In today's CMU Daily: The US Department Of Justice has sued Live Nation accusing the live giant of anti-competitive conduct. Live Nation’s market dominance is good for the company’s bottom line, but bad for “fans, artists, venues and competition” says the DoJ as it asks the court to force Live Nation to sell Ticketmaster

One Liners: ATC, Toby Daintree deals; BMG appointment, ICE royalties; Mahogany Songs launches; Black & Irish wins IMPALA award; new releases from Leigh-Anne, 潘PAN, The Menstrual Cramps, Roxanne de Bastion, Lice, Penelope Trappes, Parsnip

Also today: Spotify audiobooks trick means copyright law needs to change says NMPA boss; Beyonce sued over ‘Break My Soul’ sample; Apple hits back at competition regulators

Plus: Nice Biscuit are CMU Approved

Live Nation monopoly is “anticompetitive” and must be broken up says DoJ lawsuit

The US Department Of Justice has filed an explosive lawsuit against Live Nation accusing the live giant of anticompetitive conduct. It asks the court to force Live Nation to sell off - at the very least - its Ticketmaster business. 

“One monopolist serves as the gatekeeper for the delivery of nearly all live music in America today”, the 128 page legal filing begins. Noting how Live Nation itself claims to be the “largest live entertainment company in the world”, the “largest producer of concerts in the world” and “the world’s leading live entertainment ticketing sales and marketing company”, the lawsuit adds, "Live Nation is all these things, to the detriment of fans, artists, venues and competition”. 

Commenting on the lawsuit, US Attorney General Merrick Garland says, “It is time to break up Live Nation-Ticketmaster. Live Nation relies on unlawful, anticompetitive conduct to exercise its monopolistic control over the live events industry in the United States at the cost of fans, artists, smaller promoters and venue operators”. 

Live Nation is already fighting back in the court of public opinion. The company’s EVP Corporate And Regulatory Affairs, Dan Wall, says in a blog post that the lawsuit has been motivated by “intense political pressure” and “a long-term lobbying campaign from rivals and ticket brokers seeking government protection for themselves”. 

The DoJ’s legal filing, he adds, “ignores everything that is actually responsible for higher ticket prices, from increasing production costs to artist popularity, to 24/7 online ticket scalping that reveals the public’s willingness to pay far more than primary tickets cost”.

When Live Nation and Ticketmaster merged in 2010, the combined business agreed a consent decree with the DoJ which put in place some restrictions on how the different strands of the business would work together. That was to allay concerns that, with Live Nation so powerful in venues, tours and ticketing, its operations would become anticompetitive. 

That consent decree was meant to expire after ten years, but was extended for another five amid allegations there had been breaches. Then it emerged last year that the DoJ was again investigating claims of anticompetitive conduct made against Live Nation. It's that investigation that has led to today’s lawsuit. 

The legal filing provides various stats about just how dominant Live Nation is in the US live entertainment business. 

According to the DoJ, the company manages more than 400 artists; controls around 60% of shows at major concert venues; owns or controls more than 265 concert venues in North America, including more than 60 of the top 100 amphitheaters in the US; and, through Ticketmaster, “controls roughly 80% or more of major concert venues’ primary ticketing for concerts and a growing share of ticket resales in the secondary market”. 

It then claims, “Live Nation and its wholly owned subsidiary, Ticketmaster, have used that power and influence to insert themselves at the centre and the edges of virtually every aspect of the live music ecosystem. This has given Live Nation and Ticketmaster the opportunity to freeze innovation and bend the industry to their own benefit. While this may be a boon to Live Nation’s bottom line, there is a real cost to Americans”. 

“Live Nation’s anticompetitive conduct has not only harmed fans in the form of more and higher fees”, it goes on, “but also undermines innovation. Competition increases the array and quality of services available and makes it easier for fans to find and see artists they love. Unburdened by competition on the merits, Ticketmaster does not need to invest as much to improve the fan experience”. 

Later on in the lawsuit, the DoJ asks the court to confirm the various incidents of anticompetitive conduct that the government department has alleged. The court should also “enjoin Live Nation from continuing to engage in anticompetitive practices”. And then, the most dramatic of the demands, the court should “order the divestiture of, at minimum, Ticketmaster”. 

Live Nation has always denied all allegations of anticompetitive conduct. Earlier this week, the company’s CFO Joe Berchtold - speaking at a conference organised by JP Morgan - declared that live entertainment is “a very competitive market, don’t let any of the press reports fool you”. 

