Major Legal Battle Between Eminem’s Publisher & Spotify Reaches Verdict

Spotify has won its legal battle with Eminem’s publisher after being accused of streaming the rapper’s music without permission.  

Eight Mile Style sued the streaming platform in 2019 for approximately £30 million in damages, per BBC. In their suit, the publisher claimed Eminem was never paid for songs that had been “streamed on Spotify billions of times.”

Although the judge found that Spotify did not have the proper license, a Tennessee judge ruled that Spotify was not liable for any lost royalties. 

Additionally, the court also concluded that if Spotify were found guilty, Kobalt Music Group would pay the penalty. Kobalt is a company that administers song rights and collects royalties, including on behalf of Eminem’s publisher. 

Eminem was not a party to the lawsuit and was surprised to learn of the filing. His music was available to stream on the platform throughout the five-year legal dispute. The Detroit legend is one of the most streamed artists on the platform, sitting at No. 12, with 76 million monthly listeners. 

Juge Brands Situation “Inexplicable”

In the suit, Eight Mile Style alleged Spotify “acted deceptively” pretending to have licenses for 243 Eminem songs. 

Spotify blamed Kobalt Music Publishing, alleging the company misled it into falsely believing it controlled the administration of Eight Mile’s catalog. Eight Mile argued against the “baseless” allegations in court for years. 

In her opinion, dated August 15, Judge Aleta A. Trauger ruled Spotify should not be liable. She also noted that Kobalt was not authorized to license Eminem’s songs in the US and Canada. The rights were previously transferred to an affiliate of Eight Mile, Bridgeport Music, without formally notifying third parties.  

Branding the situation “inexplicable”, Judge Trauger said that Eight Mile was not the “hapless victim” it claimed to be. 

“Eight Mile Style had every opportunity to set things right and simply chose not to do so for no apparent reason, other than that being the victim of infringement pays better than being an ordinary licensor,” she wrote. 

Additionally, Spotify’s agreement with Kobalt did not clarify which songs could be streamed, and Judge Trauger noted it was “surprisingly plausible that Spotify might be genuinely confused.”