Publishing
The PRO business is booming! But could it become a victim of its own success?
For the 75 years after the 1939 founding of BMI, the U.S. had three organizations that collected public performance royalties for songs on behalf of composers and publishers: ASCAP, SESAC and BMI. And for much of that time — from the 1950s, when ASCAP and BMI expanded into all genres, to 1993, when a group of investors purchased SESAC — the competition might best be described as gentlemanly. ASCAP and BMI became the Coke and Pepsi of PROs, licensing similar rights, for different songs, to similar bars, restaurants, concert venues and television and radio stations. The privately owned SESAC was less aggressive than it is now.
Some licensees want to set the clock back to that simpler time. They may have inspired members of Congress to ask the Copyright Office to look into the subject, which resulted in a Notice of Inquiry and then a flood of comments. (Billboard has a guide here.) To understand why, and what this means, it helps to realize how much U.S. performance rights licensing has changed in the last decade.
In 2013, Irving Azoff, ever the disruptor, founded GMR, which like SESAC — owned by the investment group Blackstone since 2017 — signs big songwriters with big advances. Unlike ASCAP and BMI, which are more constrained by antitrust consent decrees and allow all songwriters to join, GMR and SESAC are free to cherry-pick from the most popular. (All four have big writers; GMR and SESAC just don’t have small ones.) With fewer writers, they are thought to bring in more money per performance of a song. They are also thought to be wildly profitable: A recent deal for a stake in GMR valued the company at $3.3 billion. Any business that good attracts competition, and two new PROs have emerged over the last five years: AllTrack, founded by former SESAC board member Hayden Bower; and the Florida-based PRO Music Rights.
Trending on Billboard
Things got complicated. Venues that had once received three bills for their use of music were suddenly getting five or six. Most knew they needed rights from what we might call the big four — and let’s pause for a moment to consider just how weird it is that the U.S. now has more established PROs than major labels — but some weren’t sure if they needed the rights controlled by AllTrack and PRO Music Rights. Costs went up — with the possibility of future increases — and let’s not kid ourselves that this is the real issue here.
Both the Notice of Inquiry and the responses to it are fascinating because, as several executives pointed out to me, this isn’t an issue that the Copyright Office — or even government regulation in general — seems especially well-suited to solve. The Copyright Office administers and consults on intellectual property law, and licensees presumably see the NOI as an opening move in a push for legislation that could constrain PROs — or even empower a government body to set royalty rates, as one does for mechanical rights. That would be a disaster for publishers and songwriters, which get their only negotiating power from performing rights. And licensees have much more lobbying power than the music business, simply because every Congressional district has bars and restaurants, while the music business is relatively concentrated in a few cities.
What, exactly, is the problem here? Look at the NOI, which sets out two very different issues: “The number of PROs in the United States has expanded in recent years, potentially undermining licensing efficiencies” and “PROs do not all disclose comprehensive information concerning the works that are covered by their licenses, and their royalty distribution practices and policies.” The only thing these issues have in common is that neither of them is really a matter for copyright law.
The idea that there are too many PROs is odd because for years the issue was that ASCAP and BMI had too much market power — hence the antitrust consent decrees. In legal terms, this is known as trying to have it both ways. Competition is a good thing, as long as it’s fair. If it’s not, that’s a matter for competition law — which traditionally champions competition! — not copyright.
One of the real issues behind the NOI is that it can be hard to tell which PRO controls what rights. This can be complicated, though, and the issues often have less to do with concealing information than with presenting it in an accessible way. AllTrack, which is focused on the independent market, allows potential licensees to search a database of songs to which it controls rights, but that requires looking up specific compositions. The site displays far more prominently some of the artists who play songs to which AllTrack owns at least some rights, including Billy Ray Cyrus, Elle King and No Doubt. In smaller type, underneath, it says that “The artists above are examples, but not an all inclusive list, of performers of AllTrack music” — and in most, but not all, cases it doesn’t control rights to all these artists’ songs, let alone their rights as songwriters. Billboard readers understand this, but it might drive the average bar owner to drink.
PRO Music Rights is even more controversial. It seems to focus on serving smaller songwriters in the so-called long tail, and it says it controls rights to more than 2 million works, including songs performed by A$AP Rocky, Wiz Khalifa and others. It is unclear how popular many of those songs are, though, and both the ASCAP and BMI responses to the NOI challenge its business practices more directly than those of AllTrack. In its filing, ASCAP says that in 2018 it discovered millions of songs registered by PRO Music Rights “that were apparently either computer-generated sounds or merely random titles” and BMI’s response points out that Spotify in a court filing accused PRO Music Rights founder Jake Noch of flooding its platform with AI music, although the case in question subsequently settled. (PRO Music Rights filed its own response to the NOI that accuses the established PROs of engaging in “anti-competitive practices.”)
The other side of transparency is that it’s not always clear how some PROs distribute some of the money they collect. But it seems hard to believe that licensees really worry about this — most just want to pay less — and that issue is really between PROs and creators and publishers. (Alas, Billboard advertisers seldom ask about the compensation of the publication’s witty and dashing “Follow the Money” columnist.) The best way to address this — maybe the only way to address it in a lasting way — could be a competitive market. Big songwriters who think that the big PROs don’t serve them well can sign with SESAC or GMR, although not all of them do. Why shouldn’t smaller ones have more options as well?
Like every other issue in the music business, this is ultimately about money — rightsholders want to charge more and licensees want to pay less. That’s business. And it seems best to keep it as business, without getting the government involved.
Back in September, the House Judiciary Committee sent a letter to the Register of Copyrights, Shira Perlmutter, requesting the examination of “concerns” and “emerging issues” with U.S. performance rights organizations (PROs). More specifically, the Committee expressed concerns about the alleged “lack of transparency” with PROs and the so-called “proliferation” of new PROs in the market.
So early this year the U.S. Copyright Office opened a notice of inquiry that allowed licensors and licensees to submit a comment and weigh in about whether or not they like the way that the U.S. PRO system works today.
Trending on Billboard
The inquiry has become one of the most important issues facing the music publishing sector this year, and it’s one that is especially sensitive, given mechanical royalties and the majority of performance royalties (for those signed to ASCAP or BMI) in the U.S. are not negotiated in a free market — a common complaint amongst publishers, PROs and songwriters. The idea that this inquiry could bring additional scrutiny or inspire Congress to pursue additional regulation to performance royalties in the future has become a stress point. Those who have to license music through PROs, however, believe that the system has grown to be too complicated and too expensive and a renewed conversation about reform is needed. (For more background, read Billboard’s explainer here).
The comment period ended on Friday (April 11), and the 12,344 comments were released on Monday (April 14). Since then, Billboard has been reviewing the comments submitted by key groups and individuals — like publishers, songwriters, venues, restaurants and, of course, the PROs themselves.
Here is a guide to those comments.
What did the PROs say?
Of the six U.S. PROs, five of them — ASCAP, BMI, SESAC, GMR and PRO Music Rights (PMR) — submitted comments to the Copyright Office. AllTrack, one of the two new entrants to the market along with PMR, did not.
ASCAP: American Society of Composers Authors and Publishers, one of the two U.S. PROs that operates under a consent decree and the only one operating on a not-for-profit basis, wrote that “American songwriters, composers and music publishers are some of the most heavily regulated business owners in the country.” The organization then called the complaints about “lack of transparency” “particularly disingenuous,” pointing out that ASCAP has already invested significant resources into its public repertory database, called Songview, which it shares with BMI, “and yet little evidence suggests these licensees ever use that information.” Plus, ASCAP says that “distribution” of royalties “should be decided between music creators and their chosen PROs, not by licensees or government entities.” They note that “further regulation of ASCAP and its members would “harm music creators.”
ASCAP also pushed back on the idea of rising costs for licensees: “The market for musical compositions continues to grow year over year, as does the volume of copyrighted music,” it said. “It is nonsensical, and contrary to the foundational principles of a free market, that licensees could obtain permission to use more and more music each year without a corresponding increase in what they pay for it.”
