Eminem's Publisher Sues Apple for Unauthorized Music Sales

[corywoolf]

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

Eminem may write SOME of his lyrics, everything else is sampled/ stolen. It's not an overstatement either, this one guy I worked with showed me all these old songs from the 80's/ 90's that Eminem completely ripped off. Let me put it this way, it is often as blatant as Vanilla Ice's famous case. Well then again, this is the same for 99% of hip hop. Kanye West does the same, Snoop Dogg, not Dr. Dre though. Also Scott Storch writes almost everything himself. I wouldn't say these artists who steal have no talent, but they should at least give the artist they stole it from a cut of the money.

 

[arn]

This doesn't make any since to me. Why sue Apple, when it was Universal who actually "Uploaded" the music. Apple is only offering a service here. They should be suing the record label and not Apple.

Apple is selling (making money off of) copyrighted items that Eminen's publisher claims they don't have permission to sell.

arn

 

[cliffjumper68]

Category: News and Press Releases
Link: Eminem sues Apple for iTunes sales
Description:: none

Posted on MacBytes.com
Approved by Mudbug

This is an interesting issue that could improve artists rights to their music. If it is successfully argued in court that labels existing rights do not cover digital downloads, then a further extension of the same principle is that they do not cover internet radio. Sound exchange would have no basis for representation of the labels since they would not have standing. This could really be interesting.

 

[JPyre]

Eminem may write SOME of his lyrics, everything else is sampled/ stolen. It's not an overstatement either, this one guy I worked with showed me all these old songs from the 80's/ 90's that Eminem completely ripped off. Let me put it this way, it is often as blatant as Vanilla Ice's famous case. Well then again, this is the same for 99% of hip hop. Kanye West does the same, Snoop Dogg, not Dr. Dre though. Also Scott Storch writes almost everything himself. I wouldn't say these artists who steal have no talent, but they should at least give the artist they stole it from a cut of the money.

ROFL, literally. Hip-hop has always been based on samples and loops. Spining others' records and "rapping" over it is the core foundation of Hip-Hop. Where have you been under a rock?
Dr Dre does so sample music, "Let Me Ride" is a total knockoff of George Clinton and Bootsy Collins. Also Jay-Z GHOST-WROTE most of Dr Dre's Chronic 2001 verses as well as alot of others'. I could name a dozen more examples. Just look at Palms Out Sounds site, it's a HUGE list of original music thats been sampled.
Hip-Hop is synonymous with sampling, they go hand in hand, I challenge you to find me an artist in the scene that hasn't. MCs rarely make beats, and very often have ghost writers. Same goes in any other music category.
If you think Scott Storch is the most talented and original producer you really have no idea what your talking about. Long live Rick Rubin. From Slayer to Beastie Boys to Johnny Cash to Metallica to NAS to Jay-Z to Dixie Chicks - Rubin torches Storch on every level.

 

[oldwatery]

What total B.S.
I am not a great lover of the music industry but of late I'd say I'm even less enamoured with the so called musicians themselves.
Arrogant, spoiled, money grabbing low tallented children who think the world owes them a living.
It's as if being a Hip Hop star makes them better than us mere mortals.
The music industry piles billions of dollars into these no tallents and all they can do is bitch and moan all the time.....that and get drunk or drugged up smash cars, beat girlfiends and shoot their competitors. I guess you're lucky youre only getting sued Steve
If they were any good at what they do then maybe they would have my sympathy but M&M is a plaigarist and he's already earned millions from other peolple's efforts.
And anyway, why the hell didn't his manager notice this fact years ago.
I guess any publicity is good publicity for a faded star.

 

[blindzero]

They are suing apple because the publisher (albeit possible owner of copyright OTHER than physical distribution and broadcasting) asked Apple to stop selling and Apple refused.

How else could they get them to stop selling their copyrighted material?

This forces Universal's hand. If there is no money coming into Universal via digital downloads they will have to renegotiate possibly giving the artist a better share.

It's fair. Who cares if you don't like his music. This may be VERY good for the music industry especially independents that rarely make any money out of the recordings themselves.


Read the last paragraph of the article. It makes 100% sense.

