labels and use that leverage to suppress rates.
Merlin has built strong partnerships over the last 16 years with more than 40 digital services worldwide. These partners recognize the value Merlin brings—efficiency, scale, and a deep understanding of the independent music community. TikTok’s move to sideline Merlin is not about protecting against fraud but about undermining the ability of independent labels to achieve competitive terms, not just now but for the long term. The ultimate consequence of its refusal to negotiate with Merlin for the music that earns TikTok billions of dollars, will be to damage artists’ ability to make a living from their art.
This tactic is not new. It echoes the historical struggles of the music industry with partners such as terrestrial radio and MTV, both of which profited massively from the use of recorded music while refusing to pay artists under the pretext of “promotional value” or “exposure” — ostensibly for the sale of an artist’s CDs or LPs. In this largely digital economy the stream is the sale – and it has been widely reported that TikTok pays rights holders far less than other services for equivalent uses of music.
Trending on Billboard
Richard James Burgess, President and CEO of A2IM
Independent labels choose Merlin to license their rights, because of its expertise, experience and track record in striking these kinds of deals. This ensures compensation at levels enabling them to compete with the majors and protects independents from being unfairly exploited. TikTok’s decision to bypass Merlin and demand direct deals is an assault on the freedom of small and medium sized enterprises to determine their own business strategies. The fact that TikTok is giving Merlin members a matter of days to accept TikTok’s terms or lose access to its massive platform, is an unfair exercise of its market power.
This apparent divide-and-conquer strategy is, we believe, designed to keep payouts for indie artists low by exploiting their perceived reliance on TikTok’s platform. It’s not about addressing fraud or improving the digital music ecosystem. In fact, by exponentially multiplying the number of license deals TikTok will need to strike and by losing Merlin as a partner in the fight against fraudulent material, more fraud is likely to ensue. Merlin simplifies licensing, making it easier for platforms to access diverse, independent music. Fragmenting this system hurts artists and fans and will limit the range of music available on TikTok.
At its core, this issue is about respecting the rights of independent labels to determine how their music is licensed. TikTok’s behavior doesn’t reflect a problem with Merlin; it reflects TikTok’s lack of respect for the value of music. Every other major platform has struck responsible deals with Merlin that balance the needs of the service with optimized compensation for artists. TikTok’s refusal to do so sets a dangerous precedent for recording artists and their labels.
TikTok must stop undermining and disrespecting the independent music community. It can do this by working with the labels’ rights management agency of choice to establish a fair, transparent licensing system that benefits all stakeholders in the music ecosystem. Independent labels have the right to choose their representatives to negotiate deals that truly reflect the value of their artists’ creative contributions. Anything less is a disservice to the artists and the fans and undermines the very fabric of music culture.
Dr. Richard James Burgess is an acclaimed musician, singer, songwriter, record producer, composer, author, manager, marketer and inventor, who presently serves as the president and CEO of the American Association of Independent Music (A2IM).
Last year, TikTok attempted to answer a seemingly simple question: What would TikTok be without music?
In February 2023, the company ran tests in Australia limiting the amount of licensed music some users encountered on the app. TikTok never revealed the results of those tests to the public, but some Australians who had their music libraries limited took to Twitter (now X) to complain. “wtf is up with tiktok removing like half the sounds??? like i swear ive seen SO many tiktoks where the sound has been removed,” tweeted one user.
The evidence is only anecdotal, but these tweets suggest that having limited access to licensed music did have at least some impact on the user experience in Australia.
Since its inception, the value of music has been an existential question for TikTok. This comes as no surprise; the company started out as the lipsyncing app Musical.ly, and in its current form, it is one of the most effective music discovery tools in the world. But since the modern-day TikTok launched as a general social media app — one that still features lots of music — the company has struggled to figure out how big a role music should play in their business — and how much they should have to pay for it.
Trending on Billboard
In the last year or so, TikTok has fought a prolonged battle against Universal Music Group over music licensing rates, AI, and safety concerns, leading to UMG’s three-month boycott of the platform; downsized parts of its music team; shut down the development of TikTok Music, its nascent music streaming app; and, last week, “walked away” from Merlin’s attempts to negotiate a renewed collective license for the 30,000 indie labels and distributors it represents. Instead, citing issues around fraudulent content, TikTok is only pursuing direct deals with Merlin’s member labels.
