Apple Music, Beats under legal attack over third-party licensing practices
A musician apparently disgruntled at how Beats Music and Apple Music has handled its streaming obligations is looking to fire up a class action suit, and is accusing Apple of intentionally deleting records and under-counting downloads and streams in order to pay artists less -- or not at all.

Musician Bryan Eich owns the publishing rights to two albums, spanning 18 tracks. According to Eich's court filing, Apple never served a notice of intent to obtain compulsory licenses within one month of making available the two album.
Eich claims that Apple "engaged in a systematic process of infringement" by not sending the notice of intent, deliberately deleting stream information, altering the streaming reports, and failing to properly report to him, and presumably others, to "conceal the infringements."
The issue appears to be a disconnect of some sort between third-party aggregators and the musicians. Eich is seeking class members who own the publishing rights to recordings, and submitted the recordings to Beats and now Apple through the aggregators.
In this case, music clearing house CD Baby appears to be where the breakdown somehow occurred. The suit filing claims that when Beats Music went live in 2012, CD Baby submitted most of its catalog, including Eich's recordings, for review. Eich claims that he was unaware at the time that his recordings were submitted for review.
If there was any error with how Beats Music handled the notice of intent, it is now an error carried forward to Apple Music. According to the filing, Beats did not serve notices of intent on independent artists "as a matter of corporate policy" -- and Apple was aware of that. Eich notes an active lawsuit on Aug. 1, 2014 when the purchase was made over the same matter.
Eich claims that Apple's counsel was informed of the possibly ongoing issue on August 11, with an undated second attempt at contact. Apple's non-response is being interpreted by Eich as "intentional conduct" subjecting Apple to "enhanced statutory damages."
The filing also claims that the streaming royalties for recordings owned by Eich and some of the named plaintiffs for the suit are "$0.000000." As such, Eich believes that Apple "has failed to include, and/or changed the revenue owed for streams."
The lawsuit has certificate of registration for the pairs of albums, but no copies of reports from Apple. It is unclear from the court filing how many times that Eich's tracks were streamed from Beats Music or Apple Music, or if they were streamed at all.
The suit was electronically filed on Sunday. A search on Apple Music on Sunday night did not reveal the artist's albums.

Musician Bryan Eich owns the publishing rights to two albums, spanning 18 tracks. According to Eich's court filing, Apple never served a notice of intent to obtain compulsory licenses within one month of making available the two album.
Eich claims that Apple "engaged in a systematic process of infringement" by not sending the notice of intent, deliberately deleting stream information, altering the streaming reports, and failing to properly report to him, and presumably others, to "conceal the infringements."
The issue appears to be a disconnect of some sort between third-party aggregators and the musicians. Eich is seeking class members who own the publishing rights to recordings, and submitted the recordings to Beats and now Apple through the aggregators.
In this case, music clearing house CD Baby appears to be where the breakdown somehow occurred. The suit filing claims that when Beats Music went live in 2012, CD Baby submitted most of its catalog, including Eich's recordings, for review. Eich claims that he was unaware at the time that his recordings were submitted for review.
If there was any error with how Beats Music handled the notice of intent, it is now an error carried forward to Apple Music. According to the filing, Beats did not serve notices of intent on independent artists "as a matter of corporate policy" -- and Apple was aware of that. Eich notes an active lawsuit on Aug. 1, 2014 when the purchase was made over the same matter.
Eich claims that Apple's counsel was informed of the possibly ongoing issue on August 11, with an undated second attempt at contact. Apple's non-response is being interpreted by Eich as "intentional conduct" subjecting Apple to "enhanced statutory damages."
The filing also claims that the streaming royalties for recordings owned by Eich and some of the named plaintiffs for the suit are "$0.000000." As such, Eich believes that Apple "has failed to include, and/or changed the revenue owed for streams."
The lawsuit has certificate of registration for the pairs of albums, but no copies of reports from Apple. It is unclear from the court filing how many times that Eich's tracks were streamed from Beats Music or Apple Music, or if they were streamed at all.
The suit was electronically filed on Sunday. A search on Apple Music on Sunday night did not reveal the artist's albums.
Eich vs Apple by Mike Wuerthele on Scribd
Comments
So are all artists now going to sue Apple because of issues between them and the companies who represent them?
I am am sure he greatly appreciates your career advice.
/s
CD Baby does a good job normally. You get streaming stats for Apple Music and iTunes downloads a few days after they occur. You get setup on iTunes connect to control your artist profile, etc. I doubt whatever problem he has with his albums was intentional by any of the parties. CD Baby lest you opt-in to which partners you provide your music to. So not sure how it would have gone to Apple without him knowing about.
This probably goes back to having 500+ Vinyl Albums, some quite rare and valuable.
If I can't buy the CD/Vinyl or download it then I don't listen to it.
Most of my listening on the move is done via my iPod in Airplane mode.
Then his name will actually register on the search engines?
The second part, about payments, seems like a fishing expedition, to try to force Apple to supply massive amounts of data. Again, what is CD Baby's role? What would the royalties be from just a few streams a month? Could it be less than $0.0000001 or whatever? Especially after CD Baby and Apple take their cut?
Does not seem like a terribly well-constructed lawsuit, but IANAL.
I will assume for now your information is accurate, when I read this guys complain, my mind went exactly here. No one is listening thus no reason to pay. But he obviously found a lawyer who is willing to waste his time and money in hope for a big pay out.
The guy must be hearing his music in dreams and thinks others are also listening.