 

[blindzero]

I think you should do some reading on the subject. A lot of the money paid to musicians is billed back to them by the record companies. They put (sometimes force) these artists on promotional tours then charge the artists fees associated with it while only paying the artists a small fraction of sales. Touring merchandise and tickets are a source of income but many times artists pay for the huge rigs and crew out of their share.

There's a lot of unfair practices against the artists and the artists heretofore don't have a lot of leeway in fighting it.

What total B.S.
I am not a great lover of the music industry but of late I'd say I'm even less enamoured with the so called musicians themselves.
Arrogant, spoiled, money grabbing low tallented children who think the world owes them a living.
It's as if being a Hip Hop star makes them better than us mere mortals.
The music industry piles billions of dollars into these no tallents and all they can do is bitch and moan all the time.....that and get drunk or drugged up smash cars, beat girlfiends and shoot their competitors. I guess you're lucky youre only getting sued Steve
If they were any good at what they do then maybe they would have my sympathy but M&M is a plaigarist and he's already earned millions from other peolple's efforts.
And anyway, why the hell didn't his manager notice this fact years ago.
I guess any publicity is good publicity for a faded star.

 

[RealMcCoy]

Eminem may write SOME of his lyrics, everything else is sampled/ stolen. It's not an overstatement either, this one guy I worked with showed me all these old songs from the 80's/ 90's that Eminem completely ripped off. Let me put it this way, it is often as blatant as Vanilla Ice's famous case. Well then again, this is the same for 99% of hip hop. Kanye West does the same, Snoop Dogg, not Dr. Dre though. Also Scott Storch writes almost everything himself. I wouldn't say these artists who steal have no talent, but they should at least give the artist they stole it from a cut of the money.

It´s called sample clearance ... and trust me ... most of them (at least nowadays, since a lot of lawers and music lovers are watching ;o) are paying ... either cash, roayltist or both ... plus you have to get clearance from the publsiher / songwriter(s) ....

It is a nice little side biz ... for both sides ... and nothing special ... like I said ... music biz (charts) has nothing to do with good or bad music ... it is just a product sales place ...

 

[Rocketman]

The last CD I bought I paid $15 at retail. The last live performance I went to was about $180.00. That was for a seat about halfway back in the room. I think that since the artist HAS a label who gets the lion's share of the 70 cents Apple pays to somebody, he is upset about that since newer artists are getting larger shares to not bypass record labels. This is a negotiation ploy. Apple is the hapless victim in tis and owes no special duty of care to the artist beyond honoring their contract with the label. Apple will receive damages for a baseless suit. Eminem will have pissed off Apple for the second and last time. Apple will simply shun him to the degree they can without violating their contract with the label generally. No special offers, no cross-marketing.

Eminem should do a live performance. Oh wait, his contract gives most of the money to his label! Hmmm, maybe he should form a foundation and do some fund raising concerts for free

This boils down to "a contract is a contract". That's the problem with negotiating from a position of weakness.

Rocketman

 

[JPyre]

Apple is selling (making money off of) copyrighted items that Eminen's publisher claims they don't have permission to sell.

arn

True, but that's kinda (not really) like going after drug users and not the dealers themselves. Why go after the small fish? Why not go to the source? Apple IS a dealer, but Universal is the supplier to the dealer. Universal has made a lot more than Apple from this arrangement.
If this was the feds' suit they'd let Apple plead out and turn state's evidence against Universal.
I just don't get it, I mean, I do, but I don't. Unless they plan to go after Universal next...

 

[bigandy]

and how many other online music stores are they pursuing in this lawsuit?

or is it all about keeping an artist who's not done anything in a while in the limelight?

 

[daviddpg]

Sounds like eminem needs more crack money.

 

[Peace]

and how many other online music stores are they pursuing in this lawsuit?

or is it all about keeping an artist who's not done anything in a while in the limelight?

Just for the sake of argument it may well be eminem's publisher has agreements with other online services.We don't know one way or the other.

 

[chukronos]

Just for the sake of argument it may well be eminem's publisher has agreements with other online services.We don't know one way or the other.

Very true. We don't know everything with this case. What we do know is that the legal owner of the music asked apple to stop selling and Apple refused. Hence the lawsuit. Should they sue universal? sure. But, if I pay 19.99 to limewire for "legal" downloading, does the RIAA go after limewire or me for using the service? They go after me because it is illegal for me to download the songs. Same with Apple, it is illegal for them to sell the songs. I think if the company being sued was microsoft, instead of apple, the sentiment on this forum would be much different, IMHO.