The UMG feud in particular seemed to represent a major turning point in TikTok’s perception of the value of music. The stalemate, which lasted from February to May, essentially took the small experiments done in Australia and brought them to a global stage with the world’s single largest catalog. Everyone from stars like Taylor Swift, Billie Eilish, Drake and the Weeknd, down to small artists signed to labels using UMG distributor Virgin, were removed from the platform overnight. If any event would have proved that music had negotiating power over TikTok, it would’ve been this one — but the impact was much more limited than the music biz would have hoped.
From talking to TikTok users during the UMG feud, many felt that the app experience was largely the same. Rarely, if ever, would anyone find a video on their “For You Page” with muted UMG audio. Whatever unknowable algorithm controls that feed simply adjusted to serve videos with still-available songs instead, seamlessly. The only time a user would notice the difference is if they were making a video themselves and realized they couldn’t find songs from a UMG-affiliated artist.
Plus, UMG artists big and small proved that they still wanted to make content for the app, even though doing so diminished the pressure UMG could put on TikTok to improve their compensation. Some UMG artists played their songs live instead of using the UMG-owned recording. Others would use unauthorized remixes (including sped up, slowed down and mashed up versions) of their UMG-controlled songs. Some ended up striking direct deals with the platform or finding contractual workarounds to skirt the ban, and the final nail in the coffin seemingly came when Taylor Swift’s catalog suddenly came back to TikTok on April 11 —– complete with a special campaign around her then-upcoming album, The Tortured Poets Department.
When the two companies finally reached a deal three weeks later, just before UMG’s next earnings call, UMG chairman/CEO Lucian Grainge spoke triumphantly about the new TikTok deal. “This new chapter in our relationship with TikTok focuses on the value of music, the primacy of human artistry and the welfare of the creative community,” Grainge said. It’s quite possible that, with the new deal, UMG extracted many of the concessions that it wanted from TikTok.
Still, overall, the effects of the three-month standoff were pretty limited: many TikTok users didn’t notice a change, while UMG’s stream count went unaffected. The key takeaway is that artists, desperate for promotion, would still make musical content for the app for free, even if it infringed on their own unlicensed copyrights. It became a race to the bottom, like so many other things in music.
So it comes as little surprise that when Merlin’s TikTok license came up for renegotiation, TikTok played hardball —– or rather, TikTok just refused to play ball with Merlin altogether.
Instead, TikTok wants to license its 30,000 indie record label members individually — a move which Merlin sees as an attempt to “fractionalize” members to “minimize” licensing costs, according to a letter Merlin sent to its labels last week.
The whole idea of Merlin — which says it represents 15% of music repertoire globally — is for these small, individual labels to be able to band together and negotiate deal terms with digital partners that are at least in the same neighborhood as their bigger major label brethren. Antitrust laws prevent Merlin from telling its members what to do, meaning TikTok is technically free to negotiate individually and bypass their coalition. Even if Merlin could pull such a move to band together its membership against TikTok, it’s hard to imagine a boycott of indie music going any better than UMG’s.
Optically, it’s one thing for TikTok to stand up to the biggest music company in the world and argue that UMG had put their own greed above the interests of their artists and songwriters” in an attempt to lower the rates it had to pay the label. It’s another entirely for the app, which has over a billion users, to lowball the little guys.
Overshadowing all of this, of course, is the fact that TikTok’s corporate parent Bytedance is in a court battle with the U.S. government that, if it loses, could mean it would be forced to sell its U.S. business. In preparation, TikTok is likely cutting costs wherever it can. Given how tough it is for the music industry to walk away from TikTok, it’s unfortunately one of the easiest places to start.
So what is the value of music to TikTok? It’s been a moving target throughout the company’s history. In light of recent events, however, I’ll let you be the judge.
This story was published as part of Billboard’s new music technology newsletter ‘Machine Learnings.’ Sign up for ‘Machine Learnings,’ and Billboard’s other newsletters, here.
YouTube and SESAC have settled their rate dispute, meaning the performance rights organization’s catalog will soon be back up on the YouTube platform, according to representatives from both sides.
“We are pleased that SESAC reconsidered our offer,” a YouTube representative said in a statement. “We’ve reached a deal and content will come back shortly. We appreciate everyone’s patience during this time.”
SESAC executives also say they are pleased with the deal. “We have reached an agreement with YouTube to equitably compensate SESAC’s songwriters and publishers for the use of their music,” SESAC Performing Rights president/COO Scott Jungmichel said in a statement. “We appreciate the support and patience of our affiliates, as well as the artists who perform those songs. During our negotiations with YouTube, our affiliates’ works were unilaterally removed by YouTube ahead of the contract end date of October 1, 2024. YouTube has begun the process of reinstating videos featuring these songs.”
