Slashdot Mirror


EMI Cannot Unbundle Pink Floyd Songs

smooth wombat writes "Before the advent of iTunes and MP3s, EMI and Pink Floyd entered into a contract which stated that EMI could not unbundle individual songs from their original album settings. This was insisted upon by the members of Pink Floyd, who wanted to retain artistic control of their works, which they considered 'seamless' pieces of music. However, with the advent of digital downloads, EMI has been selling individual songs through its online store. Pink Floyd sued, claiming EMI was violating the contract, whereas EMI said the contract only applied to physical albums, not Internet sales. Judge Andrew Morritt backed the band, saying the contract protected 'the artistic integrity of the albums.' Judge Morritt also ruled EMI is 'not entitled to exploit recordings by online distribution or by any other means other than the complete original album without Pink Floyd's consent.'"

19 of 601 comments (clear)

  1. Emi by Theoboley · · Score: 5, Funny

    all in all, they just ran into a wall.

    --
    Stupidity only gets you so far, then you've gotta try
    1. Re:Emi by Fieryphoenix · · Score: 5, Funny

      We don't need no compilations!

    2. Re:Emi by Em+Emalb · · Score: 5, Funny

      Hey, Leachers, leave that band alone!

      (Alternate title: Several Species of Nasty Verminous Lawyers Gathered Together in a Basement Groveling Over a Contract)

      --
      Sent from your iPad.
    3. Re:Emi by interkin3tic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you don't buy yer "Another Brick in the Wall: Part 2" you can't have yer "Another Brick in the Wall: Part 1!" How can you buy "Another Brick in the Wall: Part 2" if you don't buy yer "Another Brick in the Wall: Part 1?!?"

    4. Re:Emi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He is running into the same problem many run into as they get older.

      Their time is devoted to other things than following the latest fad (and many acts are that). So he has found a way for someone else to do a bit of sifting for him.

      We used to get our ideas from our friends of what music to listen to. They in turn got it from their friends and so on. But eventually that 'fad loop' closes. The key changers move away or just stop doing whatever it was they did to 'find new music'. Or perhaps you realize the dude with all the cool music is a bit unstable and not what you want to be around anymore...

      So radio is a perfectly valid way to find new music. Then go searching for other things to build on.

      The problem is however, I can go searching on the internet for all sorts of music. But where do I start? Google? I know what genres of music I like but how would I find *NEW* music if I do not even know what to search for? I do not even know they exist much less what sort of music they have. Last.fm and pandora are interesting but limited in their scope of introducing new music.

      You will see this too when you get older. I didnt believe it myself when my parents told me it would happen. It does to many of us.

  2. Because selling "Shine on you crazy diamond IV"... by hubert.lepicki · · Score: 5, Insightful

    doesn't make any sense. Pink Floyd's music is meant to be listened to as a whole, albums are (the good ones) carefully prepared and are one piece of music story.

  3. Radio? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's funny because radio destroys this "artistic integrity" by playing Pink Floyd singles every day.

    1. Re:Radio? by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 5, Funny

      3 moderators agree with him; none with you.

      Dude, I get massive amounts of mod points here all the time, and I'm a fuckin' idiot. What's your point?

  4. Re:Good for PF...but also...bad for PF? by amicusNYCL · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For Pink Floyd this is about artistic integrity, not profit. They've already made their money. For EMI it's all about profit, and that's why Pink Floyd put that provision in the contract.

    This is a win for Pink Floyd, and a loss for labels who think they can do whatever they want.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  5. Re:This isn't about bundling... by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You know, this might be a bit of a shock for you but sometimes, on very rare occasions, people make decisions where monetary profit is not the prime motivator. This might be one such case...

    --

    People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
  6. Re:Good for PF...but also...bad for PF? by Another,+completely · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Albums like Dark Side of the Moon and Wish You Were Here are made as single things. It was the glory days of the concept album. The best track is like the best square inch of a good painting, and they don't want to be judged on that. Good on 'em.

