Music Licensing, Inc. (OTC: SONG) and Pro Music Rights, Inc. Call for Major Reform in U.S. Music Licensing Industry in Formal Response to Copyright Office Inquiry

Rhea-AI Summary

Music Licensing Inc (OTC: SONG) and its subsidiary Pro Music Rights (PMR) have submitted a response to the U.S. Copyright Office challenging traditional Performing Rights Organizations (PROs). The filing criticizes BMI and ASCAP for:

• Opaque revenue distributions
• Excessive private equity payouts (up to 20% of royalties)
• Backdoor reciprocal agreements (30% of royalties)
• Anti-competitive behavior through CISAC network

PMR proposes an alternative licensing model featuring a $50.00 monthly base fee per location and usage-based fee capped at $0.01. The company advocates for transparency, equal access, and real-time royalty tracking, urging reforms to mandate financial transparency and prohibit global blacklisting practices.

Positive

• Innovative transparent licensing model with fixed $50 monthly fee structure
• Real-time royalty tracking system implementation
• Previous acquisition talks with BMI board validate business model

Negative

• Faces established competition from powerful incumbent PROs
• Regulatory challenges and resistance from existing industry players
• Potential retaliation through CISAC network blacklisting

Naples, FL, April 14, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Music Licensing, Inc. (OTC: SONG) and its wholly owned subsidiary Pro Music Rights, Inc. (PMR) have submitted a detailed and forceful response to the U.S. Copyright Office’s Notice of Inquiry (Docket No. 2025–1), shining a spotlight on longstanding anti-competitive behavior by legacy Performing Rights Organizations (PROs) such as BMI and ASCAP, while offering a bold and transparent alternative through PMR’s equitable licensing model.

Challenging the Status Quo: PMR’s submission criticizes legacy PROs for opaque revenue distributions, excessive payouts to private equity owners, and international licensing strong-arming via the global collective CISAC network. According to the filing, BMI—once a nonprofit—has covertly transformed into a for-profit entity, now diverting up to 20% of its royalties to private equity firms and an additional 30% through backdoor reciprocal agreements. These structures disproportionately benefit elite artists at the expense of the creative majority.

"One License Fits All": A Transparent, Scalable Model Pro Music Rights offers a radically simplified licensing model featuring a flat $50.00 per month base fee per location and a usage-based fee capped at $0.01—only charged based on the fractional share of the musical composition PMR represents. This approach ensures small businesses and multinational corporations alike receive the same fair and scalable licensing access.

"PMR believes in equality, transparency, and technological innovation," said Jake P. Noch, Founder & CEO of Music Licensing, Inc. and Pro Music Rights. "Every user should pay only for what they use, and every creator should be paid for what’s actually performed—without hidden fees, preferential payouts, or monopolistic barriers."

Key Highlights from the Filing:

• Transparent Accounting: No hidden carve-outs, no private equity kickbacks, and real-time royalty tracking for rights holders.
• Global Monopoly Concerns: BMI and ASCAP are accused of manipulating CISAC to blacklist competing PROs and CMOs that refuse to adopt their restrictive terms.
• Regulatory Failures: The filing argues that existing antitrust consent decrees are outdated and calls for DOJ and FTC action to restore market fairness.
• Historical Irony: Despite publicly disparaging PMR, BMI’s board previously engaged in confidential acquisition talks with Music Licensing, Inc., acknowledging PMR’s innovative value proposition.

A Call for Legislative and Regulatory Reform Music Licensing, Inc. and PMR are urging the Copyright Office to enact reforms that mandate financial transparency for all PROs, prohibit global blacklisting practices, and encourage equitable, standardized licensing frameworks. PMR’s tech-forward, fair-access model demonstrates what the future of music rights management can look like when creators and users are both placed first.

