Hebden’s original claim was that Domino owed him 50% of royalties on streams and downloads of his catalogue, but the label had only paid him 18%. Their original contract did not specify terms for streaming as it did not significantly factor into recorded music revenues at the time. Domino initially argued that misinterpreted the terms of the contract, but Hebden now says that the label is recognizing his original claim.

“[Domino Records] have recognized my original claim, that I should be paid a 50% royalty on streaming and downloads, and that they should be treated as a license rather than the same as a CD or vinyl sale,” Hebden tweeted. “It has been a difficult and stressful experience to work my way through this court case and I’m so glad we got this positive result, but I feel hugely relieved that the process is over.”

Hebden went on to say that he didn’t achieve 100% of his desired outcome. “Sadly, Domino still own parts of my catalogue for life of copyright and would not give me an option to take back ownership,” he wrote.

Born in Putney, England, Hebden first made a name for himself as the guitarist of a post-rock band called Fridge formed in 1995. His first foray into electronic music saw him release the single “Double Density” under the moniker 4T Recordings in 1997, and by 1998 he adopted the stage name Four Tet to release tracks like “Thirtysixtwentyfive” and “Misnomer.” His 2001 album Pause marked his first release on Domino Recordings.

“I hope these types of life of copyright deals become extinct,” wrote Hebden. “The music industry isn’t definitive and given its evolutionary nature it seems crazy to me to try and institutionalise music in that way.”

Hebden and Domino have been in a legal battle over streaming royalties since August 2021. This latest development comes after Domino removed three of Hebden’s albums from streaming services in retaliation.

The lawsuit was due to head to a high court in the U.K. next month but Domino sought a summary judgment in its favor ahead of the hearing. Because of Hebden’s amendment regarding the takedown, further discussions regarding how the case should move forward took place online.

A legal representative from Domino explained that while they don’t agree with Hebden’s interpretation of his contract, they offered to pay for his legal fees along with a 50% royalty rate on past streams.

Since Hebden’s old recordings are no longer available online, there is technically no active dispute. While that means those recordings may never go back up, it also means that Domino would avoid setting a legal precedent in court. A lawyer representing Hebden called the takedown a “deliberate, cynical, and outrageous move.”

This action by Domino is what prompted Hebden’s team to amend the lawsuit. By taking down the music, they allege that Domino is not living up to its contractual obligation to release his recordings.

Back in August, Four Tet (real name Kieran Hebden) took action against Domino Recordings over streaming and download royalty rates applied to his work from the ’90s. In the suit, Hebdan asserts that he should receive a 50% royalty rate on all streams and downloads. The reason, he says, is that the cost of releasing music digitally is significantly cheaper, and therefore he should receive more of the revenue. He also seeks up to £70,000 (roughly $93,000) in damages.

In retaliation, Domino Recordings removed three albums from streaming services: Pause, Rounds, and Everything Ecstatic. Hebden took to Twitter to voice his frustration. “I’m so upset to see that Domino Recordings have removed the three albums of mine they own from digital and streaming services,” he said. In a multi-tweet thread he went on to speak about his lawsuit and voice his opinion on royalty sharing in the digital era.

Domino Records released a statement to Pitchfork regarding the situation. “Domino are just as saddened about this current situation,” it reads. “The decision to temporarily remove the three Four Tet albums from digital services was not taken lightly.”

Four Tet (real name Kieran Hebden) claims that Domino has breached its contract, originally signed in 2001, and that he should be receiving a 50% royalty rate on all streams and downloads of the tracks in question. The label has rejected those claims. Its defense document cites a clause in the original contract that states: “In respect of records sold in new technology formats other than vinyl, Compact Discs and analogue tape cassettes the royalty rate shall be 75% of the otherwise applicable rate.”

At this rate, Hebden would receive 75% of the initial 18% royalty rate, as Domino deems Spotify, which was created in 2008, falls under the category of a “new technology format.” Hebden is seeking a 50% royalty rate, on the basis that “the costs to labels of releasing music by way of streaming services or online music stores are substantially lower than the costs associated with releasing music in traditional physical formats,” and “the royalty rate payable by labels to musical artists on streaming or download revenue is typically significantly higher than the rate payable on physical formats.”

Hebden is seeking up to £70,000 in damages from Domino. The case will be heard at the U.K.’s Business and Property Courts of the High Court of Justice.