This April 2026 edition covers what changed in March.
The month combined firm numbers with open questions. Some rates became usable for planning; a game-platform licence became the subject of a claim; and policy documents in the US and UK put registration and AI rights back into the contract conversation.
What changed
A lawsuit over Steam could change what game platforms must pay for music
PRS for Music said on March 9 that it had begun proceedings against Valve over use of PRS members’ works on Steam without permission, including music in game soundtracks offered through the platform (PRS for Music). The release describes PRS’s claim, not a court ruling, and gives no tariff, case number, or outcome.
What it means if you are trying to get placed. Separate the game licence from the soundtrack release. When a developer or publisher asks to use your music in a game, ask whether the grant also covers a soundtrack sold or streamed as a distinct product, promotional trailers, downloadable content, and storefront previews. Those are different uses even when they share the same recording. Price and document them instead of allowing “in connection with the game” to swallow every later format. Keep your performing right unless you have deliberately decided to transfer it, and register game cues under consistent titles with accurate durations and game information so a licensed platform use has something to match. If you work in the UK, make sure your PRS-side arrangements are current; if your administration is US-only, do not assume it handles the UK claim. Most importantly, do not treat the lawsuit as proof that Steam owes a particular rate or that back payments are coming. The useful change is the question it puts on every game deal: who has responsibility for licensing and reporting the music when the soundtrack leaves the game and becomes a separate storefront product?
Internet-radio royalty rates are now mapped through 2030
Final rules published March 10 set commercial-broadcaster webcasting rates at $0.0028 per performance for 2026, stepping to $0.0032 by 2030, and identify SoundExchange as the designated collective (Federal Register). A separate March 30 rule set 2026 new-subscription-service rates at $0.0241 per subscriber per month for stand-alone contracts and $0.0401 for bundled contracts (Federal Register).
What it means if you are trying to get placed. Learn which unit applies before you model anything. For the commercial-broadcaster category, a performance is one play delivered to one listener; it is not a stream total multiplied by a consumer subscription price. The published rate is master-side statutory income, not the songwriter performance royalty and not the sync fee. Make sure the recording is registered with SoundExchange under the correct ISRC, with both rights-owner and featured-performer information where applicable, because the rule can set a rate but cannot repair missing identity data. If an agreement gives an intermediary a share of statutory income, use the five-year schedule to calculate what that share means instead of treating it as immaterial. For new subscription services, note the CPI mechanism and use “then-current statutory rate” language rather than hard-coding the 2026 cents figure into a multi-year contract. Minimum fees paid by services also do not guarantee meaningful money to any one recording. Negotiate the upfront sync fee on the value of the use, then treat downstream statutory income as a separate, report-dependent line. The rates make planning more precise; they do not turn exposure into a promise.
SoundExchange passed $13 billion, even as annual payouts fell 5.9%
On March 18, SoundExchange reported more than $13 billion distributed since 2003, with unaudited 2025 distributions of $991.5 million, down 5.9% from 2024 (SoundExchange). It attributed the decline to settlement timing, lower reported SiriusXM revenue, and alleged underpayment that remains in litigation.
What it means if you are trying to get placed. Do not turn an aggregate milestone into an expectation for your catalogue. The useful number is the reported year-over-year decline: a statutory royalty line can move because of settlements, reporting by a major licensee, and litigation, none of which tracks the quality of your music or the number of pitches you sent. If you are budgeting around a placement, value the negotiated sync fee on its own and treat future non-interactive master royalties as variable. Then make sure you are eligible for whatever does arrive. Confirm rights-owner and performer registrations, ISRCs, legal names, tax information, and international elections. Compare each statement with your own log of placements and broadcasts rather than looking only at the total deposit. A missing line may be a data problem; a lower total may be a market or timing problem; those require different follow-up. The release is SoundExchange’s account and its 2025 total was unaudited, so it should not be used to forecast an individual payout. What it does establish is that the system is large, material, and uneven. Clean data gives you access to it, not immunity from its volatility.