The deal was struck after YouTube pulled down a portion of SESAC’s repertoire, including songs from the likes of Bob Dylan, Adele, R.E.M., Green Day and Zac Brown, among others. When YouTube users wanted to play a video containing music from artists signed to SESAC, they were greeted with a message stating, “This video contains content from SESAC. It is not available in your country.”
Trending on Billboard
Artists and songwriters including J Cole, Sam Smith and Kanye West who are not signed to SESAC also had songs taken down due to having credited co-writers who were signed with the PRO. In addition, sources say, even some SESAC songwriters whose publishers have direct deals with YouTube had their songs taken down.
The YouTube representative indicates it will take a day or two for everything to go back up online. As it is, some videos still have the “is not available in your country” notice, while other songs by songwriters signed to SESAC are once again available on the service. Apparently, YouTube was still in the process of removing videos when the deal was struck, so while some notable SESAC songs were taken down over the weekend, other songs by the same artists, and even songs on the same album, were still available.
According to sources, YouTube global head of music Lyor Cohen was making phone calls at the end of last week to managers, labels and publishers, warning them that the takedown was coming. When executives who received the calls asked why the music was taken down, Cohen apparently answered that YouTube and SESAC were too far apart in negotiating the rate.
Meanwhile, other industry sources say they heard that an agreement was reached in principle on Saturday morning (Sept. 28), before YouTube started heavily pulling down SESAC songs.
When 21-year-old singer ericdoa released the song “ >one” last March, he had an unusual collaborator: Valorant. That’s not another artist; it’s a popular shooter game that attracted millions of players in February. Riot Games, the company behind Valorant, used “ >one” — which references the game in its lyrics — in a trailer that introduced a playable character named Gekko. The track is now ericdoa’s second-most-popular song on Spotify, with over 36 million streams.
“That was a huge spiritual win,” says Maria Egan, global head of music and events for Riot Games. “Can we do that over and over again?” she asks. “How do we unlock our platform and other gaming platforms to be the new place that new artists can find audiences?”
It’s a question often asked in the music business as well. In recent years, the industry has struggled to find reliable ways to ensure that its songs reach a wide listenership. The gaming community is massive, youthful and interested in music — in other words, an ideal target for labels. Yet there have been few notable recent instances of games helping new artists break through or driving music discovery on a mass scale.
Trending on Billboard
“Like music, gaming is global and has significant cultural relevance, but scalability at this intersection is still a challenge,” says Geoff Sawyer, an agent in gaming and esports at UTA. “Players and revenue are scattered across an endless web of product categories and consumer affinities, and not all in one big bucket. While there are incredibly cool, bespoke integrations happening between games and musicians, the music industry would need to upend its licensing model to truly achieve scale in this category.”
In truth, gaming does not need more labels’ music to thrive — the gaming industry earned around $184 billion in 2023, dwarfing music (around $26 billion, according to the IFPI). As one prominent music tech executive puts it, “the business model for games doesn’t need to support music.”
And even within the popular games that foreground music, space remains highly competitive. “There are still a limited amount of slots in FC, a limited amount of slots in NBA 2K,” says Steve Schnur, president of music for Electronic Arts (EA).
The music industry would presumably benefit if there were more games with more slots for its songs. But gaming executives say the opaque licensing system makes this unlikely. “Every time I speak to a games publisher, they’ve always got at least one horror story about trying to navigate music rights,” says Ben Sumner, managing director at Feel for Music, which helps games and brands with music supervision.
One recording may have multiple master owners and writers, each of which could work with a different publishing company, and gaming companies have to get everyone’s approval. Vickie Nauman, who has licensed music for many games in addition to founding the music-tech consultancy CrossBorderWorks, once had to get 143 agreements complete to clear 20 songs.
This may simply take too long for a game’s timeline, explains Gavin Johnson, director of sync and partnerships at the electronic music label Monstercat. “Typically a game developer is creating content that’s quarterly or bi-weekly or even weekly,” he says, especially in the world of “live services games,” which are free to play and dynamic, updated on the fly to rejuvenate player interest and maintain consistent engagement. (Several of the most popular games of 2023 — as measured by monthly active users — were live service games, including Call of Duty: Modern Warfare and Minecraft.)
In addition, the music industry usually requires large upfront payments to license songs. “Incorporating music is often an experiment for games, and they don’t want to pay millions of dollars for an experiment,” says Alex Tarrand, co-founder and COO of STYNGR, a company that offers games precleared music.
