Eninem's Publisher Sues Apple

[maelstromr]

Someone pointed out that Apple is selling SONGS, for the artists. The album cover store display analogy isn't perfect, but it works.

If I were in charge of Apple's legal defense I would use that 4.5billion bank role to slap Eminem's people across the face in court rather than fund some cop-out settlement. Trust me everyone, Apple has 8 lawyers look at everythijng they put out to the public six ways from Sunday before it slips even into OUR eager fingers, let alone TV. They didn't break the law or infringe on the musician's rights...esp since he's going to have a hard time explaining how he lost money to free (and cute) advertising here.

Of all the people in the world HE gets high and mighty...although I suspect the artist had little to do with this.

 

[macFanDave]

You're confused

Originally posted by j33pd0g
Isn't there the 8 sec rule... you can use something just as long as isn't more then 8 sec?

As the father of a small child, I can confidently correct you that it is indeed the "five-second rule." If a piece of food hits the floor, you can still EAT it if you pick it up within five seconds.

You're welcome in advance, I'm glad I could be of service.

 

[wordmunger]

Originally posted by JW Pepper
Nothing else maters, either they have secured the right to use the material or they haven't. If they haven't they are going to loose it is very simple.

No, you are wrong there. Eminem has to demonstrate economic damage. It has to be enough of his song to cause him real harm. For example, just saying the name of the song is not enough. However, if Apple implied that Eminem endorsed their product, they could be liable for that--which is NOT a case of copyright violation, but more like false advertising. In fact, they could be liable for that even if they obtained permission to use the song.

 

[Alexander]

And in other news, Mars, Inc. sues 8 Mile Crack Whores or whoever they are.

 

[geerlingguy]

Re: Eminem's Lost Himself

Originally posted by jiggie2g
...especially after Vanilla Ice.

I kinda liked "Ice, Ice, Baby" 🙁

I don't like MTV, either.

 

[geerlingguy]

Re: You're confused

Originally posted by macFanDave
As the father of a small child, I can confidently correct you that it is indeed the "five-second rule." If a piece of food hits the floor, you can still EAT it if you pick it up within five seconds.

You're welcome in advance, I'm glad I could be of service.

Ha ha ha 😀

We always need a little light humor to ease the tension.

 

[Rocketman]

Originally posted by ph8te
Does that also mean if I play my car-radio really loud, so that others can hear it, I also have to pay royalties?

Yes 🙂

I hope you don't have deep pockets.

Or drive your car near any large crowds.

What I find interesting about the Eminem claimis that HE did not perform it. It was a performance by another person who themselves had an obligation to pay whatever the "performance royalty" is, from their proceeds.

However the claim that Eminem somehow "performed a national endorsement" for something his "personality or likeness" was not even involved with might be fraud, libel and trade libel in and of itself.

Rocketman

 

[sonicbaz]

Hang On

Hang on, this isn't about a 10 year old boy innocently singing a song, this is about a ADVERTISING campaign! Advertising is FAKE, it's David Copperfield with soap powder.

Artists have the right to protect themselves against infringement, this is not trival this is the only recourse you have to protect your works. Sorry if the big bad world of REALITY has hit you in the face! Apple was using this and other songs as a SELLING point, not to be warm and cuddly.....so they should pay up....you can't just go STEALING what you want just because you feel like it.

Maybe if I get a 10 year old to steal a BMW it would be ok then.....

duh.... 🙄

soncibaz

 

[0 and A ai]

I like how people are attacking eminem when they don't know the facts of the law suit. Quite a few of you have shown how ignorant you are.

If apple's ad agency didn't get permission to use the song then apple has no case. However it seems highly unlikely that that woudl be the case but not impossible.



You people are funny.

 

[wordmunger]

Originally posted by Rocketman
Yes 🙂

I hope you don't have deep pockets.

Or drive your car near any large crowds.

I don't think this is true. The law mainly has to do with commercial use, and gives generous exemptions for personal use. Now you could be sued (or arrested) for disturbing the peace...

Or if you sold tickets to listen to your car stereo--that would be commercial use, and you could be sued for that.

 

[jocknerd]

Originally posted by ph8te

But it is bordering on the ridiculous... Imagine me serenading my girl with a Barry White song, and along comes a lawyer and slaps me with a lawsuit, because I did not obtain the rights to sing the song...

If you are profiting from the song monetarily, he has every right to sue you. Thats a publishers' right.

Why is it everytime someone sues Apple, they are stupid and rediculous, but when Apple sues someone over "Intellectual Property" everyone here believes Apple is doing the right thing?

 

[Kingsnapped]

This is Really said and a new low when 10yr old boys can't even Sing a freakin song on TV...

I don't think this is about ten year olds singing on TV. Remember, Apple is a corperation and they want to make money just as much as the next guy. This kid was hired by them to read some Eminem off cue cards and sell iPods. If Eminem's "music" had anything do to with the sale of iPods, he wouldn't go after the kid, but whomever got the kid to do it.

 

[Spock]

Apple should just use that 4 billion and buy Interscope and fire Eminem

 

[MattG]

What a spolied f***in' punk. Now I can't stand him even more. I can't wait until he pisses off the wrong person...

 

[themacolyte]

Originally posted by CalfCanuck
Doesn't Apple spend a fair chunk of change on product placements in movies? If they understand they have to spend cash for a 10 second "supporting role" onscreen, how can they plead ignorant on using an existing song?