According to The Hollywood Reporter, he discussed the company's ongoing dealings with the DoJ, before adding, “I think it’s fair to say I continue to believe that we fundamentally have business practices that are fully defensible”. 

Elsewhere in his blog post, Wall writes, “It is absurd to claim that Live Nation and Ticketmaster are wielding monopoly power. The defining feature of a monopolist is monopoly profits derived from monopoly pricing. Live Nation in no way fits the profile. Service charges on Ticketmaster are no higher than elsewhere and frequently lower”. 

“This lawsuit against Live Nation and Ticketmaster won’t reduce ticket prices or service fees”, he adds, and instead “distracts from real solutions that would decrease prices and protect fans”. 

Live Nation has been ramping up its lobbying in the last year as the DoJ investigation has progressed and with renewed interest in the company’s market dominance in US Congress. 

Now the DoJ’s allegations are set out in black and white, we can expect even more push back from Live Nation - from lobbyists, in media, and via ‘grassroots’ public opinion influence - as it prepares to fight what could be one of the biggest legal battles ever seen in music, which could have significant ramifications across almost every part of the industry.

Secretly Distribution // UK Account Relations Director (London)

Republic of Music // Label Manager (Brighton Hybrid)

Domino Publishing // Copyright & Royalties Assistant (London Hybrid)

All Flowers Group // Project Manager (London)

Your Culture // Campaign Management Assistant (Brighton)

Horizon is CMU's new weekly newsletter - published each Friday - that brings you a hand-picked selection of early-stage career opportunities from across the music industry.

Whether you're looking for your first job in music or you're ready to take a step up, Horizon is here to help you find your dream job faster.

👉 Click through to see the current selection.

ONE LINERS

BMG, ICE, Leigh-Anne + more

DEALS

Management company ATC has announced a new partnership with Chinese music firm Modern Sky. “I am delighted that we are in business with Modern Sky”, says ATC CEO Adam Driscoll. “As one of China’s leading independent music companies, they offer a significant opportunity for ATC to expand its reach into a growing market for the benefit of our clients. And we are excited to work with the team in Beijing to bring Modern Sky events and talent into the markets in which we operate”.

Warner Chappell has signed a global publishing deal with songwriter and producer Toby Daintree. “Toby is a world-class songwriter and producer”, says UK A&R Manager George Baker. “His recent hits have showcased he can write songs that connect with a global audience and we want to help replicate this success by partnering him with the world’s biggest artists and writers”.

APPOINTMENTS

BMG has promoted Marc Johlen to Managing Director for Germany, Switzerland and Austria. “I am THRILLED to embark on this exciting journey as Managing Director for BMG’s GSA region”, he says. “BMG’s unwavering commitment to nurturing talent and fostering innovation resonates deeply with me”.

PUBLISHING 

ICE - which works with music publishers and song right collecting societies on digital licensing - has distributed over €1 billion to rightsholders in a single twelve month period for the first time, it has announced. This is “a major achievement”, says CEO Peter de Mönnink, "reflecting the hard work, expertise and innovation of everyone at ICE in ensuring our customers can deliver to their members. Despite their crucial role, copyright and music publishing often do not receive the recognition they deserve. Music is the cornerstone of today's digital services, with customer experiences built around the value of music and the importance of songwriting”.

DISTRIBUTION 

Mahogany - the company behind the Mahogany Sessions YouTube channel - has launched independent distribution company Mahogany Songs. It will be led by Dom Wallace as Label & Marketing Manager, who joins from Spotify, and its first distributed artist is Áine Deane. “The launch of Mahogany Songs is a huge moment for independent artists and we're incredibly excited to launch the service with Áine Deane - an artist I've admired from afar for a long time”, says Wallace. 

AWARDS

Pan-European indie label trade group IMPALA has announced non-profit organisation Black & Irish as the recipient of its Changemaker Award this year. “Receiving the IMPALA Changemaker Award is a recognition of our commitment to create a more equitable and inclusive Ireland”, says co-founder Leon Diop. “It is a testament to the collective efforts of our team and the partnerships we have built. Our work is rooted in collaboration and community empowerment”.

NEW RELEASES

Former Little Mix member Leigh-Anne has announced that she will release her debut solo EP ‘No Hard Feelings’ on 31 May. 

潘PAN - formerly Aristophanes - will release new album ‘Pan the Pansexual’ on 12 Jul. Out now is new single ‘Imperfect Poetry’. 