Between multiple rights holders impacting timelines and steep up-front fees, many game developers find it far easier and more fiscally prudent to commission music in-house. “If anything creates more cost in ways that aren’t really driving what a game is going after, they tend to think, ‘We probably shouldn’t be spending time and resources on that,’” gaming consultant Toa Dunn says.
Tarrand’s company STYNGR is working to reduce the friction between gaming and music companies by putting blanket licenses in place with all the major labels and publishers so game developers can come to STYNGR and pull music into their titles. Instead of paying STYNGR upfront, developers cut revenue-sharing deals.
Another company, Game Over, takes a very different approach, targeting gamers who watch live-streams on Twitch or enjoy gameplay montage videos on YouTube or Instagram. This allows them to sidestep the industry “arm-wrestling match” around rights altogether, according to partner Zach Katz. Labels are “still in the mindset that winning in the gaming space is tied to interacting with the [gaming] platforms,” Katz says. In his view, that’s “a mistake.” “The victory is ultimately to get the gaming audiences” and serve them music, which can be done in other places where gamers congregate.
Still, executives in both music and gaming dream of more in-game opportunities. “Licensing needs to be made easier and more scalable for games so that it’s not only huge franchises that can do it,” says BandLab CEO Meng Ru Kuok.
“What I’m hoping to do is create a dialogue where we can understand that, although synch relationships bear enormous amount of fruit, they still are limiting us,” Schnur adds. “Let’s take a look at what the term ‘synch’ means and what it should mean going forward.” He acknowledges, however, that music rights holders may be content with the current system — and wary that any calls for change could disguise a campaign to undervalue music.
For now, many creative ideas to bring more music into gaming “are just not coming to market,” Nauman says, “because of rights issues.”
Former Black Sabbath frontman Ozzy Osbourne called out Kanye West on social media on Friday (Feb. 9), saying that West had asked to sample a song but was “refused permission because he is an antisemite,” and used the sample anyway at a listening event for his new album at the United Center in Chicago on Thursday. “I want no association with this man!” Osbourne wrote.
Although Osbourne said online that West asked to sample “War Pigs,” the song he seems to have used is “Iron Man” – specifically a version performed by Ozzy Osbourne’s solo band at the 1983 Us Festival.
“We get so many requests for these songs,” his wife and manager Sharon Osbourne tells Billboard, “and when we saw that request, we just said no way.” Without permission, West would be unable to release a new song that used the sample. “We’ve been in touch with his team” about the legal issue,” says Sharon Osbourne. “And it’s also an issue of having respect for another artist.”
Starting in 2022, West, now known simply as Ye, made a series of antisemitic comments, for which he was widely condemned, and lost numerous sponsorship and fashion deals. Although he offered an online apology for his statements in December, the first song from his forthcoming album, Vultures, includes the lyric “How am I antisemitic? / I just fucked a Jewish bitch.” Although West does not seem to have finalized release details for the album – and Ozzy Osbourne’s comments suggest he may face issues clearing samples – he has held a number of listening events to promote it.
Ozzy Osbourne often allows other artists to sample his work. “But the simple thing is, we don’t want to be associated with a hater,” says Sharon Osbourne, who was raised Jewish. (Her father, the U.K. music manager Don Arden, was Jewish.) “To spread hate the way he does, it shouldn’t be allowed. All the excuses – he’s bipolar or whatever – doesn’t change that. It’s like, fuck you, basically.”
Like many early Black Sabbath songs, “Iron Man” was written by the band – Osbourne, Tony Iommi, Geezer Butler and Bill Ward. Who has the rights to license interpolations of a composition by more than one songwriter can depend on the agreement between them. In this case, Sharon Osbourne tells Billboard that the agreement says all four songwriters need to agree. There could also be permissions issues with the 1983 performance recording, to which Ozzy Ozbourne presumably has the rights.
Coincidentally, Ozzy and Sharon Osbourne dressed up as Kanye West and Bianca Censori for Halloween, but that was “a joke,” Sharon Osbourne said.
Universal Music Group (UMG), the world’s largest music company, released an open letter to its artists and songwriters on Tuesday (Jan. 30) stating that the company’s music would soon leave TikTok due to disagreements over compensation, artificial intelligence, infringing works and harassment. TikTok replied a few hours later, calling UMG’s letter a “false narrative” and […]
With Universal Music Group‘s catalog now being slowly removed from TikTok, the music company issued a new statement Thursday (Feb. 1) commenting on what it says are TikTok’s “woefully outdated” views on music licensing and compensation. Explore Explore See latest videos, charts and news See latest videos, charts and news The stalemate between the world’s […]