BMI's Music Licensing Battle

As discussed extensively within this blog, the music industry is currently evolving to accommodate a fundamental transition occurring within music promotion and distribution. Most modern distribution and promotional methods are now digitally formatted, instead of the traditional, physical CD that was advertised and distributed by retail stores alone. As a result of this digital revolution within the music and recording industry, labels, artists, songwriters, publishers and performing rights organizations alike have had to adjust and adapt to the impending changes. 

Some of the changes have indeed been positive, yet others have caused the industry to significantly reformat its established methods of promotion, distribution, revenue generation and, most significantly, licensing. This is not meant to suggest that these industrial entities will not recover from the aforementioned modifications, however, it is meant to suggest that evident malleability and reformation must be demonstrated in order to accommodate digital restructuring. Each individual discipline within the music industry framework must strive to make themselves digitally relevant and compliant with industry trends, even if it means sacrificing their traditional protocol. 

On Monday, Broadcast Music, Inc. (BMI) disseminated a press release informing music industry professionals of EMI and Sony/ATV music publishing group's rights withdrawal from BMI's comprehensive musical catalog. While the withdrawal only includes selected, exclusively owned compositions that were strictly intended for digital use, the rights withdrawal is still a significant statement for music publishers and industry professionals alike. It poses particular concern to songwriters, physical music venues and webcasters who depend on performing rights organizations, such as BMI and ASCAP, to provide blanket licensing agreements and ensure that royalties are fairly afforded to all involved parties. 

The recent BMI rights withdrawal executed by EMI and Sony/ATV music publishers means that they will be in exclusive control of all affected licensing agreements and royalty rates. Which could, but not necessarily, indicate that songwriters will face diminished royalty compensation, as well as exclusive music licensing control over the concerned composition shares. All of these projected repercussions are, of course, not BMI's intention and completely out of their authoritative control. 

In fact, BMI would, obviously, prefer that these major publishing moguls leave all of their exclusive music rights in the capable hands of their performing rights organization. However, that is clearly not a reality considering the lucrative opportunities that the digital revolution has, unintentionally, afforded selective disciplines within the music and recording industry. All things aside, I believe that BMI quickly and effectively addressed a controversial issue within the music industry that could have easily affected their professional reputation. 

BMI turned an extremely sensitive issue into a positive reinforcement by demonstrating how their organization was committed to the music industry's digital solution. That, in my opinion, is the most definitive example I can give of how public relations methods are helping the music industry to adapt to the imminent digital revolution. To learn more about BMI's recent rights withdrawal and their impending music industry solution, you can visit their website.