# Spotify Opposes MLC Appeal in Battle Over… | Dynamoi News

Canonical URL: https://dynamoi.com/news/2026-01-15-spotify-opposes-mlc-appeal-in-battle-over-150m-royalties.html

Source: Dynamoi static public site

Description: The streamer calls the move "prejudicial" as publishers fight to close a loophole siphoning millions from songwriter paychecks.

Dynamoi News Spotify Opposes MLC Appeal in Battle Over $150M Royalties The streamer calls the move "prejudicial" as publishers fight to close a loophole siphoning millions from songwriter paychecks. Published January 14, 2026 Editor Trevor Loucks Editorial policy → The Mechanical Licensing Collective (MLC) and Spotify are locked in a high-stakes procedural staring contest, and the pot is approximately $150 million annually. As of January 15, 2026, the streaming giant has formally opposed the MLC’s request for an "interlocutory appeal"—a legal maneuver attempting to fast-track a review of the controversial "bundling" ruling handed down earlier this month. While the legal filings are dense with civil procedure statutes, the reality for the industry is simple: Spotify wants the current lower royalty rates to stand while the case drags on; the MLC argues the industry cannot afford to wait. The procedural blockage Spotify’s latest filing is aggressive. The company argues that the MLC’s request to pause the main case for an immediate appellate review is legally baseless. Their primary weapon is the calendar: Spotify points out that the MLC waited nearly 10 months to request this expedited review. In Spotify’s view, this delay proves there is no true urgency. They characterize the MLC’s strategy as "cycling through amended claims," arguing that allowing an appeal now would be "prejudicial" to the judicial process. Key insight: An interlocutory appeal is a "Hail Mary" in civil litigation. It requires the court to agree that a specific legal question is so critical that the rest of the case cannot proceed without answering it first. The $150M loophole At the heart of this friction is the Phonorecords IV agreement. The regulations allow Digital Service Providers (DSPs) to pay lower mechanical royalty rates if a subscription is a "bundle" containing non-music services of more than "token value." In March 2024, Spotify reclassified its Premium tier as a bundle by adding 15 hours of audiobook access. The outcome: Spotify effectively reduced its royalty payout obligations to songwriters and publishers. The scale: Estimates place the impact at $150 million per year in lost mechanical royalties. The defense: Judge Analisa Torres ruled in January 2025 that the audiobooks offered "more than token value," validating Spotify’s move under the current contract language. Defining "token value" The MLC’s counter-argument—and the reason they want an immediate appeal—is that this interpretation creates a massive loophole. If a DSP can simply tack on a service (even one with market value like audiobooks) to slash music royalties, the protective floor of Phonorecords IV collapses. Spotify maintains that audiobooks are a premium product—standalone services like Audible cost significantly more than the allocated value in the bundle—making the discount legitimate. The MLC argues this feature is incidental for most music subscribers, functioning merely as a mechanism to reduce overhead. The contagion risk For strategists at labels and agencies, the immediate fear is not just Spotify’s lower payments, but the precedent this sets for the wider market. If the "bundling" defense survives the appellate process, the "music-only" subscription may become an endangered species. Competitors like Amazon Music, Apple Music, and YouTube Music possess vast ecosystems of non-music products (shipping, video, storage, gaming). If Spotify cements this legal victory, those competitors will face shareholder pressure to bundle their own services aggressively to achieve similar royalty reductions. What rights holders should do While the lawyers argue over Section 1292(b) certifications, music businesses need to adjust to the reality of volatility. Audit aggressively: Managers must review royalty statements from Q2 2024 onward to quantify the "bundling" gap. Budget conservatively: Do not expect a retroactive payout or a rate reversal in 2026. The appellate process, even if granted, is slow. Watch the NMPA: The National Music Publishers’ Association will likely escalate political pressure, potentially influencing the upcoming Phonorecords V negotiations. This battle proves that in the streaming economy, the definition of a "subscription" is as fluid—and valuable—as the content itself. Related stories Spotify Rolls Out $10.99 Basic Tier Amid $150M Royalties Dispute May 29, 2026 Major Publishers Bypass MLC After Spotify Defends $230M Bundle Cut May 9, 2026 Wixen Sues Meta for $50M Over Unlicensed Music and AI Training January 29, 2026 Apple Bets $2B on "Silent" Audio Controls With Q.ai Acquisition February 3, 2026 Latest News May 30, 2026 Warner Music Settles $24M Copyright Suit With Crumbl May 29, 2026 UMG Board Unanimously Rejects Bill Ackman’s $64B Takeover Bid May 29, 2026 Spotify Rolls Out $10.99 Basic Tier Amid $150M Royalties Dispute May 28, 2026 Sony Weaponizes 2024 AI Opt-Out in 61,000-Track Suno Lawsuit May 27, 2026 33 States Demand Ticketmaster Divestiture After Antitrust Verdict May 26, 2026 Spotify Shares Surge 16% on UMG Deal for Paid AI Remix Tools See pricing →