About Music Licensing, Inc. (OTC:SONG)  (ProMusicRights.com)

Music Licensing, Inc. (OTC: SONG), also known as Pro Music Rights, is a diversified holding company and the fifth public performance rights organization (PRO) established in the United States. It is recognized under the federal registry of the United States government. The company licenses music to some of the most prominent platforms and businesses, including TikTok, iHeartMedia, Triller, Napster, 7Digital, Vevo, and many others.

Pro Music Rights holds an estimated 7.4% market share in the United States, representing a catalog of more than 2.5 million works by notable artists such as A$AP Rocky, Wiz Khalifa, Pharrell, Young Jeezy, Juelz Santana, Lil Yachty, MoneyBagg Yo, Larry June, Trae Pound, Sauce Walka, Trae Tha Truth, Sosamann, Soulja Boy, Lex Luger, Trauma Tone, Lud Foe, SlowBucks, Gunplay, OG Maco, Rich The Kid, Fat Trel, Young Scooter, Nipsey Hussle, Famous Dex, Boosie Badazz, Shy Glizzy, 2 Chainz, Migos, Gucci Mane, Young Dolph, Trinidad James, Chingy, Lil Gnar, 3OhBlack, Curren$y, Fall Out Boy, Money Man, Dej Loaf, Lil Uzi Vert, and many others, including works generated by artificial intelligence (AI).

Additionally, Music Licensing, Inc. (OTC: SONG) holds royalty interests in Listerine “Mouthwash” Antiseptic and a vast portfolio of musical works by globally renowned artists, including The Weeknd, Justin Bieber, Kanye West, Elton John, Mike Posner, blackbear, Lil Nas X, Lil Yachty, DaBaby, Stunna 4 Vegas, Miley Cyrus, Lil Wayne, XXXTentacion, BlueFace, The Game, Jeremih, Ty Dolla $ign, Eric Bellinger, Ne-Yo, MoneyBagg Yo, Halsey, Desiigner, DaniLeigh, Rihanna, and many others.

Forward-Looking Statements:

This press release contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, which are intended to be covered by the safe harbors created thereby. Investors are cautioned that, all forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties, including without limitation, the ability of Music Licensing, Inc. & Pro Music Rights, Inc. to accomplish its stated plan of business. Music Licensing, Inc. & Pro Music Rights, Inc. believes that the assumptions underlying the forward-looking statements contained herein are reasonable, any of the assumptions could be inaccurate, and therefore, there can be no assurance that the forward-looking statements included in this press release will prove to be accurate. In light of the significant uncertainties inherent in the forward-looking statements included herein, the inclusion of such information should not be regarded as a representation by Pro Music Rights, Inc., Music Licensing, Inc., or any other person.

Non-Legal Advice Disclosure:

This press release does not constitute legal advice, and readers are advised to seek legal counsel for any legal matters or questions related to the content herein.

Non-Investment Advice Disclosure:

This communication is intended solely for informational purposes and does not in any way imply or constitute a recommendation or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any securities, commodities, bonds, options, derivatives, or any other investment products. Any decisions related to investments should be made after thorough research and consultation with a qualified financial advisor or professional. We assume no liability for any actions taken or not taken based on the information provided in this communication

Contact: investors@ProMusicRights.com

SOURCE: Music Licensing, Inc.

FAQ

What licensing model is SONG proposing to reform the music industry?

SONG proposes a $50.00 monthly base fee per location with a usage-based fee capped at $0.01, charged only for the fractional share of musical compositions PMR represents.

How much of BMI's royalties are diverted to private equity firms according to SONG's filing?

According to the filing, BMI diverts up to 20% of royalties to private equity firms and an additional 30% through backdoor reciprocal agreements.

What key reforms is SONG requesting from the Copyright Office?

SONG is requesting mandatory financial transparency for all PROs, prohibition of global blacklisting practices, and implementation of equitable, standardized licensing frameworks.

What specific issues did SONG identify with traditional PROs like BMI and ASCAP?

SONG identified issues including opaque revenue distributions, excessive private equity payouts, international licensing strong-arming, and monopolistic barriers through the CISAC network.