Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Targeted By Record Labels for Allowing Copyright Infringing Apps in Russian App Store

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
69,017
40,052


Sony Music Entertainment, Universal Music, and a division of Warner have filed applications for a preliminary injunction against Apple for hosting three music apps in the Russian App Store that infringe copyright, reports TorrentFreak.

pewpee.jpg
Roman Lukyanov, CEO of Semenov & Pevzner, a local law firm specializing in copyright protection and representing the labels, told Kommersant that the applications for interim measures against three apps were filed on October 1, 2020, listing Apple as the defendant.
Click to expand...
The applications were filed at the Moscow City Court and request that local telecoms watchdog Roscomnadzor takes action "to stop creating conditions" that allow for the illegal distribution of copyrighted works by a handful of local artists.

One of the apps in question, PewPee: Music Player, offers users a Spotify-like experience where they sign up for a free account to access a catalog of music, listen to playlists and download tracks for offline listening. It's unclear where PewPee sources its music. According to TorrentFreak's source code checks, however, the app actually distributes MP3 files of the selected tracks.

The PewPee website offers the same free service using basic browser tools, but in a way that reveals the precise URLs of the songs, which can also be downloaded.

Another app mentioned in the complaints, iMus Music Player, lets users stream music tracks pulled from YouTube interspersed with ads. iMus is the 104th most popular app in Apple's "Music" App Store category. The third app, called Music Downloader & Player, offers users a similar ads-based streaming service, with music videos pulled from YouTube, track downloads for offline listening, and an optional paid ad-free subscription.

The complaints follow a new law that came into force in Russia last week and which is designed to quickly remove piracy-enabling apps from mobile app stores. The legislation requires digital distribution platforms to quickly respond to allegations of copyright infringement. Failing to do so could result in app stores being blocked by local internet service providers.

The record labels' complaints were filed in Moscow on the day the new law came into force, and the cases are reportedly being considered a "test run" by the music industry, with other copyright holders said to be watching how they are processed by the courts.

Article Link: Apple Targeted By Record Labels for Allowing Copyright Infringing Apps in Russian App Store
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2020/10/07/apple-targeted-by-record-labels-russian-app-store/
itsmilo said:
Why not? They are always proud to claim that they check every app. In a way Apple approved copyright infringement
Click to expand...

They will have a T&C that basically ensures they don't carry the liability for an app's functionality is illegal. The whole check if app abides to law is all on best effort, or worse, political/commercial interest basis.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: pianophile, I7guy, ZZ9pluralZalpha and 8 others
I think saying Apple has been targeted is a strong word and is looking to create some buzz given recent stuff with Epic etc. in this case, these music companies appeared to have filed an injunction to get the apps taken off the App Store. Probably pretty standard practice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: apparatchik and decypher44
The law came into effect on Oct. 1. Assuming the copyright holders filed immediately, Roscomnadzor (do they work weekends?) had 3 days (calendar or business?) to get a notice to Apple (no mention if Roscomnadzor met their deadline) who were then required to contact the developer (doesn't say how quickly) who would have 1-day to address the complaint. And there's no information about any appeal process for the developer to fight back. So a complaint about slow response to a 6-day old law.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Solomani
"The legislation requires digital distribution platforms to quickly respond to allegations of copyright infringement." So the way they chose to notify Apple was by filing a lawsuit? Sounds sketchy. Does that mean that if apple takes this as a notification and responds, then the lawsuit is moot? Sounds more like a case of ambulance chasing
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stevez67
Okay so this is interesting. Is Apple a curator and gatekeeper of the AppStore, or is it just a marketplace that takes a cut?

is Apple responsible for content of AppStore and the 30% cut is justified, or is Apple not responsible and should take a lower (or no) cut and/or allow apps to be loaded on iPhones outside the AppStore?

I can see an argument made that Apple needs to ban the apps that the music industry says is infringing on them because Apple had a paid responsibility to curate the AppStore.... or Apple has to let everything in and it's up to the music industry (and other entities) to enforce their own patents and protected info.
 
  • Like
Reactions: atmenterprises, decypher44 and Mr. Rod
JM said:
Okay so this is interesting. Is Apple a curator and gatekeeper of the AppStore, or is it just a marketplace that takes a cut?

is Apple responsible for content of AppStore and the 30% cut is justified, or is Apple not responsible and should take a lower (or no) cut and/or allow apps to be loaded on iPhones outside the AppStore?

I can see an argument made that Apple needs to ban the apps that the music industry says is infringing on them because Apple had a paid responsibility to curate the AppStore.... or Apple has to let everything in and it's up to the music industry (and other entities) to enforce their own patents and protected info.
Click to expand...
Remember that this apps may be illegal according to a Russian law that went into effect on October 1st.
 
  • Like
Reactions: amartinez1660, Gasu E., Stevez67 and 2 others
itsmilo said:
Why not? They are always proud to claim that they check every app. In a way Apple approved copyright infringement
Click to expand...

Theres a difference between checking for malicious code and researching litigious royalty agreements, bank transactions/payments, etc.

So if Amazon didn’t pay some extra in one if its hundreds of TV episodes, Apple is also liable because they should’ve found that during the app approval process? Give me a break.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: sinoka56, nwcs, ftaok and 1 other person
incoherent_1 said:
Theres a difference between checking for malicious code and researching litigious royalty agreements, bank transactions/payments, etc.

So if Amazon didn’t pay some extra in one if its hundreds of TV episodes, Apple is also liable because they should’ve found that during the app approval process? Give me a break.
Click to expand...

content VS how content gets on the app are two different things. Surely they should be aware how those songs make it onto the device otherwise were is my torrent app. The name alone should ring a bell. A quick google search tells you it’s illegal
 
Last edited:
incoherent_1 said:
Theres a difference between checking for malicious code and researching litigious royalty agreements, bank transactions/payments, etc.

So if Amazon didn’t pay some extra in one if its hundreds of TV episodes, Apple is also liable because they should’ve found that during the app approval process? Give me a break.
Click to expand...

The difference is how the companies work. Amazon is a legit company whereas PewPee as far as I can tell exists solely on piracy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech
itsmilo said:
Why not? They are always proud to claim that they check every app. In a way Apple approved copyright infringement
Click to expand...

Here we go... that's not the level of checks that Apple does... otherwise they'd have to use each app extensively to make sure there's "nothing wrong". do you think they have the man power to have every app reviewer play every single game to it's fullest before approving it? how about checking every single function of an app? sure this is what we'd like to hear but it's just not possible. Also i suspect that most approvals are automated unless for some reason the app fails and then gets reviewed by an actual person (which is where some of the app approval delays probably come from).

Yes, approval process steps are speculation by me, but can anyone actually prove me wrong? :)

Also... it seems the lawyers jumped quick because it's only a 6 or 7 day old enforceable law.... why not just tell apple directly first... let them take action... if they dont then sue them... smh something seems fishy
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: sinoka56, I7guy and Gasu E.
Not knowing Russian laws and such, I don't have a definitive answer. However, if we were to apply this to the US, it would be like holding Apple responsible for hosting the YouTube app which has, from time to time, hosted copyrighted material.

The distinction is that YouTube actively searches for content that violate copyrights, whereas these apps are actually built upon violating copyrights.

I would expect Apple to comply and take these apps down as Apple generally follows all applicable laws in the countries that they operate the App Store in.

Total non-story.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back