It also pointed to the emergence of DIY distributors like DistroKid and Tunecore, private equity’s increasing interest in music as an “asset class,” and technology lowering barriers to entry as reasons why new PROs have emerged. ASCAP then cast doubt on PMR’s catalog, saying, “We discovered copyright registrations for literally millions of ‘musical works’ that were apparently either computer-generated sounds or merely random titles.” Read the full comment here.
BMI: Broadcast Music Inc., the second of the PROs in the U.S. that operate under a consent decree, said in its comments that additional regulation of PROs would harm songwriters and composers and that licensees called for this inquiry “with the goal of further reducing licensing fees at the expense of songwriters, composers and music publishers that depend on them.” In addressing licensees’ accusations that PROs lack transparency, BMI said it “rejects” the idea that these so-called issues “have any impact on a licensee’s obligation to compensate copyright owners for the use of copyrighted works,” though BMI added that it “is confident that [it] succeed[s] in this effort.”
It wrote, however, that AllTrack and PMG, “in stark contrast” to BMI, “make little information readily available regarding the contents of their repertoires.” BMI continued to cast doubt on PMR, writing that evidence suggests “that [PMR] greatly overtates its relative share of copyrighted and performed works… it is unclear whether certain of the results in [PMR’s] search function are even authentic musical works,” later adding that Spotify alleged that PMR’s founder, Jake Noch, “‘flood[ed] online streaming services with large quantities of’ AI-generated music.” Read the full comment here.
GMR: Global Music Rights, an invite-only PRO founded in 2013 for “top-tier songwriters,” said that it believes “the competitive [PRO] marketplace fostered by the four major PROs (ASCAP, BMI, SESAC and GMR)” “ensure[s]” that music creators and publishers are “fairly compensated.” It also stated that “some of the entities that are now appealing to the Office to intercede…are themselves not licensed by GMR, yet continue to use GMR’s music.” The organization also cited its differences from other PROs, saying that it offers “an identical rate card to all of its clients” and “individualized service, increased transparency, and enhanced economic terms” that songwriters allegedly couldn’t find in the “incumbent PROs.”
GMR also took shots at AllTrack and PMR, saying they “appear to be contrary to the customs and practices of the four major PROs.” “A PRO that offers no threshold level of transparency and is paired with a repertoire that is largely devoid of any meaningful value to any licensee is deeply problematic,” GMR wrote. “Coupled with attempts to take advantage of small businesses by relentlessly threatening litigation while failing to provide music users with insight into the repertoires that they represent, such a PRO should certainly be subject to further inquiry.” Read the full comment here.
PMR: Pro Music Rights wrote that the more established PROs have engaged in “anti-competitive practices” and have tried to box PMR out of the market. The organization also claimed that “BMI’s board — despite publicly disparaging Pro Music Rights — approved confidential discussions about selling BMI to Music Licensing, Inc., culminating in meetings with Goldman Sachs.” They proposed a number of reforms, including “mandated transparency” and “uniform licensing fees” so that “every voice in music, from small establishments to major corporations, is treated with fairness and respect.” Read the full comment here.
SESAC: Society of European stage Authors and Composers, the second-oldest PRO in the U.S. and the first for-profit player, said that maintaining “freedom of choice” for publishers, songwriters and composers was important in the U.S. PRO marketplace, forcing the PROs to “adjust or modif[y]” their operations “when [members] raise concerns.” SESAC noted that it has a publicly available database to search through their works and that they are more concerned that “nearly 70% of restaurants and over 90% of bars remain exempted” from paying royalties to PROs. SESAC also noted that ASCAP, BMI, SESAC and GMR are “currently exploring the inclusion of SESAC and GMR data to enhance Songview’s reconciled view of copyright ownership information” for increased transparency.
And SESAC pointed out that there are multiple ways to license music without using a PRO at all, including easy-to-license song libraries Mood Media, Soundtrack Your Brand and more. Read the full comment here.
What did the publishers say?
Publishers work with the U.S. PROs every day to ensure they are getting properly compensated for public performances. Some top publishers, like UMPG, opted not to submit comments. Those that did typically aligned closely with the stance also expressed by the National Music Publishers’ Association (NMPA) (which counts the vast majority of U.S. publishers as members), implying that the top publishers — major and indie — are fairly unified in their stance.
NMPA: The NMPA’s comment called the inquiry a “thinly veiled attempt by licensees to reduce the already depressed rates they pay” for performance royalties and called for Congress and the Copyright office to “take such claims skeptically.”
Instead, the NMPA advocated, as it often has, for “unregulated music licensing markets” and said that “musical works copyrights are already significantly undervalued…due to overregulation.”
The NMPA believes that the “creation of new PROs…is an indication of a competitive marketplace…which improves PRO performance for their members.” The NMPA said that it is “disingenuous [to] characterize the growth of the PRO market as a negative development…In reality an increase in licensing costs is an inevitable outcome of a growing market…Requiring licensees to pay fairly for the music that they use is not the systematic injustice that licensees portray; it is simply the cost of operating a business built on performing music someone else wrote.” Read the full comment here.
Warner Chappell: Warner Chappell raised in its comment that it would like to have the ability of “selective withdrawal of digital rights” from PROs’ blanket license. This resurrects a hot button issue that divided publishers and PROs dating back to 2013. The same idea was brought up again in 2019 and has previously been supported by the NMPA, the three major publishers and many of the biggest indies. Read the full comment here.
The selective withdrawal of digital rights from the PROs would basically mean publishers could still use the PROs’ services for the general licensing of bars, restaurants, venues and more, but that publishers could negotiate directly with digital services like Spotify, Apple Music, Pandora or iHeartRadio, cutting out any fees associated with royalties first going through the PROs before reaching publishers and allowing for global, not U.S.-specific, deals. But this would mean more work for the publishers, given there’s a large number of digital services beyond just the streaming and digital radio giants.
In the past, raising this point has also raised other, much less welcomed, ideas, like a 100 percent licensing system (meaning licensees only need a license from one of the songwriters on a song instead of all of them, as they have to do today, a system referred to as “fractional licensing”). Plus, it would be a seismic shift for the U.S. PROs, which have been investing in developing complex systems for digital royalty collection over the years. More background information is available on that issue in Billboard’s past coverage here.
Sony Music Publishing: SMP’s comments largely echoed the NMPA’s comments, saying that “SMP believes that less and not more regulation is not only good for songwriters but also a sensible pro-competitive approach where the true value of musical compositions is determined in a free market.” Read the full comment here.
What did the licensees say?
Licensees, such as clubs, bars and restaurants, are thought to have kicked off this inquiry in the first place. And the fact that they exist in every political jurisdiction in the U.S. likely gives them more political power than the music business, which lives mostly in clusters around New York, Los Angeles and Nashville.
National Restaurant Association: This organization said that the “emergence and proliferation of new PROs” has “jeopardized” the “efficacy of the U.S. music licensing system” “to the detriment of small business restaurant operators across the nation” and pointed the finger specifically at “recent” PROs such as GMR, PMR and AllTrack. The restaurants say they could face “costly litigation” if they accidentally play an unlicensed song. To date, the association found that its members pay “just shy of $4,500 on average to license music on an annual basis, which represents upwards of nearly 0.5 percent of the average U.S. small business restaurant’s total annual sales … for an industry that runs on an average pre-tax margin of 3 percent to 5 percent, this cost is significant.” The organization proposed three key solutions: requiring PROs to create centralized databases of their performance data; allowing establishments to receive itemized statements of works licensed from PROs upon request; and “a public registry of PROs that also summarizes what portions of the music industry they represent.” Read the full comment here.
