DailyTech - Eminem Sues Apple Over iTunes Downloads

Submit News

Internet Eminem Sues Apple Over iTunes Downloads
Brandon Hill (Blog) - August 1, 2007 11:36 AM

E-mail

del.icio.us

55 comment(s) - last by MeTaedet.. on Aug 7 at 6:51 PM

Nobody messes with Marshall Matthers III, aka Eminem

Eminem and his crew take a bite out of Apple

Everyone wants a bite out of Apple the days. Apple was sued in early July for copyright infringement concerning Avril Lavigne's "Girlfriend." Apple came under fire yet again in late July when Jose Trujillo filed an anti-trust lawsuit against the company over the iPhone's lack of a user-replaceable battery and "poor" battery life.

Today, it's rap artist Eminem's turn to bite down to Apple's core. In a multi-million dollar lawsuit filed on Monday, Eminem's producer (Eight Mile Style) and his copyright manager (Martin Affiliated) claim that Universal Musical Group was never authorized to allow the download of his music from iTunes.

"Eight Mile and Martin have demanded that Apple cease and desist its reproduction and distribution and Apple has refused," states the complaint filed by Eight Mile Style and Martin Affiliated.

Of the 99 cents that Apple receives for each song downloaded from iTunes, 70 cents is given to the recording label. The recording label then gives roughly 9.1 cents of its 70 cents to the publisher of the song.

Recording artists are looking for a way to receive a bigger chunk of the 60.9 cents that is left according to entertainment lawyer Owen Sloane.

"There are a number of unresolved issues," remarked Sloane. "You're going to see more of these suits."

This isn’t the first time that Eminem and Apple have been in a legal scuffle. Eight Mile Style and Martin Affiliated also sued Apple over the 2004 “Lose Yourself” TV spot for Apple’s iTunes music store. In the commercial, Eminem’s music was used without his permission. The suit was later settled out of court for an undisclosed amount.

Comments

Threshold

Username
Password
remember me

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Did I read that right??

By Desslok on 8/1/2007 11:51:54 AM , Rating: 1

They are suing Apple because the label didn't have their premission to let iTunes have their music??? How is that Apple's fault??

They must see their 15 mins of fame going away.

RE: Did I read that right??

By OrSin on 8/1/2007 12:02:23 PM , Rating: 4

quote:
Eight Mile and Martin have demanded that Apple cease and desist its reproduction and distribution and Apple has refused

You notice they asked apple to stop. Since they didnt do what they now know to be illegal they should get sued. Apple needs to understand they dont have ablanket agreement to every song or Artist on a label.

Parent

RE: Did I read that right??

By Desslok on 8/1/2007 12:09:43 PM , Rating: 2

But doesn't the label own the rights to the music?

Parent

RE: Did I read that right??

By crimson117 on 8/1/2007 12:33:52 PM , Rating: 5

quote:
But doesn't the label own the rights to the music?

Eminem is alleging that Universal specifically did not have the right to allow iTunes Music Store to distribute his music.

They may still have other rights granted by him - like to sell CD's. But the label doesn't own the full copyright to the music, no.

Parent

RE: Did I read that right??

By Alexstarfire on 8/1/2007 2:36:05 PM , Rating: 1

Eminem doesn't have the right to sue Apple for something his record label did. If anything he should sue his record label. Of course, since he gets money off the downloads I'm not sure why he's complaining in the first place. If he's complaining that he doesn't get enough, that's between him and his record label, not Apple.

Also, the article states that the producer and copyright manager told Apple to stop. If the record label says that Apple can do it then they don't have to listen to what Eminem is telling them to do. Eninem needs to get his record label to tell Apple to stop, then they'd stop.

All in all, it's just an attempt to get fame in my book, like so many others have tried. Very lame. He doesn't have too many good songs anyways.

Parent

RE: Did I read that right??

By omnicronx on 8/1/2007 3:19:06 PM , Rating: 1

Why does every keep bringing up money, he asked apple to stop, which would stop the money coming in not would it not?

And of course Eminem has the right to sue apple, you have the 'right' to sue anyone for anything you want, whether it will go through is a different matter.

It sounds to me like both universal and apple are at fault here, universal should not have given permission in the first place, and apple should have stopped when asked. But.. eminem probably has a good relationship with his own label, so why would he sue them, why not sue the company that has blatantly ripped him off in the past(and successfully sued for doing so) and does not listen to your cease and desist order. Apple should have seen this coming after they said no.