The Menstrual Cramps have released new single ‘Antagonistic’. 

Roxanne de Bastion has released new single ‘Sleep, Sleep Little Boy’ featuring Ed Harcourt, taken from a new album and book exploring the life and work of her grandfather, the composer and pianist Stephen de Bastion. Both are out on 6 Jun.

Lice have released new single ‘Red Fibres’. Their third album ‘Third Time At The Beach’ is out on 20 Sep. 

Penelope Trappes has released new single ‘Harmonic No 1’. Her new album ‘Hommelen’ is out on 7 Jun. 

Parsnip have released new single ‘The Babble’. They’ve also announced that they will be in the UK for tour dates in October.

Spotify’s conduct proves US compulsory licence isn’t working, says NMPA boss

David Israelite, CEO of the US National Music Publishers Association, said yesterday that changes need to be made to the compulsory licence that is utilised by streaming services in the US because the current system isn’t working. Mainly because of Spotify. 

“Spotify is not a business partner”, he declared. “They are attacking the songwriters that make their business possible”, and in doing so proving that the way US copyright law sets out a statutory process for the payment of writers and music publishers simply “isn't working”. 

He made those comments during a panel discussion in London, organised by UK collecting society PRS, which was focused on the 2018 Music Modernization Act. That’s the legislation that revised US copyright law to fundamentally change the way the mechanical rights compulsory licence works. It also resulted in the creation of the MLC collecting society. 

The MMA was the outcome of a deal between the music publishers and the streaming services, he said. It removed some of the services’ legal liabilities and made it much easier for them to pay song royalties. In return, songwriters and publishers were assured that the royalties they were due would be paid more accurately and efficiently. 

The publishers feel they compromised in doing that deal, to the advantage of the services, and yet, since the passing of the MMA, Spotify has sought to attack writers and publishers twice. First by fighting a long drawn out legal battle when the Copyright Royalty Board increased the royalty rates due under the compulsory licence, and now with its audiobook bundling tactics.  

“The truth is”, Israelite said, “we would like to get rid of the compulsory licence. We'd like to be where record labels are, where publishers negotiate their deals with digital service providers. They agree on terms. If they don't like the terms, they can say no. And if a service wants to do something novel, the service and rightsholder can get together and discuss whether it's good for both parties and, if they both agree, then they can agree a deal in the marketplace”. 

The US is unusual in having a compulsory licence that applies to streaming. In most other countries music publishers and songwriter collecting societies - just like record labels and music distributors in the US - directly negotiate bespoke deals with the services. 

Nevertheless, Israelite continued, “When we passed the MMA, I think it was a recognition that the compulsory licence was going to stay. So could we make it work?” 

The changes introduced by the MMA definitely resulted in a better system for paying writers and publishers. Much of yesterday’s panel talked up why the current system is better, reviewing the issues with the model before the MMA and explaining why the creation of the MLC has fixed many of the problems (even if some issues do remain). 

Nevertheless, Israelite continued, since the passing of the MMA, “there have been two developments which have basically proven that the compulsory licence is not working”.

Approved: Nice Biscuit

Nice Biscuit have returned with their first original music since 2021, in the form of new single ‘Rain’. It’s the second release for the Bad Vibrations label, following last year’s cover of Donna Summer’s ‘I Feel Love’. 

Driven by a motorik beat, the new track constantly pushes forward over the course of seven minutes. Vocalists Billie Star and Grace Cuell share their thoughts on climate anxiety, based on their experiences of dramatic changes in weather patterns in their home of Brisbane, Australia. 

“We began to work on ‘Rain’ again after a catastrophic flooding event occurred in Meanjin [Brisbane] in 2022, after weeks of constant rain”, say the band. “We felt trapped in this feeling of helplessness”. 

“The song then became a reflection of the psychological impacts of climate change, where you are at first wishing for rain and then begging for it to stop. We changed the lyrics to reflect this, alternating between ‘stop the rain’ and ‘please don’t stop the rain’”.

“We live in a system where action to mitigate climate change is ignored”, they go on. “So in this song we imagined a rainbow ‘cracking through the concrete’ to break free from the shackles of the system to bring change and... the rain”. 

“It’s a positive take on a situation that can make us feel powerless - to encourage us to keep going and to not lose hope when everything is uncertain”.

