Fact File: Justin Bieber’s Coachella performance not limited by catalogue sale
Advertisement
Read this article for free:
or
Already have an account? Log in here »
We need your support!
Local journalism needs your support!
As we navigate through unprecedented times, our journalists are working harder than ever to bring you the latest local updates to keep you safe and informed.
Now, more than ever, we need your support.
Starting at $15.99 plus taxes every four weeks you can access your Brandon Sun online and full access to all content as it appears on our website.
Subscribe Nowor call circulation directly at (204) 727-0527.
Your pledge helps to ensure we provide the news that matters most to your community!
To continue reading, please subscribe:
Add Brandon Sun access to your Free Press subscription for only an additional
$1 for the first 4 weeks*
*Your next subscription payment will increase by $1.00 and you will be charged $20.00 plus GST for four weeks. After four weeks, your payment will increase to $24.00 plus GST every four weeks.
Read unlimited articles for free today:
or
Already have an account? Log in here »
Justin Bieber’s stripped-back performance at the Coachella music festival on Saturday saw the Canadian star focus on his recent albums, while he gave a nod to past hits by singing along to short clips on YouTube.
Some social media posts claimed the clips were Bieber’s way of getting around restrictions on his right to perform his old music, since he sold his catalogue to a music rights management company in 2023. But entertainment lawyers say the festival would have obtained a standard public performance licence that ensured Bieber could sing as much of his old material as he wished.
THE CLAIM
Justin Bieber’s performance at the Coachella music festival in California on Saturday included a nostalgic throwback to his early days of YouTube fame, as the Canadian star pulled up videos of his past hits and sang along.
However, most of his set drew from recent albums “SWAG” and “SWAG II,” promoting speculation that the YouTube clips were the musician’s way to get around restrictions on his right to perform his old music after selling the rights to his catalogue in 2023.
“Bieber must ask his ex-label for license to perform his old songs. By playing them off youtube and not “performing” the songs, he finds a loop hole so none of the money goes to them,” claimed an X post with more than a million views.
Another X post claimed “YouTube is literally the only way justin bieber is allowed to perform his old songs.” Both posts now have a community note attached that indicate the posts are missing context.
A TikTok video with more than four million plays hinted that Bieber’s Coachella performance “makes so much more sense” with the realization he doesn’t own his old music, with commenters speculating the catalogue sale affected his ability to perform his songs “officially.”
THE FACTS
Canadian entertainment lawyers say Bieber’s YouTube singalong reflected an artistic decision, not any restriction imposed by the sale of his catalogue.
Bieber sold the rights to his music catalogue, including hits like “Baby” and “Sorry,” to music rights investment and management company Hipgnosis, now Recognition Music Group.
The group owns Bieber’s publishing copyrights, songwriter’s ownership, master recordings and rights to his entire catalogue through 2021, in a deal that Billboard Magazine reported was worth an estimated US$200 million.
The Canadian Press reached out to Recognition Music Group but did not receive a response by publication.
Mark Quail, a music and entertainment lawyer based in Toronto, called the claims about Bieber’s Coachella performance “fiction.”
In an interview Tuesday, he said Coachella would have secured a public performance licence from music licensing authorities, either the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers or Broadcast Music Inc. As a Canadian, Bieber is likely part of this country’s equivalent authority, the Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada, or SOCAN, which would have a reciprocal agreement with its U.S. counterparts.
The licence ensures performers and writers get paid, Quail said.
Paul Sanderson, a lawyer with Sanderson Entertainment Law in Toronto, said the publishing interests that Bieber sold to Hipgnosis were likely assigned to a performance rights organization that collects revenue when the songs are performed publicly.
“Then he or any other artist has the right to perform them in public, regardless of the duration of the songs,” Sanderson said in an email.
Even if a company wanted to restrict the performance of an artist whose catalogue it owns, it would be difficult, because there are often competing rights when multiple songwriters are involved, Quail said.
“What he did, I would say, has nothing to do with a licensing issue or not being able to play his songs. It’s just not the way the business works,” he said.
Quail said Bieber’s YouTube-backed performance was an artistic choice.
“This guy managed to create a performance that was incredibly human simply by being on his laptop on stage and using a screen to project what was going on on the screen, and the audience could see that. It was a really human moment,” he said.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published April 14, 2026.
— With files from The Associated Press