Whether or not the label asked apple or not, Eminem did and thats all it should take.

Parent

RE: Did I read that right??

By rcc on 8/1/2007 4:18:37 PM , Rating: 5

quote:
you have the 'right' to sue anyone for anything you want

true, "you" do have that right. "you" also have a moral obligation to use your "rights" appropriately. For instance, bringing lawsuits in an appropriate manner. Too bad there are so many people to worried about "me" to remember the other xx billion people on the planet.

I have no clue what the merits of this case are. However, I'll bet you a nickle that Apple immediately called the record company with which they have a contract and asked if there was a problem here, and were told everything was just hunky dory. So Eminem and the record company really need to get all their stuff in one sock and work things out.

Or perhaps he should also sue the ISP providing service for the iTunes server, the cabling company that maintains the wiring, and the answering service that takes calls after hours, just in case.

Parent

RE: Did I read that right??

By Oregonian2 on 8/1/2007 2:02:50 PM , Rating: 2

Their rights are spelled out in contracts with their "supplier".

Parent

RE: Did I read that right??

By Lightning III on 8/1/2007 12:12:07 PM , Rating: 2

I'm sure apple's contract is with universal music group

so they can tell m&m to go blow he's sueing the wrong people

it's not apples fault UMG is bending him over keeping 60 and giving him 10

Parent

RE: Did I read that right??

By kamel5547 on 8/1/2007 12:38:20 PM , Rating: 2

Actually it is their problem. THis is very similar to DMCA notices served to people. Apple job post such a notice was to verify that Universal was indeed the copyright holder (and not just the distributor for Eminem's label). Distributing music under an agreement does not confer additional distribution rights beyond the initial scope of the agreement (CD's and DVD's in this case). While Universal is also most likely liable, Apple is liable the same way YouTube would be if it ignored takedown notices. The big issue would be who owns the copyright, but I ahve a feeling Eminem does especially for later albums (and portions of his first album are copyrighted by labels other than UMG).

Having a contract does not confer protection unless the contract indemnifies you for damages.

Parent

RE: Did I read that right??

By Samus on 8/1/2007 3:04:03 PM , Rating: 2

60/10 ratio is pretty common for most itunes songs as far as label/artist division.

Parent

RE: Did I read that right??

By retrospooty on 8/1/2007 12:02:51 PM , Rating: 3

I may be mistaken here, but Apple collects $1 per iTunes download and they don't have permission to do so for this artist. Isn't that the issue? Apple is collecting revenue on something they have no right on.

We should all be using Limewire and other Napster clones to get it for free anyhow. That resolves the revenue issue. LOL

Parent

RE: Did I read that right??

By akugami on 8/1/2007 12:12:43 PM , Rating: 2

There are many issues at stake here and we, at this point, don't have enough information to say whether it's a baseless lawsuit or a valid one. Initial evidence and the way the music industry is set up would point to a baseless lawsuit, or perhaps the wrong party is being sued.

The main issue at hand is what exactly was in the contract between the publisher/distributer (in this case Universal) and the artist (Eminem). Depending on what the contract states Universal may or may not have the rights to distribute this digitally. I'd say that considering what the standard contracts dictate it's more likely than not that Universal does have the right to authorize digital distribution.

More likely than not what happened was Emimen's label sent a cease and desist letter to Apple saying they are infringing on his (Eminem's) copyrights. And unless the contract was sent to Apple with the specifics stating that only Eminem's label has the rights to distribute his songs online, then Apple can safely ignore any such requests. Either way, the proper party to sue would be Universal and Apple together if they are illegally distributing the songs. Universal for the initial infringement and Apple for not stopping distribution after being presented with proof that what they are doing is infringing.

More likely than not, what Apple and Universal is doing is perfectly legal as put forth by contracts.

Parent

RE: Did I read that right??

By The Sword 88 on 8/1/2007 12:22:42 PM , Rating: 1

If Apple has a contract with Universal the M&M and shoudl be sueing his record label not messing with Apple. If Apple doesnt have a contract with Universal then why isnt Universal sueing Apple?

I think M&M is just trying to get his sorry butt back into the spotlight

Parent

RE: Did I read that right??