 

[oldwatery]

I think you should do some reading on the subject. A lot of the money paid to musicians is billed back to them by the record companies. They put (sometimes force) these artists on promotional tours then charge the artists fees associated with it while only paying the artists a small fraction of sales. Touring merchandise and tickets are a source of income but many times artists pay for the huge rigs and crew out of their share.

There's a lot of unfair practices against the artists and the artists heretofore don't have a lot of leeway in fighting it.

Oh please.
Don't give me the bleeding heart thing.
It's a business they are all into for profit.
Deals are made after negotiations and there are always winners, losers and I guess in the case of M&Ms....whiners.
And maybe you should do some research into the subject....the bands that pay for their touring rigs do so because they want to have the whole Las Vegas style show rather than rely on their own talent.
I was in the business for over 6 years as a publisher and promoter so I can tell you the artist is not the only one who sometimes gets a bad deal. You would not believe the riders these prima donnas write into their touring contracts. They really believe they are royalty and should be treated like gods.

Please note I am not incuding the vast majority of tallented hard working artists out there in my rant. Just the so called super stars who have been made wealthy beyond belief by the very huge amounts of money invested in them by the music business.

Plus as has been stated before....why isn't the poor lad going after his Record company and all the other download services.
Just another wanker trying to get some newsprint off the back of someone truly worthy of it...in this case Apple.

 

[blindzero]

I'm not saying these guys are living off of Ramen noodles, And artists like Eminem can afford to only get 9 cents a song since they sell millions. But this is besides the point as it's about OWNERSHIP. If the record companies don't have the right to distribute digitally through downloads this is an incredibly valid point. Who knows what the contract says.

And I agree with you - Prima Donna's are such a SMALLLLLL part of the music industry. But that is a totally different issue entirely.

I'm sure this is only part of the step in going after Universal. Cut the distribution chain, negotiate.

I own Apple stock and I don't believe Apple will be hurt by this one bit. Apple Itunes will continue to sell, the dispensation will just change.

If he is just whining about a crappy contract he may have signed years and years ago, then I agree with most of ya, but attacking him without knowing the full story is not fair.

Oh please.
Don't give me the bleeding heart thing.
It's a business they are all into for profit.
Deals are made after negotiations and there are always winners, losers and I guess in the case of M&Ms....whiners.
And maybe you should do some research into the subject....the bands that pay for their touring rigs do so because they want to have the whole Las Vegas style show rather than rely on their own talent.
I was in the business for over 6 years as a publisher and promoter so I can tell you the artist is not the only one who sometimes gets a bad deal. You would not believe the riders these prima donnas write into their touring contracts. They really believe they are royalty and should be treated like gods.

Please note I am not incuding the vast majority of tallented hard working artists out there in my rant. Just the so called super stars who have been made wealthy beyond belief by the very huge amounts of money invested in them by the music business.

Plus as has been stated before....why isn't the poor lad going after his Record company and all the other download services.
Just another wanker trying to get some newsprint off the back of someone truly worthy of it...in this case Apple.

 

[oldwatery]

I'm not saying these guys are living off of Ramen noodles, And artists like Eminem can afford to only get 9 cents a song since they sell millions. But this is besides the point as it's about OWNERSHIP. If the record companies don't have the right to distribute digitally through downloads this is an incredibly valid point. Who knows what the contract says.

And I agree with you - Prima Donna's are such a SMALLLLLL part of the music industry. But that is a totally different issue entirely.

I'm sure this is only part of the step in going after Universal. Cut the distribution chain, negotiate.

I own Apple stock and I don't believe Apple will be hurt by this one bit. Apple Itunes will continue to sell, the dispensation will just change.

If he is just whining about a crappy contract he may have signed years and years ago, then I agree with most of ya, but attacking him without knowing the full story is not fair.