Slightly off topic, but I don't believe Apple spends anything on product placements. Apple computers are often seen in movies and television because 1) they are often out in front in terms of aesthetic design (alienware or sony vaio computers might fall under this point too) and 2) the people who do set design, computer graphics, etc. are usually using Macs. They place what they know and like.

One thing I haven't figured out is why some shows cover up the Apple logo on the computers and some don't. Legalities or stubborness (director has firm stance on not promoting any type of product or refusing to show logo without a payment).

As for using the song... I wouldn't have thought about this either (if creating the commercial) because it's a small bit of the song, it includes no music, it amounts to this kid's interpretation.

Here's a question, is American Idol paying artists each time a contestant sings a song? Would contestants then be encouraged (forced) to sing certain songs to keep costs down?

 

[wordmunger]

Originally posted by Spock
Apple should just use that 4 billion and buy Interscope and fire Eminem

Or they could just pay him his lousy $10 mil and use the rest of their money to build new computers.

 

[jocknerd]

Re: Eminem's Lost Himself

Originally posted by jiggie2g
This is Really said and a new low when 10yr old boys can't even Sing a freakin song on TV because they didn't give a record company a big enough check.

Really, this one is nothing. A sad day was a few years ago when the Girl Scouts of America was sued by ASCAP because they were singing campfire songs without permission from ASCAP.

The story is here: http://www.s-t.com/daily/08-96/08-23-96/b02li056.htm

 

[wordmunger]

Originally posted by themacolyte

Here's a question, is American Idol paying artists each time a contestant sings a song?

You betcha!

Would contestants then be encouraged (forced) to sing certain songs to keep costs down?

I wouldn't be at all surprised. Otherwise why would anyone sing anything by Journey?

 

[MillieWales]

I agree ab out attacking Eminem and his talent, the thread is actually about Apple being sued. Also, it's the publisher, not Eminem.

I think the fact that it states that Eminem Doe' not endorse products is the point. If everyone was using his songs - in full or part, tune or lyrics - the value of his endorsement would fall, dramatically. If he has never appeared anywhere endorsing anything, then the company that clinches an endorsement deal is the winner, and surely the price for that endorsement would be similar to Justin Timberlakes 6 million (not sure if dollars or £).

This really isn't about a 10 year old kid, it's about Apple either being stupid or trying it on, and Eminem's publisher protecting their intellectual property. Love him or loathe him, Eminem is hot property, and for those people saying he is finished and needs money, get real.

Marc

 

[MrJamie]

Originally posted by 0 and A ai
I like how people are attacking eminem when they don't know the facts of the law suit. Quite a few of you have shown how ignorant you are.

If apple's ad agency didn't get permission to use the song then apple has no case. However it seems highly unlikely that that woudl be the case but not impossible.



You people are funny.

I disagree completely. What is funny is the incredible misuse of funds, justice, and intelligence going on here. Honestly, what a crock this is. I understand the artists have to protect themselves, but first of all, Eminem is swimming in money.

Second of all, the ad featured a kid singing his favorite song; that was the message, not that Eminem encourages you to use the iTunes store, not that you should steal Eminem's music, but that you can download your favorite song from the music store.

Finally, I have always enjoyed Eminem's message of 'I do whatever the **** I want," because he has always done things that push the free speech envelope. As I said before though, this is a waste of resources that could be much better spent elsewhere, so I have to assume that either Eminem has gone senile, or he has sold out. One of the two.

Frankly, I don't care about the legality of the issue, I am much more concerned with the morality. For the record, no, I don't think that using the song in the commercial in the way they did was wrong (morally), regardless of whether or not they got permission.

 

[maelstromr]

Originally posted by jocknerd
If you are profiting from the song monetarily, he has every right to sue you. Thats a publishers' right.

Why is it everytime someone sues Apple, they are stupid and rediculous, but when Apple sues someone over "Intellectual Property" everyone here believes Apple is doing the right thing?

What I find rIdiculous is people's spelling:

Ridiculous:

[From Latin rdiculus, laughable, from rdre, to laugh.]

We should all be careful with the nastiness or you might get embarrassed by someone who knows what they are talking about.

As someone working in IP I am quite confident calling this a frivolous suit...not to say frivolous suite aren't won everyday. I don't believe Apple NEEDS the rights to the song as they 1) used it in the context of selling that song for the artist; 2) did not use the artisit himself or an appreciable length of music to cause economic damages; and 3) MOST LIKELY covered their approaches/retreat very well long before any of us saw the ads.

That's not legal advice, I haven't seen the suit or looked at this specifically, but I'm guessing Apple isn't sweating a whole lot.

 

[SlowX]

Originally posted by j33pd0g
Isn't there the 8 sec rule... you can use something just as long as isn't more then 8 sec?

I think that's for rodeos.
WOOP!

 

[julzmon]

That guy is a complete D I C

I have always hated that guy.
He's complete white trash.

8 mile is a nasty part of Detroit with a whole bunch of strip bars and garbage all over the place.
Nothing to be proud of...

 

[geerlingguy]

Originally posted by 0 and A ai
You people are funny.

Thank you. 😉

 

[mclosers]

No case

He has no case.. THe comercial featured a kid signing a song.. It was accapella. There is no way you could interpret it as emienem endorsing a product. Also I think the Fair Use law is 30 seconds or 10% which ever is less. But you still can not use the song for financial gain. I don't believe he has a chance in hell of winning.... Also I believe that ad did air.. but very briefly