By Nik00117 on 8/1/2007 12:57:46 PM , Rating: 1

quote:
I think M&M is just trying to get his sorry butt back into the spotlight

I laugh at that statement, Eminem has always stated it would like to be more of a producer then a rapper.

So hes not trying to stay in the spotlight he has no need too.

Parent

RE: Did I read that right??

By The Sword 88 on 8/1/2007 1:55:19 PM , Rating: 3

Then he needs the money? Why else would he be so concerned about this?

And I am sure he is perfectly happy not being a star anymore.

Parent

RE: Did I read that right??

By wordsworm on 8/2/2007 11:03:35 AM , Rating: 3

It's not always about money. Maybe it's about control. It's his music, he wants to control it. I think that's natural. All you punks who're making fun of the way he looks should maybe stop being condescending on people for the way they choose to express themselves. Don't get me wrong,I'm not into Eminem. I think I would recognize a song or two he did, thanks to commercials, but otherwise he's way off my radar. It doesn't mean I need to disrespect him because I don't care for him. I think what he's doing is not just for himself, but also for all those other artists who are basically getting raped by the system. For all his work in the music industry, I think what he's doing here with this lawsuit might very well be his most important contribution to the artistic community.

Some other folks have criticized the music ability of modern artists compared to those of Led Zeppelin and Jimi Hendrix. But the truth of the matter is that those two groups in particular were among the elites of their generations. Further, their rhythmic abilities were nothing compared to modern hip-hop and rap, including the relatively complex and skillful lyrical ability of Eminem et al. This new fangled rhythmic chanting is extremely sophisticated and commendable, even if I choose not to listen to very much of it (as I find the themes are often not to my taste). I don't think much rock-and-roll exists outside of the 3/4 or 4/4 realm of rhythm, and most of it really doesn't care. It's focussed on melody and modes. Modern rap and hip-hop pays quite a bit of attention to the stress of English - I have never heard iambic phrasing out of Jimi Hendrix (may He rest in peace) or any from His era at all. If we could resurrect Him and ask Him to sing an Eminem song, I have little doubt but that He would fail just as miserably as if we asked Eminem to play 'Purple Haze' on the guitar.

Parent

RE: Did I read that right??

By The Sword 88 on 8/2/2007 1:01:16 PM , Rating: 1

Yeah sure artists are getting raped by iTunes...

Wait no, iTunes saved the music industry. If it was not for iTunes a hell of a lot more people would be using Napster clones and these artists would not be getting any money for their songs. I mean come on, how many of you would buy a whole album for one songs when you could just find it for free? So people would but not many. But most people dont mind paying $.99 for a song instead of stealing it. Plus I think it would fair to give them 9 cents per person who downloads one of their songs. That way they have to make multiple good songs to make a lot of money instead of relying on one single that people buy a whole album for like things were before iTunes. Bands taht make a whole album of good songs deserve my $10 while bands that put out 1-3 godd songs and 7-10 pieces of crap deserve my $1-$3 dollars. That makes sense to me.

Parent

RE: Did I read that right??

By wordsworm on 8/3/2007 6:48:45 AM , Rating: 2

Sure, I'd say that iTunes violated Eminem's right not to have his work sold and the proceeds given to the record label who has no right to that money (from what I gathered from the article). In any case, it should not be for you to decide how you get the song that you want. It should be up to the artist. If you don't like the terms that the artist has offered as a fair trade, it doesn't mean you have the right to steal it.

Parent

RE: Did I read that right??

By SmokeRngs on 8/3/2007 10:03:12 AM , Rating: 2

quote:
Maybe it's about control. It's his music, he wants to control it. I think that's natural.

Then he should have done all distribution himself. He decided to have someone else take care of distribution so he could sell more albums and make more money. At this point, he lost some control since he gave the control to someone else.

From the information I have, it's a simple matter. If he believes Universal does not have the right to allow itunes to distribute the music, he should be talking to them. Then, Universal can inform itunes that it must stop selling and distributing the music if it is found that Universal doesn't have the authority to allow itunes to distribute and sell the music.

As long as Apple and itunes believes they have a valid contract with Universal to distribute and sell the music, they have no reason to listen to Eminem. Since he granted Universal distribution rights, his control in the matter is very limited depending on the contract between him and Universal.

