Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Counsel Concerns

By Scott Flaherty
February 28, 2015

When Weil, Gotshal & Manges litigators get tapped for an antitrust class action, it's usually assumed the firm is playing defense. But a bit of role-reversal paid off for Weil Gotshal in February, when a judge awarded the firm $16.1 million in class counsel fees and expenses, and signed off on a $58.5 million settlement payment it negotiated from the music performance-rights organization SESAC.

Federal District Judge Paul Engelmayer in Manhattan granted final approval to the settlement, which resolved claims that Weil Gotshal brought on behalf of a group of network television affiliates. Meredith Corp. v. SESAC LLC, 09 Civ. 9177. The deal capped more than five years of litigation over claims that SESAC violated federal antitrust law through its practice of issuing blanket, all-or-nothing copyright licenses to local stations. The $16.1 million that Judge Engelmayer awarded Weil Gotshal amounted to about 27% of the entire settlement amount.

Local TV stations that want to air syndicated shows, commercials and sporting events typically negotiate licenses with performing rights organizations like SESAC. Weil Gotshal's team, including Steven Reiss and R. Bruce Rich, alleged that SESAC made all-or-nothing licenses the only viable choice for local TV broadcasters, allowing it to jack up prices and force the stations to pay for music they'd never actually use.

SESAC was originally represented in the case by lawyers from Jenner & Block but later turned to the law firm Joseph Hage Aaronson. After losing a bid to dismiss the case in 2010, SESAC moved for summary judgment in 2013, arguing that the stations lacked sufficient evidence in support of their antitrust claims. District Judge Engelmayer, who inherited the case in September 2011, denied the summary judgment bid, though he agreed at that time to narrow the scope of the case.


Scott Flaherty writes for Litigation Daily, an ALM sibling of Entertainment Law & Finance.

When Weil, Gotshal & Manges litigators get tapped for an antitrust class action, it's usually assumed the firm is playing defense. But a bit of role-reversal paid off for Weil Gotshal in February, when a judge awarded the firm $16.1 million in class counsel fees and expenses, and signed off on a $58.5 million settlement payment it negotiated from the music performance-rights organization SESAC.

Federal District Judge Paul Engelmayer in Manhattan granted final approval to the settlement, which resolved claims that Weil Gotshal brought on behalf of a group of network television affiliates. Meredith Corp. v. SESAC LLC, 09 Civ. 9177. The deal capped more than five years of litigation over claims that SESAC violated federal antitrust law through its practice of issuing blanket, all-or-nothing copyright licenses to local stations. The $16.1 million that Judge Engelmayer awarded Weil Gotshal amounted to about 27% of the entire settlement amount.

Local TV stations that want to air syndicated shows, commercials and sporting events typically negotiate licenses with performing rights organizations like SESAC. Weil Gotshal's team, including Steven Reiss and R. Bruce Rich, alleged that SESAC made all-or-nothing licenses the only viable choice for local TV broadcasters, allowing it to jack up prices and force the stations to pay for music they'd never actually use.

SESAC was originally represented in the case by lawyers from Jenner & Block but later turned to the law firm Joseph Hage Aaronson. After losing a bid to dismiss the case in 2010, SESAC moved for summary judgment in 2013, arguing that the stations lacked sufficient evidence in support of their antitrust claims. District Judge Engelmayer, who inherited the case in September 2011, denied the summary judgment bid, though he agreed at that time to narrow the scope of the case.


Scott Flaherty writes for Litigation Daily, an ALM sibling of Entertainment Law & Finance.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

'Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P.': A Tutorial On Contract Liability for Real Estate Purchasers Image

In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.