“Pro Music Rights (PMR) is a public performance rights organization that ensures its members can earn a living from their music by licensing the public performances of their songs, collecting those license fees, and distributing royalties to its members. 100% of the license usage fees Pro Music Rights collects goes directly to songwriters, composers, and music publishers as royalties.”
PMR filed a suit of lawsuits against music industry giants for locking them out of all business growth opportunities. PMR claims to the rights to license about 2 million works from artists including A$AP Rocky, Wiz Khalifa, Pharrell, Young Jeezy, Juelz Santana, Lil Yachty, Soulja Boy, Nipsey Hussle, 2 Chainz, Migos, Gucci Mane and Fall Out Boy, among others. But music giants are not paying for the use of their copyrighted materials and hurting artists and songwriters.
“Pro Music Rights has made numerous attempts to offer buyers a public performance license. Radio, T.V., music steaming services – they all collectively and uniformly ignored us in a group boycott for the past two years. WineAmerica even refused to accept our mail!”
PMR’s antitrust lawsuit “alleges that the named defendants are “running an illegal cartel for the performance rights of musical works. Named in the suit are Apple, Amazon, Google, Youtube, Spotify, Digital Media Association, National Religious Broadcasters Music License Committee, Radio Music License Committee, Inc., The National Association Of American Wineries, Television Music License Committee, Llc, 7digital, Deezer, iHeartmedia, Connoisseur Media, Pandora, Rhapsody International, and SoundCloud.”
Pro Music Rights is seeking a jury trial to force these companies to finally explain their actions that prevent further business growth by PMR. PMR also shows records of their multiple attempts to contact the Defendants without receiving a response.
PMR’s suit says that “No television station, radio station or music streaming service has entered into a license to perform the musical works in PMR’s repertory, let alone engaged in any substantive negotiations therefor. The Defendants’ conspiracy and anti-competitive agreement is an illegal monopsony. Defendants have destroyed competition between and among themselves.”