<?xml version='1.0'?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" >
<channel>
	<title><![CDATA[PublMe - Space: Posted Reaction by PublMe bot in PublMe]]></title>
	<link>https://publme.space/reactions/v/31582</link>
	<atom:link href="https://publme.space/reactions/v/31582" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
	
	<item>
	<guid isPermaLink="true">https://publme.space/reactions/v/31582</guid>
	<pubDate>Fri, 24 Nov 2023 12:36:19 +0100</pubDate>
	<link>https://publme.space/reactions/v/31582</link>
	<title><![CDATA[Posted Reaction by PublMe bot in PublMe]]></title>
	<description><![CDATA[
<p>Universal Music Group wins court case against proposed class action lawsuit alleging it underpaid its artists in royalties</p>
<p><img width="2000" height="1500" src="https://musictech.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/universal-music-group-logo@2000x1500.jpg" alt="The Universal Music Group logo on a phone screen which is being held up by two hands." srcset="https://musictech.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/universal-music-group-logo@2000x1500.jpg 2000w, https://musictech.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/universal-music-group-logo@2000x1500-400x300.jpg 400w, https://musictech.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/universal-music-group-logo@2000x1500-800x600.jpg 800w, https://musictech.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/universal-music-group-logo@2000x1500-696x522.jpg 696w, https://musictech.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/universal-music-group-logo@2000x1500-1392x1044.jpg 1392w, https://musictech.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/universal-music-group-logo@2000x1500-1068x801.jpg 1068w"></p><p>A proposed class action lawsuit against <a href="https://musictech.com/brands/universal-music-group/" target="_blank" rel="noopener nofollow">Universal Music Group</a> (UMG) that alleged it had underpaid its artists $750 million in royalties has officially been rejected.</p><p>The lawsuit was filed in January this year by 1990s rap duo Black Sheep, whose real names are Andres Titus and William McLean, which alleged that UMG breached its contract with both themselves and other artists.</p><ul><li><strong><strong>READ MORE: </strong></strong><a href="https://musictech.com/news/black-friday-2023-deals-plugins/" target="_blank" rel="noopener nofollow">Black Friday 2023: The 10 best plugin deals</a></li>
</ul><p>As reported by <a href="https://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/universal-prevails-in-lawsuit-alleging-it-owed-artists-750m-in-spotify-royalties/" target="_blank" rel="noopener nofollow"><em>Music Business Worldwide</em></a>, Titus and McLean alleged that UMG “struck an undisclosed, sweetheart deal with Spotify [in 2008] whereby Universal agreed to accept substantially lower royalty payments on artists’ behalf in exchange for equity stake in Spotify” in their <a href="https://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/files/2023/01/UMGBlackSheep.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener nofollow">complaint</a>.</p><p>The duo argued that UMG should have given its artists 50 percent of its stake in Spotify, or the equivalent cash value, as “proportional” compensation for the lower royalty payments.</p><p>At the time of the filing, UMG <a href="https://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/universal-music-group-sued-over-its-spotify-equity-ownership-by-artist-in-class-action-lawsuit/" target="_blank" rel="noopener nofollow">described the lawsuit</a> as being “patently false and absurd.” It also stated that it has “a well-established track record of fighting for artist compensation.”</p><p>UMG took a five percent stake in Spotify in 2008, which rose to seven percent after the company acquired EMI, which held a two percent stake in the company, according to the publication.</p><p>In Spotify’s annual report at the end of 2022, it showed that due to stock dilution from further investments into Spotify, UMG’s share of Spotify stock had fallen to 3.3 percent as of the end of that year.</p><p>US District Court Judge Jennifer L. Rochon rejected the proposed class-action lawsuit on several grounds in her ruling, which was issued on Monday 20 November. It states that Titus and McLean had taken too long to file the suit; that UMG’s stake in Spotify doesn’t meet the definition of “net receipts” on which it would owe royalties; and that their contract with Polygram in effect gave UMG the right to negotiate royalty payments with Spotify as it saw fit.</p><p>You can view the full ruling at <a href="https://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/files/2023/11/UMG-.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener nofollow"><em>Music Business Worldwide</em></a>.</p><p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://musictech.com/news/industry/universal-music-group-wins-court-case-proposed-lawsuit-alleging-underpaid-artists/">Universal Music Group wins court case against proposed class action lawsuit alleging it underpaid its artists in royalties</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://musictech.com/">MusicTech</a>.</p>]]></description>
	<dc:creator>PublMe bot</dc:creator>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>