Global Music Rights (GMR) has settled its copyright infringement lawsuit against Music Choice, bringing an end to a legal dispute that centered on the alleged unauthorized performance of 95 songs from GMR’s catalog.
The case was formally dismissed with prejudice on Friday, August 7, 2026, after attorneys representing both companies filed a joint stipulation in the US District Court for the Central District of California.
The settlement brings the dispute to a close just two months after GMR filed its lawsuit against Music Choice, alleging that the music service continued publicly performing compositions from GMR’s catalog after its licensing agreement with the performing rights organization (PRO) expired.
GMR and Music Choice Reach Settlement
According to the four-page court filing, the two companies have entered into a settlement agreement that resolves the action in its entirety.
The case was dismissed “with prejudice,” meaning GMR cannot bring the same claims against Music Choice again. Both parties will also cover their own attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses.
However, the settlement leaves several important questions unanswered.
Neither company disclosed the financial terms of the agreement, and the filing does not reveal whether Music Choice has entered into a new licensing agreement with GMR or whether the settlement includes another arrangement governing the use of GMR’s catalog.
The agreement was signed by legal representatives for both parties on August 7.
The timing is also notable. Music Choice had received two extensions to respond to GMR’s original complaint. Its initial deadline was extended to July 27 and subsequently to August 10.
The settlement was filed just three days before the second deadline expired, and no formal response to GMR’s complaint appears to have been filed on the court docket.
Lawsuit Alleged Unauthorized Use of 95 Songs
GMR originally filed the lawsuit on June 8, accusing Music Choice of continuing to publicly perform songs from its catalog after the companies' licensing agreement expired on December 31, 2025.
The PRO sought the maximum statutory damages available for willful copyright infringement: $150,000 per composition.
With 95 compositions named in the lawsuit, the potential statutory damages exposure reached approximately $14.25 million, excluding attorneys’ fees, costs and the additional remedies sought by GMR.
The organization also requested a permanent injunction that would prevent Music Choice from continuing to use the disputed compositions without authorization.
Among the works identified in an exhibit to the complaint were major songs including Bruce Springsteen’s “Born to Run” and “Dancing in the Dark,” as well as Billie Eilish and Finneas’ “Bad Guy” and “What Was I Made For?”
GMR characterized the alleged infringement as deliberate and willful.
The organization claimed Music Choice had made a strategic decision not to pay licensing fees for the use of its catalog and continued performing the works despite the expiration of the licensing agreement.
GMR: Licensing Is Not Optional
When the lawsuit was announced in June, GMR General Counsel Emio Zizza emphasized that litigation was not the organization's preferred route but argued that copyright holders have a fundamental right to control the public performance of their works.
“We only turn to litigation as a last resort,” Zizza said at the time.
He also stressed that businesses that have entered into GMR licenses and paid the required fees should not be disadvantaged by services that use GMR-controlled works without a license.
The comments underline one of the central issues facing performing rights organizations: ensuring that businesses publicly performing copyrighted music obtain the appropriate licenses.
For GMR, the Music Choice case was another example of the organization using litigation as an enforcement mechanism when licensing negotiations fail.
The Fifth Federal Copyright Case Filed by GMR
The Music Choice lawsuit was not an isolated action.
It represents the fifth copyright infringement case GMR has filed in federal court since October 2022.
Interestingly, none of the organization's previous four cases went to trial.
Instead, each was ultimately resolved, with settlements involving licensing arrangements in at least several of those cases.
GMR has consistently sought the statutory maximum of $150,000 per work in these lawsuits when alleging willful infringement.
Under US copyright law, statutory damages can provide copyright owners with an alternative to proving the precise financial losses resulting from infringement. In cases involving willful infringement, the potential statutory damages can be significantly higher.
Earlier GMR Enforcement Actions
GMR launched a series of copyright enforcement actions in October 2022, filing lawsuits against Red Wolf Broadcasting, One Putt Broadcasting, and Southern Stone Communications and Black Crow Media Group.
The cases against Red Wolf Broadcasting and One Putt Broadcasting were settled on January 20, 2023. Both companies entered into long-term licensing agreements with GMR, although the financial terms were not disclosed.
At the time, Zizza said the agreements demonstrated GMR's commitment to protecting its songwriters and composers while ensuring that organizations publicly performing their works were properly licensed.