Fox Theater: The famous Atlanta theater said in its comment that AllTrack and Pro Music Rights’ attempts to collect licensing fees are “redundant” and “create a significant financial burden” on venues. The theater also accused PROs of “routinely rely[ing] on trade magazines to determine artist appearance schedules, rather than actual reports submitted by the venue. This often leads to incorrect invoices submitted by PROs, which leads to countless hours of administrative work.” The Fox Theater suggested that “PROs should be required to undergo public audits…to ensure that they are not routinely overbilling licensees.” Read the full comment here.
International Association of Venue Managers: This organization pointed to the complexity of licensing music when many songwriters and many PROs are involved. “Venues often find themselves paying high fees without understanding what rights they are actually securing,” the comment read. The organization suggested a few changes to the US PRO system, including a publicly accessible and legally reliable database; that PROs should be required to update and maintain the database; the establishment of a federal registration system for PROs; mandated itemized statements upon request from licensees; and ensuring rate-setting processes reflect the PROs’ market share. Read the full comment here.
What did the songwriters and independent advocates say?
Songwriters and independent advocates in the music business have long advocated for change — often taking even greater swings than the industry establishment and calling out issues too political for music companies to touch in their advocacy. They are all also known for centering songwriters in their efforts, but still — that doesn’t mean everyone in this grouping holds the same ideas about how to effect positive change in music.
Songwriters of North America: SONA, a songwriter organization founded in 2015, said that it “does not believe that any aspect of this requires action from any regulatory or legislative body regarding copyright. We believe that any existing issues can and should be handled outside of the purview of the U.S. government and can be solved within the industry itself.” The organization also said it “recognizes the concerns from licensees” about the so-called “proliferation” of PROs, but “SONA does not take an official stance in regards to this issue.” Read the comment here.
Artist Rights Institute, North Music Group, Blake Morgan: led by songwriter David Lowery, songwriter Blake Morgan, attorney Chris Castle and North Music Group founder Abby North, the group wrote a comment, that said, “We are apprehensive that the subtext of the NOI is the justification of yet another compulsory license for songwriters,” calling them “among the most regulated workers in America.” The comment also likened PROs to “representative bodies for independent contractors who lack the protections afford by traditional labor unions,” and while they are not actual unions, “PROs serve a crucial function by negotiating…on behalf of their members.” Without this, the commenters believe indies would be more “vulnerable.” Among their proposed solutions is the idea of a “localized PRO at the city level,” royalty auditing of the PROs, and allowing songwriters to do “partial withdrawals” to manage some of their rights outside of the PRO. For a full explanation of these ideas, read the comment here.
Songwriters Guild of America / Society of Composers and Lyricists / Music Creators of North America: This comment noted that “the independent music creator community agrees without reservation that maintenance of the competitive PRO collective licensing system in the US as described above (including its ‘fractional licensing’ structure) is essential.” In response to licensees’ complaints about there being too many PROs, SGA/MCNA/SCL said these complaints are “a renewed effort by users to invent new, unfounded, inconvenience-based excuses for royalty payment-avoidance supported by no reasonable motivation other than generation of windfall user profits.” Read the comment here.
Time to squeeze in another Publishing Briefs, our semimonthly bulletin of recent signings, deals and doings in the wide world of music publishing. Since the last time we rapped, EMPIRE Publishing hired !llmind as a senior vp of A&R and elevated Al “Butter” McLean to the role of executive vp of global creative, plus Billboard‘s Kristin Robinson made sense of the Copyright Office’s inquiry into the U.S. PRO system with this explainer.
Caught up? Here’s what else is going on:
Trending on Billboard
Reservoir Media launched PopIndia, a full-service music company in Mumbai, to sign and develop regional talent and acquire publishing and recorded music catalogs. Led by Reservoir evp of international and emerging markets Spek and PopIndia’s head of operations Ray Ahmed, the new company builds on Reservoir’s successful PopArabia model, and marks its seventh global office. PopIndia’s first major signing is Sri Lankan singer Yohani, known for her viral hit “Manike Mage Hithe.” The publishing deal includes rights to her existing catalog and future works. Yohani has become a notable voice in Bollywood soundtracks and recently released her debut album Kella. PopIndia will also manage Reservoir’s relationships with Indian rapper DIVINE and Gully Gang Entertainment, provide sub-publishing services, and offer rights management solutions in the Indian and South Asian markets. Reservoir CEO Golnar Khosrowshahi pinpointed the importance of PopIndia in the NYC-based company’s emerging markets strategy, given the market’s rapid growth. “Capitalizing on the experience and synergies across Reservoir and PopArabia, PopIndia is adapting the same model Spek has successfully implemented throughout emerging markets, with Ray building relationships on the ground in Mumbai and showcasing Reservoir’s ongoing commitment to supporting local talent worldwide,” she said.
Ultra Music Publishing is now Payday Music Publishing, following a legal dispute with Sony Music over the Ultra brand. Name change aside, Payday Publishing will continue to represent over 70,000 copyrights, including songs by major artists like Post Malone, Ed Sheeran and Drake. The company’s songwriters received multiple Grammy nominations earlier this year. The name Payday Publishing is inspired by founder Patrick Moxey’s hip-hop label, Payday Records, known for releasing music by Jay-Z and others. Moxey emphasized that only the name is changing, and the company will continue its growth and leadership in independent global music publishing. “We will continue to represent our amazing songwriters and producers and we will continue serving as the custodians and protectors of the more than 70,000 copyrights we are privileged to represent,” he said, touting “tremendous growth in recent years.” The company also announced new international writing camps for 2025, including its in-progress Coachella writing camp and an annual sync writing camp in Palm Springs.
Thrive Music, an independent dance and electronic label founded by Ricardo Vinas in 1998, partnered with Kobalt for a global publishing administration deal. Kobalt will manage Thrive’s catalog and future releases, enhancing opportunities for its artists and songwriters. Thrive has supported works from artists like Paul Oakenfold, Steve Aoki and Moby, with recent hits including ACRAZE’s “Do It To It” and Tiësto’s “Rule The World.” The label has also secured major syncs with companies like Riot Games and Hulu. “As we continue to build Thrive into a full service company, we need partners who will work alongside us to create opportunities for the artists and songwriters we work with,” said Vinas.
Sony Music Publishing Scandinavia signed acclaimed Norwegian songwriter and multi-instrumentalist Matias Téllez to a global publishing deal. Based in Bergen, Téllez has collaborated with artists like Gracie Abrams and Maisie Peters, contributing to chart-topping releases including Peters’ The Good Witch. He recently earned Songwriter of the Year at the 2025 Norwegian Music Publisher Awards and received multiple Spellemannprisen nominations. “Over the last couple of years Matias has arguably been one of the most influential in shaping the sound of modern Scandinavian diy and alternative pop music and has found global audiences for the artists he’s stood behind and worked with,” said Lasse Ewald, vp of A&R. He is managed by Sam Cantlon, Tommas Arnby, and Mike Malak of Special Projects.
Round Hill Music inked a global administration deal with LA LOM, a genre-blending Los Angeles trio featuring Zac Sokolow, Jake Faulkner and Nicholas Baker. The agreement includes creative and sync support, as well as royalty collection and catalog administration. LA LOM’s debut album, The Los Angeles League of Musicians, debuted at No. 5 on Billboard’s Tropical Albums chart. The band is set to tour in 2025, supporting Leon Bridges and Thee Sacred Souls. Round Hill’s Amy Birnbaum praised the group’s vibrant, nostalgic sound and deep connection to Los Angeles’ musical diversity and Latin heritage. “Upon seeing their live shows, we were transported to what felt like 1950’s Cuba, and we connected so deeply with the audience who joyously shared in the vibrant musical journey of LA LOM,” she said.
Polyphia, the genre-blending band known for fusing hip-hop, trap and (checks notes) prog metal, has signed a global publishing deal with Position Music. Formed in 2010 in Plano, Texas, the group’s 2022 album Remember That You Will Die includes collaborations with $not, Chino Moreno, and Steve Vai, plus production from Rodney Jerkins and Y2K. This year, Polyphia will tour with System of a Down across the U.S. and Canada. Position Music VP of A&R Delmar Powell praised guitarist Tim Henson’s boundary-pushing style and the band’s cultural influence, calling them a “perfect fit for what we’re building” at Position Music, which has a roster that includes Tinashe, Cannons, Audien, Judah & the Lion, Erik Ron, and others.