Fair comments.
But my point is that if the contract does not include digital downloads...and that is a real stretch in this day and age...then sue the damn record lable or whoever made the deal with Apple.
You've got to figure that Apple did not start carrying his stuff without asking the lable if it was legal.
Oh...and only M&M has been affected by this...I can't believe he has the only contract excluding digital downloads. So where are the rest of the law suits?
Sorry, this smacks of a PR stunt by a has-been trying to get some attention.
Look at me....I'm so bad I can sue Apple......yeh right

 

[Black Belt]

I think if the company being sued was microsoft, instead of apple, the sentiment on this forum would be much different, IMHO.

Wurd.

Sounds like most of these people are suckling Jobs' nipple and know nothing about copyrights, legal obligations of their defense, or the music industry in general - so they say Eminem's a loser, a whiner, a crack user, a whatever and that's the extent of their "intellectual property". WAHHH!!!! (slurp)

 

[yzp]

Universal?

The problem is a Universal's one???

I simply dont get it???

 

[powermac_daddy]

why even bother to buy music these days? the music industry makes way too much money anyway.

 

[Rocketman]

Very true. We don't know everything with this case. What we do know is that the legal owner of the music asked apple to stop selling and Apple refused. Hence the lawsuit. Should they sue universal? sure. But, if I pay 19.99 to limewire for "legal" downloading, does the RIAA go after limewire or me for using the service? They go after me because it is illegal for me to download the songs. Same with Apple, it is illegal for them to sell the songs. I think if the company being sued was microsoft, instead of apple, the sentiment on this forum would be much different, IMHO.

I was wondering when someone was going to say this. (Safari is snappier as a result of this post)

Apple has a contract with Universal, not with Eight Mile Style LLC or with Eminem, or with Matthews or whatever his given name is from his formerly drunk-a$$ mother.

It would be a normal and customary provision of a contract between Apple and Universal to have a provision to hold Apple harmless (Universal pay attorney fees and costs) to defend a suit from an artist represented by Universal, to be under contract, and for content agreed to be under contract.

My own efforts at getting stuff on iTunes tells me that Apple is hyper-aware of these issues. You will find this suit goes nowhere.

Rocketman

 

[BlackLilyNinja]

my guess

just an opinion


universal is behind it. Smoke and mirrors to try and make apple look bad. Otherwise Universal would be named in the suit only. Not that im a lawyer. Fact is Universal is the criminal for only giving Marshal 9.1 cents of the 70 cent share. He's earned them much more than they ever dished out for him. So ... he is their poster boy (most likely paid or unwittingly) for the artist rebellion against apple. I don't honestly think Marshal would go into this without a motivation. Record Labels are still powerful organizations
with money to throw about for their own interests.... usually without any moral track. Just public self interests.

 

[oldwatery]

why even bother to buy music these days? the music industry makes way too much money anyway.

Let me know the name of your company so I can come over and rip you off

 

[macidiot]

Are you thinking of the one Eminem is actually in or the one that just featured the song "Lose Yourself"? I know I've seen both but I'm not sure if the one in question was aired on television or if I just saw it online.

I saw it on tv. Over and over again for about 3 months straight.

 

[rockosmodurnlif]

Please. We've read the threads and the article. Eminem simply has no case against Apple. So let ME barney-style it.

Apple: Hey Universal, can we sell some of the music you have rights to on-line?

Universal: Sure Apple, here's all the stuff we are contractually able to sell through you.

Eminem: Hey - I'm not making enough money here - it isn't fair that Apple can sell the digital version of my music, I never explicitly said they could! I should ask them to stop.

Apple: It would be ludicrous if we had to stop selling certain songs that we are contractually able to sell whenever a tempermental artist is unhappy. So no. Take it up with Universal.

Eminem: No - I'd rather sue you. It makes for better headlines.

Apple lawyers: OK - good luck with that.

Where do you get your information? Certainly not from reading anything. You must just make everything up as you go along?

Let me make it two simple sentences for you: Eminem's publishers say Universal has no rights to sell his music digitally. Apple sells the music and won't stop selling the music when Eminem's publishers asked.

How does anyone not see the case?

On another note, where did all these defenders of Universal Music Group come from? I thought everyone on Macrumours wanted to see them die out and fade away after they changed their contract with Apple. I mean Eminem is fighting the "big bad record label" to stop them from using his material in ways he did not approve. That's why there is a contract. I wonder what the reaction would be if it was an "indie" artist.