backtop

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


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.


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?


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.


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.


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.


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.


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".


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


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.


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.


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


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.


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


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.


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.


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.


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.


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.