The UK backed away from making artists opt out of AI training
The UK government’s March report on copyright and AI recorded 11,520 consultation responses, with 81% of online respondents preferring licensing in all cases and more than 90% supporting disclosure of training sources (UK government report). The report did not enact a new exception, tariff, or disclosure duty.
What it means if you are trying to get placed. Treat the report as direction, not law. It shows strong respondent support for licensing and transparency, but the immediate protection for an independent writer still sits in contracts and records. Review every grant for AI training, model retention, synthetic output, and sublicensing. Ask whether participation is opt-in, whether consent can be withdrawn, whether the grant is limited to named tracks, and how credit and payment are reported. At the same time, prepare to provide the provenance data a transparency system would need: writer names, identifiers, ownership shares, publisher and administrator details, recording owners, ISRCs, and a per-track account of any generative tools used. That work also makes ordinary sync clearance easier. The report notes a UK small-claims route for cases valued at £10,000 or less, which is useful context if an unauthorized use occurs there, but it is not a substitute for timely evidence or legal advice. For a US writer, the UK report does not rewrite a US agreement. It tells you that an important production market is moving toward documented permission, and that “we assumed training was allowed” is becoming a weaker position.
Copyright registration could cost more soon. Clear your backlog now
On March 19, the Copyright Office announced a proposed fee adjustment, with comments due May 4, and said it was seeking cost recovery closer to its historical level of roughly 60% (Copyright Office NewsNet). It also previewed separate work on tiered or subscription fee structures tied to the Enterprise Copyright System, but the fetched notice did not state specific proposed fees.
What it means if you are trying to get placed. A proposed increase is a reason to clear a registration backlog, not a reason to guess at numbers that were not in the source. Prioritize songs and recordings already being pitched, then placed material, then the rest of the catalogue. Where group registration is available and your material meets every condition, use it to control per-item cost; do not force unlike works into a group that does not qualify. Register the composition and sound recording separately when you own both, and keep the receipts and application data with your clearance file. High-volume cue writers should watch the alternative-fee work closely because a tier or subscription could materially change the economics of registering many short works, but it is only an inquiry at this stage. Comments on the proposed schedule are due May 4 at 11:59 p.m. Eastern, so this is also a short, real window for independent creators to explain how fees affect catalogues with many short cues. Registration cost belongs in an annual operating budget. Treating it as an emergency expense after an infringement or clearance question is both slower and more expensive.
The Ivors revealed which publishers are landing top film and TV work
The Ivors Academy announced its 2026 nominations in March, including five Best Original Film Score nominees and a television-soundtrack slate, and printed the UK publisher or publishers beside each work (The Ivors Academy). The categories describe recognized film and television work as commissioned music, and the published examples include production-related entities administered by larger publishers.
What it means if you are trying to get placed. Read the publisher line as a rights map. An “on behalf of” credit can show a production entity holding publishing while an established publisher handles administration. If you are offered a score commission, ask who will own the publishing, who will administer it, which rights you retain, whether there is any reversion, and who is responsible for registrations and cue sheets. Do not wait until delivery to discover that the production expected a publishing share. The nominations also distinguish commissioned scoring from catalogue licensing. If your goal is this kind of recognition, you need a commissioning route and the ability to deliver to picture; an existing song placement can be valuable without fitting the category. For UK-facing work, confirm a non-US collection path because a US-only administrator does not collect the world. Finally, use awards calendars operationally. Entry windows close well before the ceremony, and self-entry may be possible when eligibility is met. Keep credits, publisher strings, dates, and episode or film identifiers ready so an entry does not become a last-minute reconstruction.
March’s practical lesson is to separate the pipes. A game soundtrack, a webcasting performance, a streaming mechanical, a copyright registration, and a commissioned score can all touch the same piece of music while following different contracts and systems. Label each one correctly before deciding what it is worth, and keep the supporting registration or agreement beside each line in your catalogue ledger.