Just un-redacted by court/Foreclosure/Liability/Constitutionality of MMA

Below is a link to a number of just un-redacted by the court motions and filings in the Eight Mile Style (Eminem publisher catalog) litigation against Spotify for willful infringement and against HFA for contributory infringement and fraud.

Key issues for me (amongst others):

1. The musical works that were previously infringed on are foreclosed from the possibility of a compulsory license”. This means they cannot be licensed under The MLC blanket license and there are not subject to the statutory rates of rate court and can negotiate any royalty rate they want, like a sound recording.

The foreclosure issue is also in the MMA and also exists post the MMA.

2. Spotify does not have the benefit of the limitation of liability. In the MMA it states the digital services cannot be sued for statutory damages provided they follow the rules of the MMA. The argument by Plaintiff is that Spotify not only infringed on the copyrights willfully, but they also did not follow the rules of the MMA that would limit the statutory damages.

3. The MMA is not constitutional as it violates property laws by stripping the constitutional property rights from a rights holder as provided by the US constitution.

Note that the NMPA takes credit for the MMA. Note also that the NMPA owned 100% of HFA when it engaged in the allegedly contributory infringing and fraudulent activity.

You can view all the documents here: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/1h920fdz9azx3wcq9q4lh/h?rlkey=bgghrr4hyhedn2cxmjgscbvkg&dl=0