Last Publishing Briefs: Indies Sound the Alarm on GenAI
In 2009, in between full-time shifts at a local factory, then-19-year-old musician Daniel Rosenfeld composed a score for an independent video game. “It was just a side hustle, maybe not even that. It was a hobby, really,” explains Rosenfeld, who records under the name C418.
The game, Minecraft, turned out to be successful beyond Rosenfeld’s wildest dreams. In 2014, Microsoft purchased Minecraft’s Swedish developer, Mojang Studios, for $2.5 billion, and through 2023, it had sold 300 million copies of the game, making it the best-selling video game of all time. Now, it’s the latest one to receive a movie adaption, and even that has been wildly successful: A Minecraft Movie, starring Jack Black, is the biggest box office hit of 2025 to date, having already grossed $550.6 million since it opened on April 4.
Because no one anticipated the game’s whirlwind success, or had the budget to properly pay him back in 2009, Rosenfeld was compensated for his work with a small fee and 100% ownership over Minecraft’s now-iconic score. Then, when Microsoft came calling in 2014, Rosenfeld made a fateful decision: he refused to sell the score to the tech behemoth, opting instead to bring on game composer manager Patrick McDermott to help him navigate building a business as an independent composer of Minecraft.
Trending on Billboard
McDermott counts himself as one of the rare folks who understands how to navigate both games and music. He started his career at Captured Tracks, and from 2015 to 2020 he built Ghost Ramp, a label which specialized in releasing game soundtracks on vinyl. At the time he was brought in to help Rosenfeld, he was also managing a number of other games composers, too.
Though McDermott says deals like Rosenfeld’s, where composers retain ownership of their IP, are increasingly rare, his Minecraft soundtracks have proven to be big business. The score, Minecraft Volume Alpha, which is distributed via TuneCore, was certified gold by the RIAA in 2023, and this month, it was inducted into the Library of Congress by the National Recording Registry, which cited it as an “audio treasure worthy of preservation.”
Since its release on digital service providers, streams of Minecraft Volume Alpha and its companion Volume Beta have averaged 38% year over year growth, and they have been streamed 2.8 billion times worldwide, according to McDermott. McDermott and Rosenfeld have built a surprisingly formidable vinyl business, too. The album, distributed by Ghostly, has sold over 200,000 units to date globally. Rosenfeld even has fans of his own who often congregate in a Discord server devoted to talking about his work, which includes the scores for other games such as Catacomb Snatch and Wanderstop.
But it’s not all fun and games for Rosenfeld. He thinks that by not selling the score to Microsoft, he might have sacrificed his chance to make future soundtracks for the Minecraft franchise — and it’s true that since the sale, Rosenfeld has not written anything for the game, with Microsoft instead turning to other composers. But because many Minecraft players are nostalgic for his original soundtrack, the score for A Minecraft Movie, composed by Devo’s Mark Mothersbaugh, interpolates it — giving Rosenfeld some upside from the blockbuster’s success.
In the end, Rosenfeld feels he made the right choice. “I don’t want to be stuck with the same thing for the next 50 years,” he says of Minecraft, and now, he can turn his attention to the new scoring gigs that excite him.
Here, Rosenfeld and McDermott speak to Billboard about the strange business of scoring for games and building a living off of Minecraft. “I know it’s hard to believe, but there’s a real argument that Daniel’s music is up there for the most heard audio by humans in history,” says McDermott.
How were you compensated for the original Minecraft game?
Daniel Rosenfeld: I asked for a share of the game, and I didn’t get a share. I got a tiny, tiny amount of salary for the music itself. The good thing, though, is that I owned the rights to the music, and that’s still persistent to this day. At the time, like 2010, people liked doing [revenue] shares for indie games as payment — like the musician gets 10 percent [of the game’s IP], the visual artist gets 20, and then the main developer gets 40 or whatever. That’s usually what happened back then. Mine was a little different.
Back in the day, when you made this score, is this also how larger game scores worked? Would Nintendo, for example, offer a deal like this?
Rosenfeld: Absolutely not. Nintendo is a Japanese company and in that culture, it’s typical that you would likely not get ownership but you’d just be employed there for, sometimes, the rest of your life. It’s the expectation of a company like Nintendo that it’s like a family — we work together and stay together. The mindset of American video game companies is different. The usual deal is the composer writes a song, and they get a single fee. That’s it. No residuals are typical in a AAA [a term used to describe video games produced by large publishers] big game.
Patrick McDermott: The typical structure is to get paid a price per minute of audio.
Has the way composers are paid in the independent game industry shifted since Minecraft launched?
McDermott: The way I see it is that there was a big boom of independent games. The comparison I use to explain this is what happened to the music business when [digital audio workstations] and home recording got easier. We got a lot more independent musicians, right? Independent gamemaking was the same. It got a lot easier because you had new tools like Unity and Gamemaker that make it possible to start building your own games. I’d say the heyday of indie games was something like 2008 to 2012 or so. The upstart, scrappy indie game business that allowed for a lot of this shared equity model was really successful for a period of time, but it’s just one of the sad, prototypical things that as people see more success in a market, the more bureaucratic and standardized things become.
Minecraft was a surprise hit. Then, Microsoft came along and bought it. You’ve said before that they wanted to buy the music rights from you. Why did you decline that offer?
McDermott: We did have conversations about it. Honestly, beyond sheer dollar figures, there was a gap in our understanding of each other. This was the genesis of Daniel and my relationship — when these conversations with Microsoft started to happen. And Daniel was smart enough to say, “Maybe it would be good to have an intermediary to help with it.” We involved a really wonderful lawyer on our side, and we had a strong belief that this music really matters. We just never quite came to the same terms and understanding on it [with Microsoft]. Daniel’s music is doing incredibly well. Who knows? Maybe they’ll knock on the door again someday, but for now, we’re thrilled that Daniel maintained ownership through all this.
Rosenfeld: I’m still going to therapy for this whole process. [Laughs]
Do any of your peers have the rights to their music from popular games today?
Rosenfeld: I am in a unique position, but it’s a bit of a monkey paw. I think it’s still frowned upon by the Microsofts, Sonys and Nintendos of the world for an artist to have ownership like I do. I’m a proponent of keeping rights, but it comes with the problem of some people not liking you so much for it.
McDermott: A lot of these composers don’t have anyone to advocate for them in these deals. I’ve had a couple situations with clients that I’ve worked for that are less known than Daniel, and we’ve been able to secure some rights for them, just because video games lawyers typically don’t know the nuances of the music business language enough to iron some things out. In a number of cases, I’ve been able to get the full IP ownership [of the music for the composer] and give gaming companies the unfettered usages that they want, but we can still sub-license back the monetization of digital and physical royalties that the musician wants.
Patrick, when you go into a negotiation for one of your clients, what is the first thing you ask for?
McDermott: I always want artists to be able to maintain their digital royalties, their physical royalties and their autonomy to make those decisions where they can sign with a record label for the vinyl side of things — stuff like that.
I honestly wouldn’t expect someone to want a game soundtrack on vinyl, but it seems like you all have built a booming vinyl business.
McDermott: When we grew up, we would buy games, and we loved the physical boxes and manuals and keepsakes that came with it. Now, most things you buy you just fire up on Steam or on the PlayStation store. I think people are drawn to the idea of having something physical from the Minecraft game they’ve always loved. If I had to guess, probably like 75% of the people who buy it never put it on a turntable. Even beyond just Daniel’s music, there’s just a lack of physical collectibles in these digital spaces, so it just fills that need.