Apple/itunes has a direct relationship with Universal as Universal gave Apple/itunes distribution rights for downloads. Eminem has a direct relationship with Universal as he gave distribution rights to his music to Universal. Eminem does not have a direct relationship with Apple/itunes for anything. The convergence point is Universal. If there is an actual problem, it's with Universal.

Parent

RE: Did I read that right??

By wordsworm on 8/5/2007 11:25:28 AM , Rating: 2

According to this article, Eminem did not give over all the rights to his music. He sold the rights for them to distribute his music CDs, not mp3s. It's a different format. From what I understand (based on the above article), Eminem still owns those rights. If he does own them, then what right does Universal have to distribute them through iTunes? If Eminem does have legal rights over his mp3s, and he informed iTunes of this, then they have participated in violating his rights.

Parent

RE: Did I read that right??

By The Sword 88 on 8/1/07, Rating: 0

RE: Did I read that right??

By Oregonian2 on 8/1/2007 2:01:24 PM , Rating: 2

It's not Apple's "fault" that the label didn't have the rights they licensed to Apple. It's Apple's fault for not stopping sales of the "music" after being informed of the situation.

Parent

RE: Did I read that right??

By Imaginer on 8/1/2007 6:19:47 PM , Rating: 2

It is not Apple's fault for failing to pull the music off the distribution through iTunes. Eminem needs to speak with Universal about that. Apple has a contract with Universal that they probably follow orders from and if Eminem can bypass this, who's to say other artists can't do the same?

In a company, if you do not like something or how it is done, do you go directly to whoever that is not even within your line of authority to get something done? Does one get a hold of a sub-sub-contractor to tell him/her what to do if you feel they did something wrong when it is not in your power to do so? Eminem has no authority to tell Apple what to do because Apple is mearly a means of distributing, not the authority (Universal).

Parent

RE: Did I read that right??

By Oregonian2 on 8/2/2007 1:52:07 PM , Rating: 3

If a subcontractor is tearing down your house, will you not directly yell at them and try to get them to stop. After all it's YOUR house not your direct contractor's (whom you hired to do something in the back yard). The songs being distributed by Apple isn't the distributor's, it's the artist's (unless it was sold by them ... rather than just hiring the distributor to do something with it -- I know new artists have diddly-squat rights but name artists can have control of their own work).

Assuming Eminem's assertions are true, Universal certainly should be involved as well -- but if Apple is distributing Eminem's material without proper authorization direct action against them is proper I think. If my brother gives me authorization to distribute Eminem's songs on a website I set up, should I ignore Eminem and RIAA's protests and lawyer letters because I have authorization -- and that they should take it up with my brother?

Parent

baseless lawsuit

By Screwballl on 8/1/2007 12:14:44 PM , Rating: 3

The label allowed his music to be sold... the label is screwing him out of the money... therefore the money needs to come from the label, not Apple.

But he is such a moron to begin with so this is no surprise...

RE: baseless lawsuit

By Oregonian2 on 8/1/2007 2:03:50 PM , Rating: 3

But the stopping of the allegedly illegal sales needs to come from Apple.

Parent

RE: baseless lawsuit

By kelmon on 8/3/2007 3:04:00 AM , Rating: 2

Pardon? Sorry but where do you think Apple got the music from in the first place? Do you think Steve nipped out to the local record store, ripped Eminem's CDs and then sold them through iTunes? Or is it more likely that Universal gave Apple the tracks to sell? If Universal tells Apple not to sell the tracks then Apple will stop selling them. But, hey, Eminem sues Apple is a better headline than Eminem sues Universal...

What a load of nonsense.

Parent

RE: baseless lawsuit

By Oregonian2 on 8/3/2007 5:23:18 PM , Rating: 4

So if Universal gives copies of Beatles songs (EMI music) to sell on iTunes (which they presumably don't have rights to either) and the Beatles want 'em to stop, then the Beatles have to get Universal to tell Apple to stop selling it?

To repeat a comment I made lower down in the thread chain, if my brother authorizes me to sell Eminem material on the web, and I do so, should I ignore threats from Eminem and RIAA because they have to take it up with my brother who gave me the rights? You say that my brother doesn't have the rights to give me? Well, Eminem says Universal doesn't either.

