The Wall Street Journal reports that Ticketmaster, the concert-ticket giant, will not be resigning its deal with live-music promoter Live Nation after the 10 year agreement between the parties expires next year.
Talk about losing a big-account!
One can imagine that tension in the deal involved the fees Ticketmaster charges. But perhaps Live Nation is taking a cue from the fans - though the service Ticketmaster provides is convenient and popular, the surcharges Ticketmaster imposes are excessive. Considering concert-goers can now purchase AND PRINT tickets at home, why are there "service fees"? If the public is getting charged such fees, one can only imagine what Live Nation is getting charged.
December 21, 2007
December 20, 2007
Phil Spector Seeks Return of Legal Fees
The AP reports that Phil Spector, legendary producer and creator of the "wall of sound", is suing his former lawyer in Spector's murder trial.
Spector seeks a refund of $1mil. paid to Robert Shapiro and his firm.
Spector seeks a refund of $1mil. paid to Robert Shapiro and his firm.
Bad Bad Leroy Brown
Last week, EMI Music Publishing announced that it had acquired the exclusive North American publishing rights for the catalogue of famed singer-songwriter Jim Croce.
Roadhouse Blues
The Boss - Bruce Springsteen - and his cronies (i.e., publishers EMI, WB etc.) filed a cookie-cutter copyright infringement suit, alleging unauthorized public performance of four musical works. Defendant is the owner of the Rolling Thunder Road House Cafe, in South Carolina.
Nothing that interesting here, other than plaintiffs claim knowing and wilful infringement, based on Defendant ignoring letters from ASCAP -- but then only demand non-wilful statutory damages (i.e., $750 - $30,000). Statutory damages for wilful infringement have a maximum of $150,000. 17 U.S.C. 504(c).
[Duke of Earle et al. v. Baker, case 6:07-cv-04062-RBH (filed 12/18/2007; Dist.S.C.)]
Nothing that interesting here, other than plaintiffs claim knowing and wilful infringement, based on Defendant ignoring letters from ASCAP -- but then only demand non-wilful statutory damages (i.e., $750 - $30,000). Statutory damages for wilful infringement have a maximum of $150,000. 17 U.S.C. 504(c).
[Duke of Earle et al. v. Baker, case 6:07-cv-04062-RBH (filed 12/18/2007; Dist.S.C.)]
December 19, 2007
Multiply Inc. Sued by Major Label
Capitol Records, and a host of other entities owned and/or controlled by label giant EMI Music, sued the company Multiply Inc. in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York. Plaintiffs allege copyright infringement arising from unauthorized use and exploitation of original sound and video recordings by encouraging and enabling users of Multiply to upload and share performances of well-known musical groups.
What gives? This sounds like EMI is suing YouTube type service. But, after casually visiting Multiply's website, which boasts "Multiply makes it easy to create, share and discuss your blog, photos, videos and music with more of the people you know, and less of the people you don't"; it looks like this is more of an online storage site, giving users their own "homepage" to share with the world. But, is this any different than MySpace? Is EMI just going after the little-guy, hoping for precedential effect against the behemoths in the future?
[Capitol Records Inc.; Caroline Records Inc.; EMI Christian Music Group Inc.; Virgin Records America Inc.; Colgems EMI Music Inc.; EMI April Music Inc.; EMI Blackwood Music; EMI Full Keel Music; EMI Grove Park Music Inc.; EMI Longitude Music; EMI Robbins Catalog Inc.; EMI U Catalog Inc.; EMI Virgin Music Inc.; EMI Virgin Song Inc.; EMI Waterford Music Inc. v. Multiply Inc.; filed 12/18/2007; case CV-11357]
What gives? This sounds like EMI is suing YouTube type service. But, after casually visiting Multiply's website, which boasts "Multiply makes it easy to create, share and discuss your blog, photos, videos and music with more of the people you know, and less of the people you don't"; it looks like this is more of an online storage site, giving users their own "homepage" to share with the world. But, is this any different than MySpace? Is EMI just going after the little-guy, hoping for precedential effect against the behemoths in the future?
