Parental Advisory News Report 3.14.10: Every Cover Has Its Thorn
Posted by Dan Haggerty on 03.14.2010
This week Pink Floyd sues their label, Phil Spector may get his conviction overturned, Miley Cyrus to cover a Poison song, Amazon and iTunes prepare to go to war, and we have the final word on labels pirating their own musician’s music!
Pink Floyd Versus EMI
British prog legends Pink Floyd have won their court battle with label EMI this week.
Yea, I missed this going to court to. But it is interesting and will likely have repercussions in the music business. The good news is that those repercussions will favor the musicians.
We'll also not now how this affects the music business because EMI successfully asked for, and received, a "news blackout" of the out of court settlement. Hell, I didn't even know you could do that. But they did.
As for the case, the issue was that EMI was selling parts of Floyd songs for ringtones, while the band wanted to put the kibosh on that (do people say that?) because they have a contract saying that the label can only sell complete albums. The label claims that the contract does in fact say that, but it applies to physical copies of the albums and not digital copies, because obviously in the virtual world the whole point is to by single tracks or ringtones.
Now Pinks Floyd, to there credit, doesn't have this unique clause because they are trying to force people to buy the album, but because they consider the albums a unified whole with the songs being secondary. Sounds a bit snooty, but really when the point of your band is to do concept albums then you're going to want to have the albums stay intact.
What we do know is that the judge sided with Floyd and older contracts do in fact carry over to the digital age. We also know a fine against EMI was charged to the sum of $90,000. What we don't know is that the royalties made from the ringtones are and that is what is being handled behind closed doors.
So expect labels to start to set up contracts know that gives them more leverage in the ringtone and digital singles market.
As for the rest of the commentary, see the end of the column. There is a part missing in this that I'm calling foul on…
Phil Spector Trial Part III?
Spector makes for an ugly picture
so enjoy Kim Kardashian instead
Lawyers for Phil Spector have filed for an appeal in a district court to resend the convixtion of the famous album producer. The logic for to have the case pulled and retried is that the defense claims the judge made several errors against Spector, including "unfairly" allowing five women to testify that the charged music mogul had separate instances of threatening them with a gun.
I can see how five women each claiming they had their own instance of being threatened by Spector might sway a jury.
They defense is also claiming the judge made other technical errors in giving the jury instructions, misreading rulings, and evidently actual offered testimony during the second trial of the now convicted producer.
I'm not really keen on the specifics of law, especially there, but it does seem irregular that a judge would actually inter comment as testimony in a trial.
Spector is serving 19 years to life in prison for shooting actress Lana Clarkson in the mouth on February 3, 2003. As the man is 70, this will literally be a case whether the man will end his life free or behind bars. The defense says it was a suicide while the prosecutors obviously are throwing the book at Spector. The first go around was deadlocked in the jury so the second trial was ordered.
Now it looks like we'll be getting a second.
And the reality is that we'll spend a shit load of money on three trials and at the rate lawyers jockey for position and the length to get to a trial Spector will by probably go west to visit Elvis before it's resolved.
Every Cover Has Its Day
In the light hearted news of the odd this week, we have Bret Michaels and Miley Cyrus possibly hooking up to guess appear in a song on the other's new album. Evidently the two both have appeared on this seasons "Celebrity Apprentice" where they hooked up and talked about a collaboration.
Yea, I'm sure THAT was the motivation behind Michaels talking to Cyrus. Ahem.
But anyway, they really did work out a plan and will make an appearance on each other's album. Miley will appear on a new single from Michaels called "Nothing To Lose" while Michaels will guest on a cover of the Poison power ballad "Every Rose Has Its Thorn" on Cyrus' next album.
"Miley got ahold of me and wanted to re-cut 'Every Rose...,'" Michaels said, "When we were in the studio, I said, 'Do you want to hear some of my new tracks?' She said 'I'd love to,' and I played her 'Nothing to Lose' and she fell in love with it and said she'd love to sing on the song. I was like, 'That'd be killer!'"
Michaels says that had a different kind of approach in mind for his song. "One of her heroes is Stevie Nicks," he says. "I produced and recorded Stevie before, so I said, 'OK, let's take that approach. (Nicks) is kind of freestyle; you've just gotta go at it and sing what you want.' She did, and she ended up having a great time doing it."
And there you go. Although I have to give Miley kudos for being a Stevie Nicks fan. That renews my faith in the future of music a little more.
