BMI sues Pandora over song licenses
Broadcast Music Inc. (BMI) has filed suit against Pandora, claiming the online radio company is refusing to pay higher licensing fees for songs.
June 14, 2013 at 08:00 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Broadcast Music Inc. (BMI) has filed suit against Pandora, claiming the online radio company is refusing to pay higher licensing fees for songs.
BMI, a songwriters' rights organization, said in the suit it filed yesterday that the fees it proposed to Pandora are “consistent with market rates to reflect the explosive growth of the Internet music streaming marketplace.”
BMI represents more than 600,000 songwriters, composers and music publishers, and works on their behalf to collect license fees for their music.
Pandora, founded in 2000, now has nearly 71 million listeners. With the growing audience base comes an increase in licensing fees.
But earlier this week, Pandora purchased a radio station in South Dakota. The company said the purchase was a move to allow the Internet radio company to pay lower licensing fees, comparable to those of traditional broadcasters.
BMI said that its licensing fee agreements with other Internet radio companies, such as Spotify, are the same as or higher than the one it proposed to Pandora.
Read more about this story on Thomson Reuters.
For more InsideCounsel stories about IP, see:
IP: Brand protection and expansion, Part 3
IP: The Hobson's Choice of conflicting national security laws in international patent filings
White House takes on patent trolls with legislative proposals and executive orders
IP: Licensor or licensee, who bears the burden of proving infringement?
Velvet Underground and the Warhol Foundation settle suit
Broadcast Music Inc. (BMI) has filed suit against Pandora, claiming the online radio company is refusing to pay higher licensing fees for songs.
BMI, a songwriters' rights organization, said in the suit it filed yesterday that the fees it proposed to Pandora are “consistent with market rates to reflect the explosive growth of the Internet music streaming marketplace.”
BMI represents more than 600,000 songwriters, composers and music publishers, and works on their behalf to collect license fees for their music.
Pandora, founded in 2000, now has nearly 71 million listeners. With the growing audience base comes an increase in licensing fees.
But earlier this week, Pandora purchased a radio station in South Dakota. The company said the purchase was a move to allow the Internet radio company to pay lower licensing fees, comparable to those of traditional broadcasters.
BMI said that its licensing fee agreements with other Internet radio companies, such as Spotify, are the same as or higher than the one it proposed to Pandora.
Read more about this story on Thomson Reuters.
For more InsideCounsel stories about IP, see:
IP: Brand protection and expansion, Part 3
IP: The Hobson's Choice of conflicting national security laws in international patent filings
White House takes on patent trolls with legislative proposals and executive orders
IP: Licensor or licensee, who bears the burden of proving infringement?
Velvet Underground and the Warhol Foundation settle suit
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Keys to Maximizing Efficiency (and Vibes) When Navigating International Trade Compliance Crosschecks
6 minute read
LSU General Counsel Quits Amid Fracas Over First Amendment Rights of Law Professor
7 minute read
Exits Leave American Airlines, SiriusXM, Spotify Searching for New Legal Chiefs
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'Lookback Window' Law for Child Abuse Cases Constitutional, State High Court Finds
- 2Troutman Pepper Says Ex-Associate Who Alleged Racial Discrimination Lost Job Because of Failure to Improve
- 3Texas Bankruptcy Judge Withdraws Ethics Complaint Against Jackson Walker
- 4Apply Now: Superior Court Judge Sought for Mountain Judicial Circuit Bench
- 5Harrisburg Jury Hands Up $1.5M Verdict to Teen Struck by Underinsured Driver
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