[Capitol Records Inc.; Caroline Records Inc.; EMI Christian Music Group Inc.; Virgin Records America Inc.; Colgems EMI Music Inc.; EMI April Music Inc.; EMI Blackwood Music; EMI Full Keel Music; EMI Grove Park Music Inc.; EMI Longitude Music; EMI Robbins Catalog Inc.; EMI U Catalog Inc.; EMI Virgin Music Inc.; EMI Virgin Song Inc.; EMI Waterford Music Inc. v. Multiply Inc.; filed 12/18/2007; case CV-11357]
Labels:
Copyright,
EMI,
Infringement,
Multiply Inc,
MySpace,
Social Networking
Easy Listening
Yes, shocking as it may be, even world renown musical artists need someone to manage their business, financial, and tax services. Yesterday, Michael Bolton (and affiliated companies) were sued in New York Supreme Court (N.Y. Co.) for alleged breach of contract / failure to pay ($513,000.00).
[Executive Monetary Management Inc. v. Michael Bolotin aka Michael Bolton; Bolton Power Blues LLC; Bona Justitia Music Inc.; Is Hot Music Ltd.; MBO Productions Inc.; MBO Tours Inc.; MB Swings LLC; MB Swings II LLC; M Bolton Entertainment LLC; Montaigne Records LLC; Mr. Bolton's Music Inc.; Passion Films Inc.; The Passion Group Inc.; Passion Music Inc.; Passion Realty LLC; The Second Time Around LLC; Stowaways LLC; filed 12/18/2007; case 07-604128]
[Executive Monetary Management Inc. v. Michael Bolotin aka Michael Bolton; Bolton Power Blues LLC; Bona Justitia Music Inc.; Is Hot Music Ltd.; MBO Productions Inc.; MBO Tours Inc.; MB Swings LLC; MB Swings II LLC; M Bolton Entertainment LLC; Montaigne Records LLC; Mr. Bolton's Music Inc.; Passion Films Inc.; The Passion Group Inc.; Passion Music Inc.; Passion Realty LLC; The Second Time Around LLC; Stowaways LLC; filed 12/18/2007; case 07-604128]
December 18, 2007
Flashing Bling
Damon Dash, co-founder of Roc-A-Fella records with Jay-Z, was sued in New York Supreme Court (N.Y. Co;) for allegedly flashing his "bling" (i.e., genitalia) at a club in Miami, Florida...and, allegedly trying to make plaintiff perform oral sex. Due to his high-profile -- which includes Rocawear clothing ventures, work with Posh Spice, and a reality TV show-- should bring some attention in the gossip tabloids.
Oh, and did we mention that he is married? And, has a daughter with his wife, fashion designer Rachel Roy? Try explaining THAT ONE to your kids after work...
[Jamie Roberts v. Damon Dash; filed 12/17/2007; case 07-116694]
Oh, and did we mention that he is married? And, has a daughter with his wife, fashion designer Rachel Roy? Try explaining THAT ONE to your kids after work...
[Jamie Roberts v. Damon Dash; filed 12/17/2007; case 07-116694]
Labels:
Bling,
Damon Dash,
Hip-Hop,
Personal Injury
December 17, 2007
Well Its All Right - It's Okay - You Can Look the Other Way
...and another cookie-cutter alleged infringement of publisher's copyright in public performance. Notable parties include the collection society BMI and the Gibbs brothers, i.e., The BeeGees.
[Broadcast Music Inc.; Michael Joe Jackson; Janice Vercher; Spirit One Music; Miran Publishing Inc.; Two Knight Music; Couch & Madison Partnership; The Estate of Maurice Gibb; Robin Gibb; Barry Gibb v. Queen of Hearts Cruises Inc. dba The Queen of Hearts; Steven Salsberg; Ira Barocas; filed 12/13/2007; S.D.N.Y.; case CV-11222]
[Broadcast Music Inc.; Michael Joe Jackson; Janice Vercher; Spirit One Music; Miran Publishing Inc.; Two Knight Music; Couch & Madison Partnership; The Estate of Maurice Gibb; Robin Gibb; Barry Gibb v. Queen of Hearts Cruises Inc. dba The Queen of Hearts; Steven Salsberg; Ira Barocas; filed 12/13/2007; S.D.N.Y.; case CV-11222]
Labels:
Bee Gees,
BMI,
Copyright,
Infringement,
Public Performance,
Publishers
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)