Virtual Wars
This one never gets old
Quietly behind the scenes in the music industry a throwdown is forming. In one corner we have Apple in the other we have Amazon. Both offer downloads, and evidently the competition is getting a lot to hot. Apple was fine with Amazon as long as they where a minor player, but with the advent of Amazon's "Daily Deal" that does big business with exclusives when an album is released, the company behind the iTune is now calling foul and putting pressure on labels to not do business with Amazon.
The issue stems from how not only how successful the Daily Deal program has worked, but in the wake of that success Amazon is no getting labels to offer them exclusive distribution rights for those deals. So if you want a hot new single when it comes out the first day, you go to Amazon because they know have a day lead over iTunes.
That is actually pretty smart business move.
Needless to say, iTunes is ticked off. They have dominated the market since its inception and that trend could change. Of course, the fact that Amazon releases their music DRM free helped them get a leg up, something not being mentioned here. but things are getting to the point industry insiders are saying Apple has gone from dropping hints that they disapprove of their business partners cutting deals with Amazon to outright telling label executives that they will "withdraw market support for certain releases featured as a Daily Double".
Amazon must be doing something right if they have the competition threatening people and name dropping their major promotion vehicle!
Not that I blame Apple for being pissed, but threatening the people who provide their product isn't necessarily the smartest business move. It sounds more like something you'd see Gordon Ramsey chewing out some chef for doing because it is counterproductive.
Evidently, some labels now are just playing to safe until the smoke settles and not releasing anything early on either format, which is a shame but understandable. Most small labels can't really afford to piss off either one of the two biggest music selling vehicles online.
So there is two things to take away from this. The first is that Amazon is now the number two selling distributor on music online and giving Apple a run for its money. That is a good thing for us consumers.
The second thing is Apple has gone from being an innovator in this field to basically entrenched business. From adventurer to turf protector. My money says, with a philosophy like that, they won't be number one for long!
TWITTER Don't forget to follow 411 every day on twitter!
Wait a minute. Let me get this straight. When unemployed moms, collage kids, or clueless grandmothers get caught using a couple dozen songs they didn't have the right to distribute, in this case downloading, they get wacked with anywhere from a life crippling quarter million to over one million dollars in fines. The RIAA tells us that these people are stealing from the musicians and the laws are there to protect the rights of the artists.
BUT, when a label gets caught using thousands of songs from artists they didn't have the right to distribute, in this case sell and pocket the money on, they get charged a pithy $90,000. Broke moms get hit for millions and a multimillion dollar label that made money off that artist gets a fraction of that?
WHAT THE FUCK?
No, really, what the fuck? How in the hell does that make any kind of sense. Sure, the label will have to settle royalties with the band, but it's the court charged fine here. The average person gets nailed for that, 20 to 40 songs, and EMI basically sold thousands of songs by court definition illegally. It has to be illegal, if it was legal they would have won the case.
Oh. Your. Gods. This has to be the most hypocritical and eye opening piece of flotsam and jetsam to wash up in my years of watching the music news. How can these parasites even look in the mirror? They bandy about saying they are about protecting the artist, and when the laws they bought gets turned against them for illegally distributing the music of those same artists they get this? Hell, they should be ashamed for even doing it and then paying a lawyer to get out of it!
But the fact that they get a love tap for doing the very thing they accuse their customers of doing is beyond the pale. Unless the RIAA and the other labels come out and denounce this, they are basically admitting to the double standard.
Time to fess up folks. Either this party is about protecting artist's rights or it's about protecting your bottom line. I really have no problem with people trying to feed the bottom line, that is how businesses grow and survive. BUT I go have a big issue with businesses that basically admit they can't cope in their own field anymore and do it by hook and crook through legal action.
One can of business built this country. The other kind caused this recession.
112% on the WTF at the end. The fact that the label's defence amounted to "digital copies don't count" when their mantra has been the exact opposite for over 10 years is horseshit.
And a $90,000 fine is stupid. Just goes to show that your judicial system is as flawed as the music industry's business model.
Posted By: Guest#0914 (Guest) on March 14, 2010 at 02:02 PM
Hey Dan, you may be interested in looking into this thing called Indie on the Move, which was created by this band Zelazowa and allows bands to stay independent through allowing easier ways to book shows and a lot of advice to what bands should do regarding merchandise and such.
Posted By: Jcon (Guest) on March 14, 2010 at 03:15 PM
Copyright � 2011 411mania.com, LLC. All rights reserved.
Click here for our privacy policy. Please help us serve you better, fill out our survey.
Use of this site signifies your agreement to our terms of use.
