Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Eminem's Publisher Sues Apple for Unauthorized Music Sales
- Thread starter MacBytes
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
seeing as I'm a law student and i'm most likely going into Intellectual Property...Eminem is suing Apple because you sue and name anyone and everyone who could potentially be a party to the suit...and seeing as Apple is the one distributing the songs it only makes sense to include Apple as a party. The main thing here, though, is Apple more than likely has an indemnity clause protecting them from any lawsuits of this nature. Thus, all the liability will pass to Universal.
But, I can definitely understand why Eminem is pissed. Eminem most likely writes his own music, but assigns all rights and title is said music to Universal for pennies on the dollar. He, like any other artist, is trying to claw back and I honestly don't blame him. The music industry is such BS. Consumers are the ones that will be screwed in the end with higher prices....I'll stop now...just my 2 cents
i think they shoudl cease and desist selling eminems music even if there aren't any legal issues
Aaaaah, back in my day recording artist and record labels and music publishers were screaming at Apple and the goverment saying that online music downloads were "The Devil" and could cannabalize their business and profits would disappear.
I guess things have changed since 2001. Coincidentally, that's about the last time eminem wasn't a hack. If I'm not mistaken, he has an album due out soon, so I'm guessing his name is attached to this article because someone is trying to get him some free publicity. I image lots of us are having to wiki him anyway, trying to remember who he is and why we liked him once upon a time.
Why don't we just give everyone an equal piece of all profits everywhere? Oh, that's right, because while that seems fair it isn't fair. Music publishers are splitting hairs here. They spend too much on their Benz's and HDTVs and iPhones and other high-priced consumer items they can't afford, so now they're trying to make more money.
I guess things have changed since 2001. Coincidentally, that's about the last time eminem wasn't a hack. If I'm not mistaken, he has an album due out soon, so I'm guessing his name is attached to this article because someone is trying to get him some free publicity. I image lots of us are having to wiki him anyway, trying to remember who he is and why we liked him once upon a time.
Why don't we just give everyone an equal piece of all profits everywhere? Oh, that's right, because while that seems fair it isn't fair. Music publishers are splitting hairs here. They spend too much on their Benz's and HDTVs and iPhones and other high-priced consumer items they can't afford, so now they're trying to make more money.
The standard is to sell the album. Unless they release a specific single. The artist gets paid a percentage of the album sales.
I agree with him. The honest guys at the record companies just kind of decide what they think they should pay an artist out of the online sale. Because the labels are such stand up guys, I know they are concerned about making sure the artist gets paid fairly.
The publisher owns the rights, and apple ignored the request from the owner of the music. So, he is suing them. I think all it will do is bring about awareness. I expect other artists will follow suit. I am sure a suit against the label will happen soon.
Microsoft has the same attitude towards the owners of software, sell it even when they tell you not too. I am glad that apple is taking on the same microsoft attitude.
i think what you are all failing to grasp is that the US copyright law (and most others as well) grants a compulsory licence and sets statutory rates for mechanical rights, i.e. what owners or controllers of composition copyrights, e.g. music publishers, get for the sale of music.
I would assume the issue here will be whether a DPD constitutes a sale in the spirit of the compulsory licence, I believe it has already been decided that it does, so I don't really get what this suit is about.
As for poor starving artists, in the case of Eminem, I am quite sure that unless he is an utter moron (doubtful) he has received a multi-million dollar advance for his publishing rights, along with a massive check regularly from his PRO for the writer's share.
I would assume the issue here will be whether a DPD constitutes a sale in the spirit of the compulsory licence, I believe it has already been decided that it does, so I don't really get what this suit is about.
As for poor starving artists, in the case of Eminem, I am quite sure that unless he is an utter moron (doubtful) he has received a multi-million dollar advance for his publishing rights, along with a massive check regularly from his PRO for the writer's share.
Sorry, didn't mean that any of those objects were crappy. I edited my post accordingly.
I agree with you...I think the problem is that most artists get taken advantage of from record companies and most people don't understand this. People automatically blame the artist for suing without knowing why the artist is suing.
I guess this all stems from watching a show about Left Eye from TLC. She commented on how the record made like 8 millions or so from sales. After taxes, paying the record label for studio time and the videos, etc. she received only 300,000 from 8 mill. Of course 300,000 is a lot of money...but the record company ended up with more than 10 times that...
But whatever...My 2 cents.
I think It'd be more like Best Buy suing Microsoft for sellling Windows as a download on Amazon, AFTER Microsoft had signed a contract BEFORE the internet was developed, for BestBuy to be a sole distributor. If the internet didn't exist how can it be included/excluded from the contract... Make sense?
The publisher's contract was no doubt created before iTunes ever even existed.
I think you're misunderstanding the suit, eminem isn't suing anybody, neither is his record label that owns the masters. The publisher/distributor that prints CDs is suing. (even after they're getting a check for doing absolutly nothing)
M&M should be suing Universal..
This could be a stunt on the part of Apple to get direct deals with artists instead of labels.
Let's say M&M won
The record labels would be forced to re-negotiate contracts with the artists.The artists would then be able to deal with Apple directly without breaking a contract.Thus allowing Apple to sell whatever music from artists they had made contracts with.Leaving out the Label.
This could be a stunt on the part of Apple to get direct deals with artists instead of labels.
Let's say M&M won
The record labels would be forced to re-negotiate contracts with the artists.The artists would then be able to deal with Apple directly without breaking a contract.Thus allowing Apple to sell whatever music from artists they had made contracts with.Leaving out the Label.