Patrick, you’ve mentioned before that there’s a lack of understanding, on both the music and gaming sides, of the other. What are some of the mistakes you saw musicians making in the gaming world?
McDermott: When I got into game audio, I would talk to these game composers and realize their sales numbers were so massive compared to the independent tier that I had worked on. It was akin to the top artists at a label like Captured Tracks [where I previously worked]. You’d find someone who casually had Mac DeMarco-level sales numbers. The biggest mistake I saw some game composers making is they would be selling 30,000 units on Bandcamp in six months, but they never registered their music with a PRO. They didn’t know about SoundExchange. They probably had not been receiving publishing royalties in a meaningful way. I realized I could at least bridge these gaps for these composers and help them capture the royalties that are out there for them.
Rosenfeld: Yeah, I wasn’t signed with a PRO [when I met Patrick]. There were a lot of back royalties that were owed to me that I didn’t know existed.
McDermott: BMI, to their credit, reached out to Daniel because there was uncollected money. Thankfully these PROs have a period of about three years for retroactive royalties. So some of his money was technically lost, but we were still able to garner three years of back royalties.
I imagine the streaming habits for fans of the Minecraft score are pretty different from traditional mainstream pop listeners. Patrick, can you explain what listening behavior you’re seeing?
McDermott: There are two main things that I find pretty wild about Daniel’s digital performance. One is just the sheer amount of organic listens that avoid any of the algorithmic and editorial playlisting. The other thing is Spotify started sharing streams per listeners, which obviously shows if listeners hear a single once and move on or if they are bingeing the track, and Daniel’s is quite high. It’s 15 streams per listener. That’s at least seven or eight listens higher than anyone else I have access to. It’s also very evenly listened to throughout the soundtrack.
How is Daniel’s score represented in the new Minecraft film?
McDermott: There’s a song that the film licensed from us for interpolation across the score. It’s in there a number of times. There’s one song called “Dragonfish” that’s from a separate composition Daniel did during his negotiation with Microsoft, and Microsoft actually owns the rights to that one — well, Daniel owns the royalty and monetization rights, but Microsoft owns the IP. They actually play that song in full in the movie. We have no idea if that was gamesmanship on their part, using one of the songs of Daniel’s that they have better access to, or if they creatively just chose that one.
Rosenfeld: To their credit, I find the way they interpolated my song to be quite respectful. I haven’t seen the movie. I don’t know if I want to see the movie. I still need to go to more therapy. [Laughs]
The movie is still very new, but has hype around it translated into more streams for Daniel’s original score?
McDermott: Since the release of the film, his three highest streaming days ever were consecutive. Like within a range of 10 percent to 20 percent higher than usual.
Patrick, have you seen a noticeable impact in the consumption for this soundtrack since you came on as manager?
McDermott: Since Daniel and I started working together, the catalog is probably about eight to 10 times [more] in terms of monthly [listeners]. Still, every year has been bigger than the last since we started working together. I think it’s just worth saying that Minecraft is obviously continuing to add players — I think that’s what separates this. It’s such a unique IP to be associated with — so different from traditional music or even film. It’s just getting bigger over time.
Do you attribute the growth in listenership to Minecraft’s continually growing popularity, or do you also think that the trend is due to your various marketing efforts?
Rosenfeld: This is actually my little source of pride: as long as I have worked on Minecraft, there has been next to no marketing help.
McDermott: We don’t have a marketing budget for ads or anything. This is just organic. We just let it ride and see where it goes. But I think the reason it’s growing is twofold. It’s new Minecraft fans, and I think there was a transition of game audio listeners leaving Bandcamp and becoming Spotify users. We saw a big drop in Bandcamp and a big jump in Spotify in the last few years.
What about YouTube? There are so many gamers who are streaming their game play on there and other sites like Twitch. How do you handle monetizing your IP versus letting users enjoy the soundtrack?
Rosenfeld: We don’t collect any Content ID stuff on YouTube. We just rejected the idea of claiming those videos.
Why?
Rosenfeld: Legally I wasn’t allowed to. It was part of the original first contract.
McDermott: It’s a pretty unique thing to gaming. You would never want to short-change the marketing of the game to monetize the music. It just wouldn’t make any sense to pull monetization from these streamers because then they will just start muting the music. The spirit of the arrangement is to let content creators play the game and even do things beyond the game and let the score be part of it. It’s definitely different. If my music was being used on a random stream, I would claim it, but that’s not how it works here.
How much does Spotify account for Daniel’s soundtrack income now?
McDermott: Nearly 70 percent.
Back when you had the opportunity, you decided to not sell to Microsoft. Since then, there have been more compositions made to build on the Minecraft universe that came from other composers. Do you feel that if you had done it differently then maybe you’d be part of the newer scores?
Rosenfeld: Yeah, I bet I would, but here’s the thing: If I would have said yes, I would probably be able to write so much more music for them, but I probably would not feel great about it. I chose not to sell it, and now, I get the different sadness of, like, a messy divorce [with Minecraft] — but in return, I get my mental health and my freedom.
This story is part of Billboard’s music technology newsletter Machine Learnings. Sign up for Machine Learnings, and other Billboard newsletters for free here.
EMPIRE Publishing has hired !llmind as a senior vp of A&R. As part of his duties, the tech entrepreneur and Grammy-winning producer, who has worked with Drake, The Carters, Eminem, Ye, Nicki Minaj, Nathy Peluso, Romeo Santo and more, will screen songs and provide feedback, based on his production expertise. !llmind will also act as a bridge between EMPIRE’s publishing and label arms.
Along with !llmind’s appointment, the independent music giant is also promoting Al “Butter” McLean to executive vp of global creative, where he will keep co-leading EMPIRE Publishing with senior vp of global head of business Vinny Kumar. Over McLean’s 30-year career as an artist, producer, street promoter, manager and A&R, he’s inked deals for names like Yung Bleu, Childish Gambino, Alicia Keys, Daddy Yankee, Lecrae, Mint Condition, KEM and Kirk Franklin. As part of his elevation, McLean will now be responsible for overseeing all global deals and signings. He will also provide internal leadership to ensure EMPIRE Publishing continues to grow.
“I’ve worked with !llmind for years and have seen firsthand how his passion, taste, and commitment to excellence inspire everyone around him,” says Kumar. “He’s a true visionary—constantly evolving, embracing new technology, and defining the future of music and culture. We’re beyond excited to officially welcome him to the EMPIRE Publishing family.”
Trending on Billboard
“I was fortunate to have signed the amazing !llMind to a publishing venture years ago – so now this is full circle not only re-signing him as a writer, producer, and publisher, but to work alongside him as a colleague,” says McLean. “He is a legend and what he brings to our entire EMPIRE Publishing and Creative team is immeasurable”.
Adds !llmind: “My entire career I’ve always felt like an outsider because I like to dive head first into innovation, solving things in unique ways and pushing the sound of music forward. I can’t wait to contribute to this movement and learn more in the years ahead!”
Earlier this year, the Copyright Office opened a notice of inquiry (NOI) into U.S. performing rights organizations (PROs) – asking the music industry, venues and broadcasters that hold performance licenses to weigh in on whether or not they should face any new reform. Triggered by a so-called “proliferation” of new PROs in the market, and PROs alleged “lack of transparency,” it’s shaping up to be one of the most important issues facing the music publishing business this year. On Friday (April 11), the industry’s chance to submit comments came to a close. Ahead of all comments being made public, Billboard explains the origins of this inquiry and its possible implications.
How the NOI Started
On Sept. 12, 2024, Billboard broke the news that the House Judiciary Committee sent a letter to the Register of Copyrights, Shira Perlmutter, requesting the examination of “concerns” and “emerging issues” with U.S. PROs.
Trending on Billboard
The House Judiciary’s note cites two key issues: the “lack of transparency” surrounding PRO distributions and how they “currently gather information from…general licensees about public performance;” and the “proliferation” of PROs in the United States. This references the fact that, with newer entrants like Global Music Rights (GMR), PRO Music Rights (PMR) and AllTrack emerging over the last decade or so, the U.S. PRO total is up to six different options — making the licensing system more complicated and expensive for licensees. In contrast, most countries only have one PRO – while a small number have two – for writers to choose from.