    What I want to know is whether this means that EMI reckons we can freely copy EMI songs from that period because their copyrights applied to the physical album only, so a digital copy from vinyl is OK for free distribution.

  7. Re:Guess no music games then by Chris+Burke · · Score: 5, Funny

    There goes any hopes for Pink Floyd on Rock Band or Guitar Hero...

    They can still make em, they're just going to be fucking brutal. One level is Dark Side of the Moon. The next is The Wall. Hope you can keep it up for 81 minutes, fucker!

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are
  8. So, my guess is... by CannonballHead · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That Slashdot will generally back up PF in this, because they are standing up to the evil record label.

    Which seems to be somewhat contradictory to the general opinion that record labels (and/or artists? information wants to be free? evil copyright?) should not be allowed to have such tight control over how things are sold.

    So here's a record label making it EASIER to get tracks and we're upset about it, because PinkFloyd wants to only sell complete albums. I guess that's their artistic license... but aren't they being evil and putting strict terms on how you acquire their music? I've heard plenty of arguments how that shouldn't be allowed, it's not fair, etc., unless you're talking about physical media. And PF is now suing over distribution of non-physical media ...

    So yes: in my opinion, EMI is breaking a contract. Bad.

    And in my opinion/guess, Slashdot is going to generally be contradicting themselves, upholding a "non-freedom" position (PF's) because it happens to be against what the record label wants.

    If PF wanted it to be listened to as a whole, then make it one track. Or make it movements, like symphonies... etc. For that matter, think of all the symphonies that are sold by movement. Separately... :)

  9. Re:Because selling "Shine on you crazy diamond IV" by Hatta · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have yet to hear anything resembling artistic integrity on the radio.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  10. Re:Good for PF...but also...bad for PF? by amiga3D · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe it's greed or maybe it's revenge. The only way to hurt EMI is through their bank account. If someone makes me go to all the trouble and expense of hiring a law firm I'm damn sure going to hurt them as bad as I can.

  11. Different music concept by boristdog · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Ever since the advent of the long-playing record as the popular music medium, many artists have been making music that flows for 20 to 45 minutes, not just music that lasts for 3 or 4 minutes. Sure, singles still got made, but most real artists thought in terms of albums, not songs. The CD reinforced that model, allowing artists to flow their music for even longer. Even on albums that appear to be mostly singles, a lot of thought went into how they were arranged on the record.

    The advent of itunes killed this. And it's a shame. Young music marketers don't even think beyond 5 minutes of music. Would Thick as a Brick, Tommy, Sgt. Pepper, The Who Sell Out, Brain Salad Surgery, 2112, Ziggy Stardust or any of the Pink Floyd or any number of classic albums even be able to be made in this new "single" only model?

    Floyd has their money, they want to keep their integrity.

  12. Re:Good for PF...but also...bad for PF? by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 5, Funny

    Then why would Pink Floyd ask for royalties as damages?

    How else are you going to hurt the bastards? Money. It's a hit. Don't give me any do goody-goody bullshit.

    --
    Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
  13. Re:Good for PF...but also...bad for PF? by idontgno · · Score: 5, Funny

    Your comment reminds me how truly and deeply I miss AOR.

    Chillin' out with my boombox in my lounge chair in my lawn with a tall cool drink listening to Alan Parsons Project or Yes.... I wouldn't even feel the need to yell at you to get off, you young kids...

    --
    Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  14. Re:Crowded non-profit band by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The only college radio station in Fort Wayne, Indiana, is WBCL, the Bible college radio station.

    The bigger question is: "What in the hell are you doing in Fort Wayne, Indiana?"

    If I remember correctly, there are buses leaving that town every single day. It's a great American tradition that people who are interested in experiencing all that the world offers leave towns like Fort Wayne just as soon as they're old enough to walk and make their way to places that are not bound by religious fundamentalism and small-town small-mindedness.

    I'd like to say I'm not trying to single Fort Wayne out, but the fact is that I'm quite familiar with Fort Wayne and the Bible Belt that it's got on so tight that it's cutting off the circulation to the brain.

    Seriously, friend, make like a tree and leave.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.