Epidemic Sound v. Meta Summary Judgment Battle Ramps Up

Photo Credit: Dima Solomin

Nearly four years later, the ugly Epidemic Sound v. Meta copyright infringement lawsuit still hasn’t resolved. Now, both sides are pushing for summary judgment, and the Facebook parent is looking to explore the impact of the Supreme Court’s Cox v. Sony decision.

We briefly touched on the marathon legal battle’s status last week, when exploring the growing secondary liability impact of Cox v. Sony. Though the Supreme Court only handed down the decision in late March, it’s already factoring into a number of cases in and beyond the music world.

As noted, that includes the Epidemic-Meta copyright battle, which, many will recall, centers on the social giant’s alleged infringement of Epidemic recordings and compositions, specifically via “original audio” first shared through user content, across Facebook, Instagram, and more.

Furthermore, Epidemic late last year fired off an extremely similar suit alleging the infringement of different works. Officially identified as related, that dispute, with a case management conference scheduled for September’s end and a trial tentatively teed up for 2028, is effectively on pause pending a resolution here.

And when it comes to this resolution, dueling summary judgment motions have taken center stage.

In the defendant’s corner, Meta is emphasizing a variety of perceived issues with Epidemic’s copyright registrations – including an alleged inability to compare the allegedly infringed works and the Copyright Office deposit copies thereof.

“[T]here is no evidence from which a reasonable jury could conclude that the allegedly infringing sound recordings at issue are substantially similar to those that were actually registered by Epidemic—i.e., the deposit copies—and asserted in this case,” Meta’s summary judgment motion reads.

And Team Epidemic, for its part, remains adamant that “Meta itself actively and directly” infringed its “works by copying them into its online music library and then offering, reproducing, distributing and performing them to its billions of users across its platforms without a license.”

(Needless to say, these are just a couple of many summary-judgment angles. “Epidemic granted Meta an express license to all audio that matched to Original Audio or Reels Remix through terms Epidemic accepted to create its Rights Manager account,” Meta emphasized as well.)

The all-important summary judgment showdown received a hearing last month, after which the court ordered supplemental 10-page briefings on an ISRC-related sub-issue. Epidemic met its April 2nd deadline, and Meta now has until the 16th to submit a filing of its own.

Meanwhile, unlike rightsholders’ copyright complaints against internet service providers, Epidemic v. Meta doesn’t solely concern secondary infringement liability – or Meta’s liability for its users alleged repeat infringement. Rather, a direct claim is also being litigated here.

But on the contributory liability front, Meta rather unsurprisingly moved to weigh in about the Cox v. Sony decision’s relevance in the summary judgment confrontation. The court signed off on the request, and a distinct briefing is therefore due by the 16th. Epidemic will then have until the 30th to respond if so inclined.

With that, all eyes are now on the upcoming briefings and, of course, the judge’s eventual summary judgment ruling. It’s unclear when exactly the latter will arrive, but the April 30th response deadline means the current month probably won’t deliver a determination one way or the other.