Copyright Royalty Board Lets Spotify, Apple, Amazon and Pandora Read Sealed Web VI Documents in the Songwriter Rate Fight

A federal board that sets royalty rates has let the biggest streaming services read documents that were sealed in a different rate case. The order bears on how much songwriters and publishers may be paid when their songs are streamed.

The Copyright Royalty Board granted a request from Pandora, Spotify, Apple and Amazon to access unredacted materials from the Web VI proceeding while the Phono V proceeding is under way, Digital Music News reported Oct. 26. Chief Copyright Royalty Judge Trevor Jefferson approved the access in a brief order, with conditions, the outlet said. The services filed the motion around the start of September.

Phono V is the rate-setting proceeding for mechanical royalties for interactive streaming, covering 2028 through 2032, per Digital Music News. The outlet described it as contentious. A separate and similarly heated proceeding is under way for permanent downloads and physical releases. Web VI, covering 2026 through 2030, concerns non-interactive use of recordings, and parties including SiriusXM and SoundExchange have been participating for some time. Its determination hasn't been issued.

The streaming services argued that waiting for the Web VI decision would "create needless inefficiencies and delay." They pointed to overlapping evidence and potentially worthwhile "economic analyses." In the motion's words, as quoted by Digital Music News, "Although this proceeding concerns mechanical royalty rates for interactive streaming services, it follows the same willing-buyer-willing-seller legal standard applied in Web VI. The two proceedings have also historically involved overlapping issues, including evidence concerning licensing for the interactive services at issue in this proceeding."

They also argued that public versions of the Web VI documents wouldn't be enough. The redacted materials, they said, "may not reveal how the specific economic analyses presented may have influenced the Judges' determination, or how—if at all—those analyses might impact this proceeding."

The board's conditions, as described by Digital Music News, are these. Existing protective orders still apply. Access won't be granted to outside counsel who weren't counsel of record for a participant in Web VI and who are, or during the proceeding will be, directly participating in license negotiations with sound recording companies outside the context of settling legal claims. Participants that aren't "litigating participants" must request access; a notice goes on the docket, and for the following 10 days the entities that provided the materials can "seek relief necessary to prevent any potential competitive harm." The streamers say the three paragraphs of provisions are ones SoundExchange requested.

A final condition concerns artificial intelligence. The services must abide by AI-use terms, including making sure the settings of the programs they use shield the sensitive information from third parties and developers, according to Digital Music News. The outlet's own parenthetical was that it might be wise to avoid feeding the files into AI.

Digital Music News said the case is in full swing: earlier this month Spotify and others submitted detailed proposals, and the National Music Publishers' Association called Amazon Music's proposed terms an attempt "to squeeze songwriters." Those proposals and the NMPA's statement are the outlet's account. Boston Uncut hasn't reviewed the filings or the order itself.

What we still don't know: what is in the Web VI documents and whether they will change the streamers' numbers, what the board will decide for 2028 through 2032, how the 10-day notice window will work in practice, and whether the publishers will seek the same access. The order and the underlying filings will be in the board's docket.