Slashdot Mirror


Et Tu Brute? EMI to Sue AOL Over Musical Infringement

QGambit writes "Salon.com is running an AP story about EMI Music suing AOL Time Warner for using songs from its music catalog on TBS and the AOL service without paying for them."EMI's publishing unit contends that AOL Time Warner is illegally using songs for promotional purposes from "The Wizard of Oz," "Singin' in the Rain," and other classic Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer movies." Good. Now that they are turning on themselves, they will leave us alone for awhile."

7 of 122 comments (clear)

  1. I don't think so... by Skirwan · · Score: 5, Funny
    Good. Now that they are turning on themselves, they will leave us alone for awhile.
    I'm pretty sure that most individual lawyers aren't multithreaded, but a massively parallel system like the legal department at EMI or AOL/TW has got to be able to do more than one thing at a time.

    --
    Damn the Emperor!
  2. Talk about picky by Shimmer · · Score: 5, Informative

    The meat of the story is at the bottom of the article. Apparently TBS owns the rights to the movies that contain these songs. TBS is in turned owned by AOL/TW. But EMI claims that TBS cannot transfer the rights to its own parent company! The exact quote is:

    "We gave them very personal use. It was non assignable."

    This just seems like an argument between lawyers about the fine print in an old contract. Not really relevant to the whole IP debate. (I'm sure that won't stop the /. hordes from descending, though.<g>)

    -- Brian

    --
    The most rabid believers in American Exceptionalism are the exact same people whose policies are destroying it.
    1. Re:Talk about picky by T.+Will+S.+Idea · · Score: 4, Insightful

      True,

      But buying a company solely for its IP, stripping the company to the bone and firing all of its employees is a fairly common practice in business. (Although usually this is done with software or patent IP not music, which is readily licensed.)

      Making the songs non assignable, protects the company you licensed them to. It also prevents your arch enemy from licensing your stuff by acquisition.

      --
      If electricity is produced by electrons is morality produced by morons?
  3. They made their bed and now it's time to lay in it by digiZen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hehehe... The songs they mention are so damn old (How old is The Wizard of OZ, anyway?) that the copyrights should have expired a long time ago if we lived in a sane world. But thanks to the lobbying efforts of Disney, Time Warner and others in the record industry, they get to take their bitter medicine. I only wish they'd learn from their stupidity. I'm personally hoping that they spend oodles and oodles of money on $400/hr star trial lawyers, and maybe (if we're lucky) to reach an unsatisfactory conclusion for both sides - sort of like that recently passed retroactive webcasting fee is being groaned about from both sides. Only this time it would be a pleasant sound to hear Time Warner and EMI groan.

  4. Seems I read somewhere by thumbtack · · Score: 4, Funny

    that sharks sometimes attack each other when in a feeding frenzy....

  5. It�s still our fault!!! by DaHat · · Score: 5, Funny

    All of us are to blame because we watch, if our tv's would prevent the viewing of unauthorized pieces of music then none of this would ever have happened. This is why we need DRM to keep us from being forced to listen to/see illegal broadcasts!

  6. Re:How long? by bellings · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How long will it be before executives and investors finally realize that the only people making money... are the lawyers?

    Do you remember the old story about the two guys who get being chased by a bear? The first guy sits down, ruffles through his bag, pulls out a pair of running shoes, and starts to put them on. The second guy asks, "What the hell are you doing? You can't outrun a bear!" The first guy replies, "I don't have to outrun the bear. I have to outrun you."

    To win, media companies only have to do two things: first, become the most successful of the existing media companies, and second, raise the entry barrier so high that no other media companies can come into the picture and compete.

    Of course, this is EMI's way of raising the entry barrier higher. I imagine the story submitter found this to be a "good thing" because he can't imagine himself as a content producer himself. More artificial restrictions on the people who create thing won't affect him in any way, because he knows he's never going to create anything anyhow.

    --
    Slashdot is jumping the shark. I'm just driving the boat.