Broadcast Music, Inc. v. Sirius XM Radio LLC
- Katherine Failla
- 1:24-cv-06896
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Broadcast Music, Inc. v. Sirius XM Radio LLC, Judge Failla granted Sirius XM’s request to seal a response containing confidential commercial information.
Sirius XM Radio LLC, Broadcast Music, Inc., the court, the parties, and members of the public seeking access to docket entry 29.
What happened
Broadcast Music, Inc. asked for a determination of reasonable fees, and Sirius XM Radio LLC asked to file its response with limited redactions. Sirius XM said the response contained confidential contract terms and negotiation details.
Sirius XM argued that the information included payment structures, rates, and other commercial terms whose disclosure could harm its competitive position and future negotiations. The court’s order sealed the filing rather than making those details publicly available.
Judge Katherine Polk Failla granted the application. She directed the Clerk to keep docket entry 29 under seal, available only to the court and the parties, and to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 28.
The detailed version
- Broadcast Music, Inc. v. Sirius XM Radio LLC · No. 1:24-cv-06896
- Katherine Failla
- Dec. 16, 2024
Background
Broadcast Music, Inc. (BMI) filed a petition seeking a determination of reasonable fees. Sirius XM Radio LLC submitted a response and asked for permission to file it in redacted form. Sirius XM sought to redact limited portions describing specific license-agreement terms, payment structures, rates, and confidential negotiations.
Request to Seal
Sirius XM argued that the information was competitively sensitive and subject to confidentiality provisions. It asserted that disclosure could harm its competitive standing and business relationships and could allow existing or prospective counterparties to use the information in future negotiations. Sirius XM asked the court to grant the letter motion in full. It also provided an unredacted version of the response to BMI’s outside counsel under an agreement limiting access to outside counsel.
Court’s Action
The court granted the application. The Clerk of Court was directed to maintain docket entry 29 under seal, viewable only to the court and the parties. The Clerk was also directed to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 28.
The order does not separately explain the court’s reasoning beyond granting the application. The disposition concerns access to a court filing; it does not decide the underlying reasonable-fee dispute.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.