GMR followed those cases with another lawsuit in January 2024 against Vermont Broadcast Associates, alleging infringement involving 66 songs.
That dispute was settled three months later. The resolution included a long-term GMR license and an agreement addressing the alleged past infringements.
The settlement with Music Choice does not disclose whether a similar long-term licensing agreement has been reached.
Who Is Music Choice?
Based in Horsham, Pennsylvania, Music Choice has been a major player in the US music and television landscape for decades.
The company describes itself as having evolved from a cable television service into a multi-platform music experience designed for modern listening habits.
Its music channels are included in many cable television packages, while the company also offers a standalone subscription service for mobile devices and selected smart TVs.
Music Choice also operates Music Choice for Business, which provides music services to commercial establishments.
According to GMR's complaint, Music Choice is owned by a consortium that includes Sony Corporation of America, Charter Communications, Comcast Corporation, Cox Communications and Microsoft.
The company has previously faced legal scrutiny over music-related licensing and royalty issues.
Music Choice Has Faced Previous Royalty Litigation
In April 2019, SoundExchange sued Music Choice, alleging that an audit had uncovered underreporting of gross proceeds used to calculate statutory sound recording royalties.
The dispute continued for several years before a federal judge referred the matter to the Copyright Royalty Board (CRB) in December 2021, determining that the Board was better positioned to interpret its own royalty regulations.
Interestingly, one of the lawyers involved in that earlier dispute also represented Music Choice in the GMR case.
Music Choice was represented in the latest litigation by Kelly Perigoe of King & Spalding's Los Angeles office and Paul Fakler, a partner at the firm's New York office.
Fakler has extensive experience in music licensing and copyright royalty matters and has represented Music Choice in proceedings before the Copyright Royalty Board.
GMR, meanwhile, was represented by Daniel Petrocelli and David Marroso of O'Melveny & Myers.
Petrocelli has served as GMR's lead counsel for several years, including the organization's antitrust dispute with the Radio Music License Committee.
GMR's Growing Position in the Music Rights Market
Founded in 2013 by Irving Azoff and Randy Grimmett, Global Music Rights has established itself as a significant force in the US performing rights market.
The organization represents more than 175 songwriters and their publishers, according to the complaint, including some of the world's most successful songwriters.
GMR operates alongside the three other major US performing rights organizations: ASCAP, BMI and SESAC.
Its position in the market has grown considerably since its creation, and the organization has increasingly taken an assertive approach to protecting the rights of its affiliated writers and publishers.
That business has attracted significant financial interest as well.
In September 2024, Music Business Worldwide reported that GMR had reached an agreement with private equity firm Hellman & Friedman that valued the company at approximately $3.3 billion.
In January 2026, Jeff Toig was promoted from Chief Business Officer to CEO, while Grimmett moved into the role of Executive Chairman.
Copyright Enforcement Remains Active
The GMR-Music Choice settlement comes amid broader copyright enforcement activity across the US music industry.
The performing rights sector has become increasingly active in pursuing businesses and broadcasters accused of publicly performing copyrighted works without appropriate licenses.
ASCAP, for example, announced copyright infringement lawsuits against four US radio groups on June 9, one day after GMR filed its case against Music Choice.
The activity highlights the continuing importance of licensing in an industry where music can be delivered across an increasingly diverse range of platforms.
From traditional radio and television to streaming services, digital platforms, commercial establishments and connected devices, music companies must navigate a complex network of rights and royalty obligations.
What Happens Next?
For now, the immediate dispute between GMR and Music Choice is over.
The dismissal with prejudice means the claims brought in the lawsuit cannot simply be revived in another case between the same parties over the same alleged conduct.
However, the absence of financial details leaves the broader commercial outcome unclear.
The court filing does not confirm whether Music Choice has agreed to a new long-term GMR license, whether the companies reached a separate licensing arrangement, or whether the settlement primarily addresses the alleged historical infringement.
What is clear is that the case ended without going to trial, continuing a pattern seen across GMR's recent enforcement actions.
For songwriters and publishers represented by GMR, the settlement reinforces the organization's approach to copyright enforcement: licensing remains central to the public performance of their work, and services that use those works are expected to secure the necessary permissions.
For the wider music industry, the case serves as another reminder that as music consumption continues to evolve, copyright licensing remains one of the most important—and closely watched—parts of the modern music business.