🎧 Watch the video for ‘Rain’ here

Beyoncé sued over Break My Soul sample 

Beyoncé and her label Sony Music have been sued over a Big Freedia sample on her 2022 hit ‘Break My Soul’. However, the lawsuit’s not been filed by Big Freedia, but by a group who claim that the track Beyoncé sampled infringed their copyright. And that infringement was then replicated in ‘Break My Soul’.

The Big Freedia track sampled by Beyoncé is 2014 release ‘Explode’. Members of a group called Da Showstoppaz - who, like Big Freedia, are part of the New Orleans bounce music scene - claim that ‘Explode’ lifts some lyrics from their 2002 song ‘Release A Wiggle’. 

In particular, the key lyric “release a wiggle”, which was tweaked slightly on the Big Freedia track to “release yo wiggle”. 

“The infringing phrase ‘release yo wiggle’ and several other substantially similar phrases are featured prominently” in ‘Explode’, a lawsuit claims, according to Billboard. “Any reasonable person listening to ‘Release A Wiggle’ and ‘Explode’ would conclude that the songs are substantially similar", it adds. 

Moving onto the Beyoncé track with the ‘Explode’ sample, the lawsuit says that Beyoncé and her collaborators “have received many accolades and substantial profits” from the hit record, while “Da Showstoppaz’s have received nothing - no acknowledgment, no credit, no remuneration of any kind”. 

Da Showstoppaz are now looking for co-writing credits and a share of the copyright on both ‘Break My Soul’ and ‘Explode’, with Big Freedia also named as a defendant in the lawsuit. 

It seems a somewhat optimistic claim. Generally, the US courts have been cautious about granting copyright protection to short phrases which might appear in multiple songs. 

Taylor Swift was sued over the lyrics to ‘Shake It Off’ by the writers of an earlier pop song that also referenced players playing and haters hating. Although that litigation was ultimately settled, at one point the judge mused that lyrics about players playing and haters hating were too “banal” to enjoy copyright protection on their own. 

A similar argument could definitely be made about lyrics suggesting the release of any kind of wiggle. And, if Da Showstoppaz can't prove that ‘Explode’ infringes ‘Release A Wiggle’, there would obviously be no claim in relation to the Beyoncé sample. 

Nevertheless, in their lawsuit, Da Showstoppaz insist that the lyrics allegedly lifted by Big Freedia are protected by copyright in isolation, and that Big Freedia, and more recently Beyoncé, have therefore exploited their rights without permission.

Apple hits back at competition regulators in EU and US

Lawyers working for Apple have made new filings in relation to allegations of anticompetitive conduct that have been made by regulators on both sides of the Atlantic. 

In Europe, it has filed an appeal against the European Commission’s recent ruling over its in-app payment policies, which stemmed from a complaint made by Spotify. And in the US, it has made a new filing in response to legal action instigated by the Department Of Justice. 

In March, the European Commission fined Apple €1.8 billion over its App Store rules that stop app developers from sign-posting payment options that circumvent Apple’s own transactions platform. It was also ordered to change those rules, which it technically did, although in a way that Spotify says has done nothing to address the issues raised by the EC. 

Court records now show that Apple formally began an appeal over that ruling with the European Union’s Luxembourg-based General Court earlier this month. 

Specifics about the appeal are not yet known. Though Reuters notes that it could take years to get a ruling from the EU General Court, and then - when that ruling is inevitably appealed to the EU Court Of Justice - a few more years to get a final resolution. 

It was also in March that the US Department Of Justice sued Apple over various allegations that the tech giant is violating competition - or antitrust - laws. Although that litigation covers a range of grievances, companies like Spotify will be hoping that it ultimately forces changes to the App Store rules that restrict how app developers communicate to and transact with their users.  

Earlier this week, Apple’s lawyers wrote to the District Court in New Jersey requesting a pre-motion conference prior to the submission of a formal motion seeking dismissal of the DoJ’s lawsuit. Setting out its initial arguments, the letter insists “this case lies well beyond the outer limits of antitrust law”.

It adds that the US Supreme Court has “repeatedly held that the type of conduct at the core of this case - namely, Apple’s decisions about how and whether to grant third parties access to its platform - does not give rise to liability as a matter of law”. 

It also argues that the DoJ’s lawsuit fails to “connect the restrictions it challenges to any anticompetitive effects in the smartphone market”, while also stating that “far from being a monopolist, Apple faces fierce competition from well-established rivals”. 

As with the legal battle in the EU, this case is likely to drag on too. Meanwhile, Spotify et al will pursue other lobbying and legal channels, given they really want to force substantial changes to the rules around in-app communications and payments sooner rather than later.