Perlmutter and the Copyright Office replied to the letter by opening this inquiry in early 2025.
PRO History
The U.S. PRO system dates back to 1914 with the founding of the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP), which was created to help songwriters and publishers collect their earnings from public performances. This included collecting royalties from venues, restaurants, bars, college campuses and anywhere else music is played or performed in front of other people. It also included radio broadcasters. (In later years, as technology developed, performance monies also started to be collected from TV broadcasters and music streaming services.)
In 1931, the Society of European Stage Authors and Composers (SESAC) opened as a more boutique option, largely representing works published by European firms. In 1939, broadcasters in the radio business banded together in protest of some of ASCAP’s licensing practices, which they felt were unfair, to eventually form their own competing PRO, Broadcast Music Inc. (BMI).
For many years, ASCAP and BMI acted on a not-for-profit basis (BMI changed to for-profit status in 2022) and allowed any writer to join. Their open door policies meant that the two came to represent the vast majority of songwriters in the U.S., while SESAC continued as a smaller, for-profit player that allowed sign-ups by invitation only.
Alleging ASCAP and BMI were partaking in “anticompetitive business practices,” the Department of Justice (DOJ) sued ASCAP and BMI beginning in the 1930s. By 1941, the two PROs had settled their cases and entered consent decrees with the DOJ. One of the stipulations of these consent decrees said that ASCAP and BMI were subject to oversight by a “rate court” if a licensee couldn’t reach an agreement with them on an appropriate royalty. In short, ASCAP and BMI could no longer negotiate any rate they wanted to for their songwriters, which became increasingly challenging to navigate as performance licensees expanded over the years to include major tech platforms.
Royalty rates in the music publishing sector, unlike those in the recorded music business, are often overseen by government bodies in the U.S. That includes the rate court, which steps in to set performance license rates for ASCAP and BMI when they can’t agree with licensees; and the Copyright Royalty Board, which regulates the rates for all U.S. mechanical royalties. For that reason, the publishing business is particularly sensitive to talk of any additional criticism, restriction or regulation, which is a possible result of the U.S. Copyright Office’s inquiry should Congress find it appropriate to take further action afterwards.
Why the NOI Started
From the perspective of small venues around the country that have already been squeezed by the COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. PRO system today — including having to pay up to six different PROs for music — is seen as complicated and increasingly expensive. Sources in the live industry say one of the newcomers, GMR, also charges higher prices than its competitors for its performance license. Because it was founded in 2013, long after ASCAP and BMI’s DOJ woes, and because it positioned itself as an invite-only, for-profit PRO for elite musicians like Drake, Bruce Springsteen and Billie Eilish, GMR charges a premium.
The other two newcomers, AllTrack and PMR, are less understood by some licensees. AllTrack was founded in 2017 by former SESAC board member Hayden Bower and focuses on mid-sized and/or independent talent, hoping to provide a modernized, streamlined approach to the over 100 year old PRO system of royalty collection; while PMR was founded in 2018 by serial entrepreneur Jake Noch. PMR is perhaps best known for suing “the entire music industry,” as the PRO put it, for allegedly “running an illegal cartel for the performance rights of musical works… [and entering] into an illegal agreement, combination and/or conspiracy to shut PMR out of the market and fix prices.”
The House Judiciary Committee also expressed concern that the increasing number of PROs in the U.S. “represents an ever-present danger of infringement allegations and potential litigation risk from new and unknown sources,” as it stated in its letter to Perlmutter.
Besides frustration about how many PROs there are in today’s market, the House Judiciary flags a number of areas where transparency might require improvement. “It is difficult to assess how efficiently PROs are distributing general licensing revenue based on publicly available data,” the letter reads. “[We] request that the Office examine how the various PROs currently gather information from live music venues, music services, and other general licensees about public performance; the level of information currently provided by PROs to the public; whether any gaps or discrepancies occur in royalty distribution; what technological and business practices exist or could be developed to improve the current system; the extent to which the current distribution practices are the result of existing legal and regulatory constraints; and potential recommendations for policymakers.”
Transparency issues have been flagged a number of times over the years by stakeholders who feel PROs – in the U.S. and abroad – can be unclear about how they calculate royalties, bonuses and advances distributed to talent. Some PROs, however, would likely disagree with that characterization. ASCAP, for example, is proud of its songwriter-led board of directors, which determines how it handles distributions.
What Happens Next
The comment period ended on Friday, and soon, the responses from publishers, PROs, venues, broadcasters and more will be made public. From there, the Copyright Office will review the comments, and it will eventually write up a report with its findings. There is no timeline for this report, and it should be noted that the Copyright Office does not have the remit to make any specific changes to PROs but its findings could be influential to Congress.
Seeker Music has partnered with Blackheart, the independent company founded by Joan Jett and longtime collaborator Kenny Laguna, to acquire what is described as a “substantial share” of Jett’s publishing and recorded music rights, it was announced on Thursday. This collaboration aims to enhance the Joan Jett and the Blackhearts catalog, with plans for releasing unreleased music, reimagining classic albums and launching new campaigns tied to her global tours.
The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame inductee (class of 2015) has left quite a mark on rock music with hits like “Bad Reputation,” “Crimson and Clover,” “Do You Wanna Touch Me (Oh Yeah)” and “I Hate Myself for Loving You.” Formed in 1979 following the breakup of The Runaways, Joan Jett and the Blackhearts have achieved eight platinum and gold albums and nine Top 40 singles, including her sneering hit “I Love Rock ‘N Roll,” which topped the Hot 100 for several leather-clad weeks in early 1982.
Trending on Billboard
Seeker Music, founded in 2020 by M&G Investments and led by Evan Bogart, manages a diverse catalog of over 15,000 copyrights, including works by artists like Run The Jewels, Jon Bellion, Christopher Cross and others.
The partnership between Blackheart and Seeker Music represents a full-circle moment of sorts, connecting two storied rock and roll family legacies. Carianne Brinkman, Laguna’s daughter and the president of Blackheart, and Evan Bogart, son of legendary record executive Neil Bogart, who signed Jett to his Boardwalk Records, are key figures in this collaboration.
“Seeker joining forces with Joan, Kenny, Carianne and Blackheart isn’t just a partnership, it’s a personal, powerful reunion… reigniting a legacy and carrying the torch forward with the same rebellious spirit that ignited it,” said Evan Bogart.
Kenny Laguna, Steven Melrose, Joan Jett, Evan Bogart and Carianne Brinkman.
Brandon Young
Brinkman and Laguna echoed Bogart’s sentiment on the serendipity of the collaboration.
“I can’t imagine a better partnership that is at once completely new but a return to a shared legacy that began with the belief in Joan Jett and the Blackhearts,” said Brinkman.
Laguna added: “It’s too coincidental to be a coincidence, so I am so overwhelmed to see how fate brought Carianne and Evan Bogart at Seeker together 58 years after I had my first hit with Neil Bogart.”
The partnership was negotiated by LaPolt Law, P.C., and Reed Smith, LLP, with support from Seeker’s chief creative officer Steven Melrose and Blackheart’s head of distribution and operations Hubert Górka.
“At Seeker, our celebrated creative and innovative approach to catalog means that our focus is on super-serving Joan’s current fans, whilst growing her fandom year on year – essentially taking Joan’s music into millions of new homes globally,” said Melrose. “For a catalog as expansive and legendary as Joan Jett and the Blackhearts’, we’re working on plans to release incredible archival moments, activations around her best-selling global tours, reaching new fans through global and cross-genre campaigns, and creative re-releases of beloved albums utilizing new platforms around the world.”
The companies did not disclose financial aspects of the deal, nor the specifics of the “substantial share” of the acquired catalog.
