here<\/a>, has sparked immediate vocal opposition from independent advocates and creators, including the Songwriters Guild of America, Word Collections, Eminem\u2019s publisher Eight Mile Style, and copyright activist George Johnson. These parties declined to join the settlement\u2014with Johnson noting they were never even sent the proposal to review\u2014and are actively preparing to file formal objections in July 2026 to demand a higher, material composition rate of 15.65 cents per track rather than a modest inflation-adjusted growth rate.<\/p>\nBut curiously, another famed pugilist of the music industry \u2014 the legendarily hard-negotiating Irving Azoff and his Global Music Rights, LLC \u2014 were edged out of this latest proposal.<\/h4>\n
Indeed, according to the participant lists reviewed by DMN, GMR was singled out and \u2018withdrawn\u2019 from the process (as the Copyright Royalty Board phrases it). That is, despite a fairly large tent of participants, including the aforementioned heavyweights as well as DSPs such as Apple, Spotify, Pandora, Google, and Amazon.<\/p>\n
(Those mega-DSPS, which account for 98%+ of the US-based streaming music subscriber market share according to DMN Pro\u2019s multiyear research, are undoubtedly prepped for a full-blown streaming-rate discussion. But much, much, more on that later.)<\/p>\n
Back to the GMR situation, one negotiator offered a very simple explanation for the exclusion: GMR is a powerful performance royalty upstart, but they aren\u2019t involved in the recent mechanical licenses. That certainly makes sense, though let\u2019s see what happens once deliberations move into the streaming realm, where mechanicals are intricately tied to performance licenses in a delicate \u2018sushi roll\u2019 formula.<\/p>\n
Others, however, pointed to something more sinister.<\/h4>\n
According to another more loquacious informant, GMR attempted to participate in the process, but the NMPA and DSPs filed a motion to \u2018knock them out, and they were knocked out.\u2019<\/p>\n
That same source also relayed that GMR is feared for being \u2018very powerful and very good at negotiating increases in royalty rates,\u2019 while hat-tipping the oft-feared Azoff.\u00a0 Incidentally, Irving Azoff is currently a minority owner of GMR, but understood to be a primary figure in the operations of the company. Hence, the motivation for \u2018knocking them out.\u2019<\/p>\n
That was echoed by another source involved in the negotiations, who also pointed to a removal motion specifically targeting GMR.<\/h4>\n
On the issue of performance royalties, a separate source pointed to backroom promises made to GMR that performance royalties wouldn\u2019t be impacted during the upcoming proceedings. That appeared to be a first overture, which was followed by the \u2018filing of a motion to deny their petition\u2019 before GMR voluntarily opted to withdraw.<\/p>\n
Separately, we reached out to GMR\u2019s negotiating attorney and head of Business & Legal Affairs, Amanda Cooke, but have yet to receive a response.<\/p>\n
As for the just-dropped Phonorecords V proposal: there\u2019s certainly a broad group of companies and associations backing the plan to keep rates steady on downloads, physical formats, and ringtones.<\/h4>\n
But the sudden settlement proposal also carries historical baggage, as the CRB previously rejected a similar physical-rate freeze proposal in 2022, citing inherent conflicts of interest arising from the \u201cvertical integration\u201d between major record labels and major publishers.<\/p>\n
Beyond that, the quick nature of the recently reported deal is being met with industry skepticism, as critics note that the previously rushed Phonorecords IV agreements ultimately enabled the current streaming \u2018bundling\u2019 loopholes that severely slashed overall mechanical royalty payouts for songwriters.<\/p>\n
Bundling excesses also generated some unexpected ripples for the fast-surging IP investment community, a group that may prefer to slow-roll on their slow-cooking copyright tranches.<\/p>\n
More as this develops.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n