The entire record industry acts like a screaming brat
"oh cr*p we don't control the market anymore" *freak out*
seriously, they were the ones who dropped the ball, if they had implemented something like the iTS themselves before P2P took off, it wouldn't have been so big, if happened at all.
You evolve or get left behind, they really need to learn that...
"oh cr*p we don't control the market anymore" *freak out*
seriously, they were the ones who dropped the ball, if they had implemented something like the iTS themselves before P2P took off, it wouldn't have been so big, if happened at all.
You evolve or get left behind, they really need to learn that...
The thing I love most about MacRumors is that when any musician is mentioned, half the posters go out of their way to dismiss them as a no-talent hack who survives only through careful marketing and the ignorance of the consumer market.
"Eminem @#$%ing sucks! They just don't make musicians like Ricky Nelson/the Byrds/Tommy James and the Shondells/Grand Funk Railroad/Foreigner/Duran Duran/Poison/Bush/Linkin Park anymore..."
But who's being ignorant?
"Eminem @#$%ing sucks! They just don't make musicians like Ricky Nelson/the Byrds/Tommy James and the Shondells/Grand Funk Railroad/Foreigner/Duran Duran/Poison/Bush/Linkin Park anymore..."
But who's being ignorant?
Heard an artist on Jonesy's Jukebox talking about this the other day. He said that record label are really just there to loan them all the money it takes to produce, master, publish and deliver albums. The labels are notorious for billing the artist when an album is a hit, instead of cutting them a check.
I think i'd tell him to go back to where he came from [8 Mile Road]. He is way better off than most people in that area of Detroit.
What a Greedy bastard.
Shouldn't here be suing Universal, and not Apple? Universal gave Apple the right to sell music digitally when they signed a contract with them.
What a Greedy bastard.
Shouldn't here be suing Universal, and not Apple? Universal gave Apple the right to sell music digitally when they signed a contract with them.
Yeah I'm still trying to get to grips with why Apple is getting sued over this.
Apple have been given the go ahead by Universal, who may not have the rights to do that, but Apple wouldn't necessarily know that, plus there may be a dispute due to the wording too.
So from my perspective it lies with Universal and Eminems publisher for not agreeing the terms clearly enough etc at the beginning.
I'd go with greed and publicity on the Publishers part.
Record Company vs Artist vs Publisher
Now, I am far from an expert on this stuff, but what most of the people posting here are failing to realize is that in many cases, neither the record company nor the artist owns the publishing rights. That is where the music publisher comes in. They control how the music is distributed in many cases, right down to the sheet music at a guitar store.
So chances are this is NOT Eminem suing, and Universal technically did not have the right to distribute his music this way, and as Arn stated originally, this probably comes down to the wording in a contract.
And just my 2 cents, but if you don't think that Eminem has talent because you don't like his music, then that is a pretty self-centered statement. I, for one, am not a big fan, but I can certainly see what he has brought to to hip-hop/rap etc. I think that pretty much anyone in the music industry would agree that he has made some significant contributions to his genre, his ******** personality aside.
Just my opinion, but at least it is an open one.
Now, I am far from an expert on this stuff, but what most of the people posting here are failing to realize is that in many cases, neither the record company nor the artist owns the publishing rights. That is where the music publisher comes in. They control how the music is distributed in many cases, right down to the sheet music at a guitar store.
So chances are this is NOT Eminem suing, and Universal technically did not have the right to distribute his music this way, and as Arn stated originally, this probably comes down to the wording in a contract.
And just my 2 cents, but if you don't think that Eminem has talent because you don't like his music, then that is a pretty self-centered statement. I, for one, am not a big fan, but I can certainly see what he has brought to to hip-hop/rap etc. I think that pretty much anyone in the music industry would agree that he has made some significant contributions to his genre, his ******** personality aside.
Just my opinion, but at least it is an open one.
Technically every CD is considered digital music. The issue is whether or not Universal has the right to offer his music via download. Some artist have well written contracts (most do not) which specify how there work can and cannot be sold (see: The Beatles, Led Zepplin, Rolling Stones, Madonna, AC/DC) others don't care.
Just to clarify..
Eminem's publisher suing Apple, does not equal Eminem suing Apple.
The publisher shops the music around to labels on behalf of the artist for mechanical royalties. this has nothing to do with the performance, but the "intellectual property" if you will.
And while I'm not a fan of Eminem, I certainly recognize the guy is talented. I listen to a song like "Without Me" and realize the work that went into it. He has a gift, that doesn't mean you have to like it. There are plenty of rich/famous recording artists that are indeed without talent. I don't believe Marshall Mathers falls in that category.
----
Edit: wow.. as I was posting this, PDubNYC made almost exactly the same post and did a much better job than I did.
Eminem's publisher suing Apple, does not equal Eminem suing Apple.
The publisher shops the music around to labels on behalf of the artist for mechanical royalties. this has nothing to do with the performance, but the "intellectual property" if you will.
And while I'm not a fan of Eminem, I certainly recognize the guy is talented. I listen to a song like "Without Me" and realize the work that went into it. He has a gift, that doesn't mean you have to like it. There are plenty of rich/famous recording artists that are indeed without talent. I don't believe Marshall Mathers falls in that category.
----
Edit: wow.. as I was posting this, PDubNYC made almost exactly the same post and did a much better job than I did.