Atticus Ross will receive the BMI Icon Award at the 41st annual BMI Film, TV and Visual Media Awards on May 14 in Beverly Hills, Calif. The ceremony will also salute the composers of the previous year’s top-grossing films, top-rated primetime network television series, and highest-ranking cable and streamed media programs. The event will be hosted by Mike O’Neill, BMI president and CEO,and Tracy McKnight, BMI VP, Creative, Film, TV & Visual Media.
Previous BMI Icon Award recipients include Terence Blanchard, Mychael Danna, Alexandre Desplat, Ramin Djawadi, Harry Gregson-Williams, James Newton Howard, Christopher Lennertz, Thomas Newman, Rachel Portman (PRS), Mike Post, Alan Silvestri, Brian Tyler and John Williams.
Trending on Billboard
“Atticus Ross’ unique ability to merge innovative sounds with cinematic storytelling has left an indelible mark on the industry, and we’re thrilled to recognize his extraordinary talent and achievements with the BMI Icon Award,” McKnight said in a statement.
Ross, 57, is best-known for his longstanding collaboration with Trent Reznor. They have composed some of the most memorable film scores of the past 15 years, including The Social Network, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, Gone Girl, Soul (a collaboration with Jon Batiste), Mank, Queer and Challengers. Reznor and Ross have won two Academy Awards, two Grammy Awards, a BAFTA Award, three Golden Globe Awards and three Critics Choice Awards.
Their work in television includes Ken Burns and Lynn Novick’s lauded 18-hour documentary The Vietnam War and their Primetime Emmy-winning score to HBO’s Watchmen. (Reznor and Ross are just a Tony Award away from EGOT status.)
Ross is also notable for his collaborations with his brother Leopold Ross and his wife Claudia Sarne. Most recently, his work on FX’s Shōgun alongside Leopold and co-composer Nick Chuba garnered much acclaim, including two Primetime Emmy nominations and a Grammy nomination.
Ross is also a key member of Nine Inch Nails, joining in 2016, alongside Reznor. In 2020, the band was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame (with Iggy Pop doing the honors). Later this year, the band will embark on a sold-out global arena tour. They are also set to score Disney’s highly anticipated Tron: Ares, their first score under the Nine Inch Nails moniker. In addition to their musical endeavors, Ross and Reznor launched With Teeth, which encompasses film and TV production, products, and a music festival.
Ross has won 19 BMI Awards throughout his career for his scores on films and TV programs.
Welcome to Publishing Briefs, our semimonthly bulletin of recent signings, deals and doings in the wide world of music publishing. Since the last time we rapped, NMPA chief David Israelite gave his annual State of Music Publishing address at a conference for indie publishers, Canada’s SOCAN reported a record-high number in total royalty distributions, and Billboard Español had a chat with Rimas Publishing president Carlos Souffront and managing director Emilio Morales about their vision for the company.
The Independent Music Publishers International Forum (IMPF) released its fourth Global Market View report, analyzing the indie music publishing industry’s performance and trends, including the impact of Generative AI. The report shows that the sector grew by 5.7% in 2023, the last full year of data, reaching a total value of 2.57 billion euros ($2.83B, as of the exchange rate on Dec. 30, 2023), up 105.6% since 2018. Despite a slight decline in market share from 26.7% to 26.3%, independent publishers collectively hold a larger market share than major companies like Sony Music Publishing, they said. Key priorities outlined in the report include addressing AI challenges and advocating for fair compensation from DSPs. The study warns that unchecked growth of AI-generated content could lead to a 24% revenue dip in music and a 21% drop in audiovisual by 2028, resulting in a cumulative loss of 22 billion euros, with 10 billion euros affecting music. The IMPF, which reps 230 indies, emphasizes the need for supportive tax policies and plans to monitor the U.S. Mechanical Licensing Collective for equitable practices. The report also raises concerns about consolidation/acquisitions of catalogs and indie publishers, which could negatively impact cultural diversity by reducing independent routes to the music market.
Trending on Billboard
Sony Music Publishing signed producer, engineer and multi-instrumentalist MTech (Matthew Bernard) to a global publishing deal. This agreement covers his existing catalog and future songs, and is in collaboration with producer Sounwave’s new production division, new.ordinary. Mtech contributed on six tracks on Kendrick Lamar’s GNX album, which reached No. 1 on the Billboard 200 albums chart. His credits on GNX include “Luther” and “Squabble Up,” both Hot 100 No. 1s. He has also worked on Lamar’s Euphoria, Kali Uchis’ Orquídeas, and Blxst’s I’ll Always Come Find You. Born in Los Angeles, MTech began his career at 17, later moving to Atlanta where he secured his first major TV placement on FOX’s Star and worked on The Four: Battle for Stardom. Returning to LA in 2022, he was introduced to Sounwave, who calls him a “superstar.” Sony Music Publishing manager, creative A&R Lauren Munroe said, “MTech’s exceptional talent is truly inspiring to be around, and I’m grateful for the opportunity to work with him. We’re honored to welcome MTech to the Sony Music Publishing family alongside the visionary Sounwave and excited for the incredible music ahead.”
Kobalt signed rock band Pierce The Veil to a global publishing deal. The band is on a successful tour following their fifth studio album, The Jaws Of Life, with sold-out shows at Madison Square Garden and The Forum. Their I Can’t Hear You world tour will continue across Europe, Mexico and South America. With over a decade in the industry, PTV blends post-hardcore, emo and progressive rock, earning a devoted global fanbase, especially within the Latinx community due to their Mexican-American roots. Melissa Emert-Hutner, Kobalt’s senior vp of creative, praised the group’s unique sound and significant fanbase in both rock and Latin music communities. “We look forward to working closely with the band and their team to provide the support and resources they need as they continue to grow their fan base around the world,” she said.
Peermusic signed songwriter and producer Clint Lagerberg to a worldwide publishing deal, covering future works and select back catalog. Lagerberg’s career highlights include Rascal Flatts’ “Here Comes Goodbye” and co-writing and producing Josh Kelley’s “Georgia Clay.” He achieved massive success with Keith Urban’s “Blue Ain’t Your Color,” the singer’s top song on Spotify and his highest-charting hit on the Hot 100 (at No. 24, in 2016). His songs have been recorded by country stars like Blake Shelton, Brad Paisley, Tim McGraw and Matt Stell. Recently, Lagerberg contributed to Brad Paisley’s upcoming album as both a writer and producer, with additional production credits include Matt Stell, LoCash, Leanna Crawford, Kevin Jonas and Backstreet Boys, among others. Knox praised Lagerberg’s talent and process. “He’s already proven his ability to land songs on the top of the charts, but it’s his process that is really impressive to me,” he said. “Clint has the technical knowledge and ability to see it through from conception to song production and delivery.”
Concord Music Publishing signed music producer Dom Martinez to a worldwide publishing deal, covering his full catalog and future works. Originally from Denver and now based in Nashville, Martinez is known for his versatility across genres like pop, rap, folk, singer-songwriter, and R&B. Martinez has collaborated with emerging talents such as Myles Smith, Caleb Hearn and Braden Bales. Lily Bunta, A&R Manager at Concord, praised Martinez’s passion and “truly infectious” enthusiasm for music.
Across the pond and then some, Concord Music Publishing ANZ signed up New Zealand power-pop band The Beths for worldwide representation. The deal covers their growing catalog, including albums Future Me Hates Me, Jump Rope Gazers, and Expert In A Dying Field. Formed in 2014 and led by vocalist Liz Stokes, The Beths have gained acclaim with their indie rock sound and performances at major festivals like Coachella. They were the first New Zealand act to win the Levi’s Music Prize in 2020. Jaime Gough, managing director at Concord Music Publishing ANZ, praised Stokes’ “deft lyricism and unique turn of phrase,” while Pennie Black, director at CMPNZ, called out their “infectious” indie pop sound as “a true reflection of their exceptional songwriting talent.”
