Nearly 165,000 songwriters saw their class action lawsuit against the UK’s music licensing body collapse this week, after Blur drummer Dave Rowntree‘s ambitious legal challenge against PRS for Music was struck down by the Competition Appeal Tribunal.
The case, which commenced in early 2024, centered on the contentious issue of “black box” royalties—funds collected but not matched to specific rightsholders due to incomplete or inaccurate metadata.
Rowntree, backed by legal heavyweights from Monckton Chambers, Brick Court Chambers, and law firms Maitland Walker and Willkie Farr & Gallagher, claimed that PRS unfairly distributed these unmatched royalties, allegedly favoring publishers over individual songwriters.
According to the lawsuit, approximately 7.5% of works registered with PRS remain unidentified for royalty purposes, potentially representing hundreds of millions of pounds in misdirected payments.
The Competition Appeal Tribunal, chaired by Justin Turner KC, handed down its decisive 44-page judgment on August 27, 2025, refusing to certify the action for collective proceedings under section 47B of the Competition Act 1998.
In a unanimous decision, the tribunal determined that the claim “fails as a matter of law” and struck out the case entirely.
Central to the tribunal’s reasoning was the finding that songwriters are not legally “owed” black box royalties, consequently undermining the class’s standing under UK law.
The CAT also highlighted several complicating factors, including PRS’s not-for-profit status and the fact that publishers partially own the organization, effectively meaning members were suing themselves. The tribunal criticized the litigants for not exploring alternative dispute resolution options before pursuing the legal action.
Rowntree had argued that the current distribution policy unfairly allocates unmatched songwriter royalties on a pro-rata basis to publishers, breaching both UK and EU competition law.
His legal team insisted that royalties belonging to songwriters should remain with songwriters rather than defaulting to publishers.
Despite the drummer’s concerns about transparency and fair payment practices, the tribunal ultimately found no plausible methodology to assess damages and questioned the practical sense of the litigation, effectively ending this chapter in the ongoing debate about royalty distribution fairness in the music industry.
For musicians seeking stable income, this ruling highlights the importance of establishing diverse income streams beyond traditional royalty models to protect their financial interests.
PRS for Music functions similarly to US-based PROs like ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC, which collect and distribute royalties for public performances of copyrighted music on behalf of creators.
The total financial stakes were substantial, with the class action potentially involving £200 million in disputed black box royalties that could have significantly impacted PRS’s financial health as a not-for-profit organization.
