MP3.com in legal trouble now

David Pennybaker · Post by **David Pennybaker** » 9 May 2001 8:42 am

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/20010508/tc/mp3com_lawsuit_1.html

Tuesday May 8 11:08 PM ET
Newman, Waits, Heart Sue MP3.com

By GARY GENTILE, AP Business Writer

LOS ANGELES (AP) - Songwriters Randy Newman, Tom Waits and members of the rock band Heart have filed a $40.5 million copyright infringement lawsuit against Internet music site MP3.com.

The songwriters, who all own the copyrights to their music, assert that the San Diego-based Web site illegally gives listeners access to their songs over the My.Mp3.com service. The suit was filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles.

The suit claims that songs such as Newman's hits, ``I Love LA'' and ``Short People'' as well as ``Downtown Train'' by Waits and ``Barracuda'' by Heart, were illegally copied onto MP3.com's computers and made available for listening to anyone who ``proved'' ownership of the artist's music by briefly inserting a compact disc into a computer.

The songwriters claim about 270 songs are illegally available through the service and are asking for the maximum penalty of $150,000 for each song.

``Unless the major artists band together to do this, everyone else is taken advantage of as well,'' plaintiff's attorney Henry Gradstein said Tuesday.

A spokesman for MP3.com said Tuesday the company has not been served with the suit and couldn't comment.

Last November, MP3.com agreed to pay $53.4 million to Universal Music Group, which ended the company's disputes with major music makers. Earlier, a federal court judge in New York ruled that MP3.com had intentionally violated the copyrights of the music companies.

The National Music Publishers' Association Inc. filed a separate suit and last October, MP3.com agreed to pay them $34 million to make more than 1 million musical compositions available on the site.

------------------
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons

Jody Carver · Post by **Jody Carver** » 9 May 2001 9:43 am

Universal Music Group plays "hardball" they have a master of an LP I recorded back in 1958,,,the master they used for the original recording was actaully a "demo" tape that my group had made up on the outside at a recording studio in New York City.

It was that demo that was made up for the LP
I have contacted Universal several times regarding getting a copy of the "demo" (master) and they repled one time ,,,,informing me that were not interested in selling me back my master (demo)....They have no intention of re-issueing the LP yet will not give me the "right's to the LP,,,,should there not be a public domain clause regarding the time
that has lapsed since 1958??? The label I recored on was Coral records who was taken over by Universal Music Group,,,,any ideas's???? Since this thread which is quite old....The Hot Club Of America..had been recorded in New York City..All of the material on the CD has been recorded by the the Nashville Tape and Disc factory..ASCAP and BMI have been paid by the Nashville Tape Factory and included in the cost of the Cds to me....

Bob Shilling · Post by **Bob Shilling** » 9 May 2001 10:05 am

What's the basis for the suit here? If you must insert a CD proving you've purchased a recorded version of this song, why are they objecting? It seems like this would not hurt sales. Is it too easy to get around the "proof of ownership" requirement? I don't get it. This ain't napster.

------------------
Bob Shilling, Berkeley, CA--MSA S10

[This message was edited by Bob Shilling on 09 May 2001 at 11:06 AM.]

David Pennybaker · Post by **David Pennybaker** » 9 May 2001 10:29 am

Is it too easy to get around the "proof of ownership" requirement?

That's how I read it. Borrow a friend's CD, insert it, instant access. Never mind the fact that you could just make your own MP3 if you had your friend's CD with you.

I don't see this lawsuit going very far.

------------------
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons

Chris Walke · Post by **Chris Walke** » 9 May 2001 11:11 am

From what I've heard, Waits tends to win his lawsuits regarding the use of his music. I'm interested to see if his streak continues.

David Pennybaker · Post by **David Pennybaker** » 9 May 2001 11:20 am

Well, I certainly can see why they're upset and filed the lawsuit.

Who the heck gave MP3.com the right to distribute their music?

Granted, MP3.com did take steps to try to prevent the outright theft of their music -- but I'm sure that they facilitated the theft of a few copies, at least.

You'd think that a "service" like MP3.com would at least have the decency to ask the artists if they want their music distributed via their site. In fact, I'd always assumed that MP3.com had done this.

I sympathize with the artists' positions, and wish them luck. But, legally, I don't think they have much to stand on. Then again, I'm not a lawyer.

------------------
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons

Donny Hinson · Post by **Donny Hinson** » 10 May 2001 3:02 pm

Jody, there have been changes recently in the ownership laws. There was a time when a song became "public domain" after 17...then 25...then 40...then 50 years. But now (due largely to the efforts of the late Sonny Bono, as I understand) copyrights may, in some cases, extend over a hundred years!

I think that for anything to be "public domain" now, it would have to be from about Stephen Foster's time!