Sony Music Publishing locked in multi-instrumentalist and songwriter Jesse Fink to a global publishing deal. Based in Los Angeles, Fink has written major hits, including Myles Smith’s Stargazing, which spent 44 weeks on the Billboard Hot 100 and topped international charts, and Artemas’ i like the way you kiss me, which surpassed 1 billion Spotify streams and reached #1 on Billboard’s Global 200 Excl. US chart. His songwriting credits include work with John Legend, Dove Cameron, and Leyla Blue. A GRAMMY winner for Best R&B Album in 2021 with Legend’s Bigger Love, he recently earned two BRIT Award nominations for Song of the Year. Sony Music Publishing A&R manager Clark Adler lauded Fink’s passion and work ethic, saying these traits “elevate everyone around him.”
Over in The Volunteer State, SMP Nashville signed singer-songwriter Averie Bielski to a global publishing deal. Originally from Roswell, GA, Averie has quickly made a name for herself, first gaining attention in 2021 with her viral debut single I Do Too, which gained traction on TikTok. Since moving to Nashville, her songs have been recorded by artists like Callista Clark, Zach John King, Carson Wallace, Ashley Anne and Grace Tyler. Sony Music Publishing Nashville’s manager of creative A&R, Synnovea Halsel, praised her “fresh” lyricism and unique melodies — “From the moment I heard her first song, I was taken aback.”
Warner Chappell Music‘s Miami team signed Afro-Colombian artist Hamilton, also known as AfroRockStar. As a prominent figure in the Afrobeat movement, Hamilton has already amassed over 250 million career streams. He is gearing up to release his debut album, which includes “Mi Reina,” a new single with Nanpa Basico. Recognized as an artist to watch, Hamilton’s Afrobeats collaborations include Ryan Castro’s “A Poca Luz” and Justin Quiles and Lenny Tavárez’s “Atardecer.” He is signed to Cigol Music on the label side and Globalatino/Cigol Publishing.
PUB BRIEFS BRIEFS: Centricity Music signed the Texas-based duo Band Reeves to a recording and publishing contract. The duo features Reeves brothers Jeramy and Cody, who have crafted a sound that blends country and Christian music. Band Reeves is managed by Proper Management and will release a debut single soon … Electronic music producer Anyma signed a global publishing deal with Kobalt. The agreement covers Anyma’s entire catalog, including his work with the duo Tale of Us, as well as future releases.
Last Publishing Briefs: El DeBarge Signs With Reservoir
National Music Publishers’ Association (NMPA) president/CEO David Israelite joined the Association of Independent Music Publishers (AIMP) to give his annual State of Music Publishing address on Wednesday (April 2) at Lawry’s in Beverly Hills. In his speech, Israelite discussed hot button issues for publishers, including Spotify bundling (“we are still at war”), AI concerns, PRO reform and more.
Israelite started by sharing the NMPA’s data on the revenue sources for songwriters and publishers. It found that songwriters and publishers earn 45% of revenue from streaming services, 11% from general licensing and live, 9% from traditional synchronization licensing, 8% from mass synch (licenses for UGC video platforms like YouTube), 8% from radio, 7% from TV, 4% from labels, 2% from social media, 1% from sheet music, and 1% from lyrics. The NMPA says that 75% of its income is regulated by either a compulsory license or a consent decree, while the remaining 25% is handled via free-market negotiation.
On the AI front, Israelite explained that the NMPA is actively watching and supporting pending legal action.
Trending on Billboard
“We have not filed our own lawsuit yet, but I can promise you that if there is a path forward with a productive lawsuit, we will be filing it,” he said. As far as trying to regulate AI through policy, Israelite added, “We’re doing everything that can be done.” The NMPA is participating in both a White House initiative and a Copyright Office initiative, but he added, “If you are waiting for the government to protect your rights and AI models, I think that is a very bad strategy.”
Instead, Israelite said that the “most emphasis” should be placed on forming business relationships with AI companies. “When that date comes [that AI companies are willing to come to the table to license music], I believe the most important principle is that the song is just as valuable, if not more, than the sound recording in the AI model,” he continued.
During the speech, Israelite said he had a recent conversation with “the CEO of one of the major AI companies” who told him that “by far, the song [as opposed to the sound recording] is the most important input into these models. I tell you this because I am fearful that as these models develop, if we do not protect our rights, we will find ourselves in a situation where we are not getting as much or more than the sound recording when it comes to revenue…that is a responsibility of this entire community to fight for that.”
Israelite added that his “number one problem when it comes to revenue is how we are treated with these bundled plans,” pointing to publishers’ ongoing issues with Spotify. Last year, Spotify added audiobooks into its premium tier offerings and began claiming those tiers as “bundles,” a term referring to a type of subscription that qualifies for a discounted rate for music. Spotify claimed that it now had to pay to license both books and music from the same subscription price and subsequently started paying songwriters and publishers about 40% less for music, according to the NMPA. At the time, Billboard estimated that this would lead to a $150 million reduction in payments to publishers in the next year, compared to what publishers would have been paid if the tiers had never been reclassified.
In January, news broke that Universal Music Group (UMG) and Spotify had forged a direct deal that gave UMG’s publishing arm improved terms, effectively minimizing the harm caused by the previous year’s bundling change. Shortly after, Warner Music Group (WMG) followed suit with its own direct deal with Spotify for improved publishing remuneration. “I know in this room in particular, there is a great concern about what those market deals mean for the whole industry,” Israelite says. “I want to be very clear about this. I believe those market deals are a good thing, but until everybody benefits from the same protections about how bundles are treated, we are still at war. Nothing has changed.”
Israelite added later that UMG and WMG’s direct deals could be cited as “evidence” to support the publishers’ position during the next Copyright Royalty Board (CRB) fight, which will determine the U.S. mechanical royalty rates for publishers in the future. The CRB proceedings begin again in 10 months, and Israelite estimates his organization will spend $36 million in the next trial to fight for the publishers’ position. While he often noted that “we shouldn’t be in this system in the first place” during his address, Israelite conceded that despite his calls for a legislative proposal that would give publishers and writers the right to pull out of the 100-year-old system of government-regulated price setting for royalties, the “brilliant idea” is “next to impossible to accomplish.”
Israelite went on to detail all the ways the NMPA and others are still fighting back against Spotify over the bundling debacle. He noted that the Mechanical Licensing Collective (MLC) “is doing a fantastic job of continuing the fight” against Spotify, adding that its lawsuit, which was dismissed earlier this year by a judge who called the federal royalty rules “unambiguous,” has “been revived.” He added, “[It’s] our best chance of getting back what we lost.”
Elsewhere in his speech, Israelite told the crowd of independent publishers that the NMPA has now sent three rounds of takedown notices to Spotify for various podcast episodes, citing copyright infringement of its members’ songs, and that “over 11,000 podcasts have been removed from Spotify” as a consequence.
The recent calls for performing rights organization (PRO) reform are also top of mind for publishers in 2025. Last year, the House Judiciary Committee sent a letter to the Register of Copyrights, Shira Perlmutter, requesting an examination of PROs, citing two areas of concern: the “proliferation” of new PROs and the lack of transparency about the distribution of general licensing revenue. This spurred the Copyright Office to take action, opening a notice of inquiry that allows industry stakeholders to submit comments, sharing their point of view about what, if anything, should be reformed at American PROs. However, some fear that the notice of inquiry could lead to increased regulation at the PROs, further constraining publishing income.
Israelite addressed this by giving publishers a preview of the NMPA’s forthcoming comments. “I will tell you today exactly what our comments are going to say,” he said. “It is very simple. Music publishers and songwriters are already over-regulated by the federal government. Congress should be focused on decreasing regulation of our industry, not increasing regulation of our industry, and to the extent that any of these issues are substantive issues. This should be dealt with between the PROs and their members. It has nothing to do with the Copyright Office. It has nothing to do with Congress. It has nothing to do with the federal government.”