Parent

RE: baseless lawsuit

By Seemonkeyscanfly on 8/2/2007 3:29:17 PM , Rating: 3

Look I hate RAP. Add the C back to the front of that word and you have the word that describes RAP for me. I really dislike Eminem, He reeks of being a “want-to-be-boy”. However, at one time Eminem cut, printed, and distributed his own albums, because he did not like paying such high percentages to people who did not help him create the albums. He felt the artist should get the biggest cut – not the lawyers, record labs, distributors… So no the label did not allow him to sell his music. He succeeded without one before and now someone trying to cut into his pie again. He protected himself from this, he is suing, and will most likely win. In turn he will pocket millions.
Call him fake, call him self-centered, call him a bad artist, but I would not call him a moron.

I would also add apple is collecting the money from the downloads not the record label. Therefore apple has his money.

Parent

wow, what a pic

By Quiksel on 8/1/2007 11:46:21 AM , Rating: 3

I've never seen that headline pic before, but... OH. My. God.

I bet he's glad to be an adult now. Childhood must have been mega painful.

Now I feel sorry for him. Dang.

/turns up the Eminem on iTunes, feeling his pain ;)

RE: wow, what a pic

By Griswold on 8/1/2007 12:12:38 PM , Rating: 2

I dunno, but I prefer the honest, young smile over the wannabe badboy face.

Parent

RE: wow, what a pic

By Moishe on 8/1/2007 12:34:56 PM , Rating: 2

Not to mention.... you'd get the same reaction out of most pictures that are ten+ years old... Most of us look like idiots in our teen pics. If you're still a teen, you'll agree in 10 years :)

Parent

RE: wow, what a pic

By headbox on 8/2/2007 2:22:39 AM , Rating: 3

He lived at home in the suburbs until he was 25. He has no idea what life on the street is. He went from Mom's basement to making millions of other white wannabes.

In other news: rap and hip hop sales are down 60% in the last two years. They are all selling out and doing TV commercials and losing that bad boy image that attracts kids. No surprise when they start suing people so they can buy more bling.

Parent

RE: wow, what a pic

By wordsworm on 8/2/2007 10:38:38 AM , Rating: 2

quote:
They are all selling out and doing TV commercials and losing that bad boy image that attracts kid

Yeah, I agree 100%. Only murderous thugs and convicts should be role models for kids, not pasty middle class suburbanites.

Parent

RE: wow, what a pic

By Seemonkeyscanfly on 8/2/2007 11:22:46 AM , Rating: 2

Ironic but theft of rap CDs from stores are up 60%....

Parent

what's with all these losers?

By Gul Westfale on 8/1/2007 7:06:32 PM , Rating: 5

so first avril lavigne sues apple and then chantal kreviazuk (sp?) says lavigne copied her "music"... and then it's in all the papers and it's a "controversy"... and now we have this here sad little loser boy/retard who says that his own label was not authorised to sell his music (like omfgwtfbbq?!?)...

what i wanna know is, who actually cares? so avril and chantal are fighting over who wrote the crappy song that plays in elevators worldwide; and some guy is pissed that he gets paid from itunes downloads even though he cannot actually play an instrument...

and to think, once there were bands like zep and the eagles and jimi and deep purple and and and... and they actually made MUSIC. you know, with instruments? and they wrote the songs themselves? and they weren't about teenage angst crap because that's what the label told them to write about?

RE: what's with all these losers?

By Cunthor666 on 8/2/2007 3:19:08 AM , Rating: 3

Would you care if your music was being sold without your authorization? Subjective music opinion aside (I couldn't care less about rap/pop), if you are not allowed to sell something legally, then don't do it.

I'm just curious as to why Universal only just decided to pursue this matter...

Parent

RE: what's with all these losers?

By Gul Westfale on 8/3/2007 12:41:47 AM , Rating: 2

of course i would care, but the point of asking a label to distribute your music is so that they can actually, you know, distribute it. i don't think that there are separate provisions there for CDs, SACDs, vinyl, and tape; so why should there be for the digital format?

it is unfair that the artists (and i'm not calling any rapper an artist, ever) only get 9 cents when their label makes 6 times that; but that is the fault of the label and not of apple.

Parent

RE: what's with all these losers?

By wordsworm on 8/3/2007 6:52:42 AM , Rating: 2

I don't think Eminem is objecting to his work being sold on CDs. He's objecting to iTunes. The two are clearly different.

quote:
so why should there be for the digital format?

CDs are digital.

Parent

What is the $0.70 used for?

By nhepker on 8/1/2007 3:10:18 PM , Rating: 2

So what does the label use this money for? There was no CD produced for this purchase. It can't cost all that much to produce the music does it? Enlighten me please.

RE: What is the $0.70 used for?

By Gul Westfale on 8/1/2007 7:08:29 PM , Rating: 3

who do you think pays for all the hookers and coke during the recording sessions? who, i ask you?

;)

Parent

RE: What is the $0.70 used for?

By MobileZone on 8/2/2007 12:10:11 AM , Rating: 2

No, it doesn't cost. First class recording studios, mixing, mastering professionals, pre-production, etc. are all FREE.

Parent

RE: What is the $0.70 used for?

By StillPimpin on 8/7/2007 6:15:20 PM , Rating: 2

No. They are not free (and I do understand your sarcasm), but they do have a fixed cost. And once those costs are paid for, everything else is profit.

Someone posted earlier that we don't have all the information that we need to discern if this lawsuit has merit or not. I agree, we don't know. This is a very complex issue that is more than just if Universal had the right to authorize Apple to distribute Enemas music or not. And to know if they had the right, you would have to look at all the contracts to see exactly what rights are spelled out where and who has them.

There is also the issue of royalties.

quote:
Of the 99 cents that Apple receives for each song downloaded from iTunes, 70 cents is given to the recording label. The recording label then gives roughly 9.1 cents of its 70 cents to the publisher of the song.

Now, I'm no math wiz but, $.091 is only 13% of $.70. That means that the record label is keeping 87% of what comes from iTunes. Again, I don't know all that goes on behind the scenes but any artist looking at these numbers would be a fool to give up their rights to digital distribution. It's pure profit.

So now on the surface, it looks like Enema has a legitimate case against Apple if the rights to mp3/downloadable distribution in fact do not belong to Universal. If he asked them to stop, and they said no because Universal told them that they could, and he said Universal can't give you that right because they themselves don't have it, and they said screw you we're going to do it anyway, then he is absolutely going after the right people.

Go Enema! Fight the Power!

Parent

Pimped

By cbo on 8/1/2007 2:19:01 PM , Rating: 2

9.1 cents maybe the artist should get at their labels. I know that after 10 million or so records thats still some considerable change to you or I. But when you sit and think all that was left on the table and divided by others.... well if I where an artist it would make me wanna get my own website and cut-out the middlemen

RE: Pimped

By Christopher1 on 8/6/2007 11:23:22 PM , Rating: 2

You've got that right. With the availability of high-speed internet now, that is becoming more and more viable as days go by, for the artists to totally cut out the middleman.

Frankly, I don't buy CD's anymore. I go to a website that offers DRM-free downloads of the music I want or sign up for something like Yahoo's Music Unlimited service.

Otherwise, I just don't buy from them!

Parent

Hmm: Check out these Lyrics

By ckdailytech529 on 8/1/2007 12:57:13 PM , Rating: 1

Eminem in Public Enemy # 1 from the RE-UP.

I sense someone's tapping into my phones, why do
I got this feeling in my bones I might die soon
The FBI might be trying to pull my file soon
I might be walking blindfold into a typhoon
I might be seeing rockets light up the night sky
Right outside the window of my living room
And if they do you can say good night and by-bye to them iTunes
If I don't try to record as much as I can before I do
The plan is to have as many in the can as I can
As I stand before you in this booth of walking dead man

RE: Hmm: Check out these Lyrics

By The Sword 88 on 8/1/2007 2:02:07 PM , Rating: 2

What?

Parent

Boo Hoo

By iFX on 8/6/2007 10:47:26 AM , Rating: 2

Poor Eminem, struggeling to remain relivent.

sigh

By MeTaedet on 8/7/2007 6:51:31 PM , Rating: 2

I wish you hadn't been a helping hand in the effort to pull Eminem out of the pop music rubbish bin. To be more accurate, he was always in a rubbish bin of said kind, but, in his best days, the one into which obscene amounts of money were also placed - MTV and VH1 being adiutrices of the denizens of which. Before this lawsuit he'd been in a different kind whither the spent, no-longer-profitable tards are relegated. He's escaped now momentarily to torment those of us with unsullied and sagacious ears. I suggest he be more safely disposed of next time by, say, placing him in the document shredder.