Tweet
The BBC noted that
Garth Brooks and AC/DC are among the others who have objected to their albums being split up.
Peter Jenner, who managed Pink Floyd when they first signed with EMI in the 1960s, said releasing complete albums was important to the band.
"Clearly in cases like the Floyd, there was a coherence in the content as an album," he told BBC 6 Music. "Tracks were dropped because they didn't fit in with the whole thing. I think that was quite common, especially in the 70s and 80s."
Mr Jenner, now emeritus president of the International Music Managers' Forum, predicted that the ruling would be significant.
"I think it will give the artists some ammunition to get the record companies to be a bit fairer with the royalty treatment they give artists for digital work."
Peter Jenner, who managed Pink Floyd when they first signed with EMI in the 1960s, said releasing complete albums was important to the band.
"Clearly in cases like the Floyd, there was a coherence in the content as an album," he told BBC 6 Music. "Tracks were dropped because they didn't fit in with the whole thing. I think that was quite common, especially in the 70s and 80s."
Mr Jenner, now emeritus president of the International Music Managers' Forum, predicted that the ruling would be significant.
"I think it will give the artists some ammunition to get the record companies to be a bit fairer with the royalty treatment they give artists for digital work."
In a ruling this afternoon, the court dismissed the appeal by EMI against the High Court judgement earlier this year that the group’s individual songs must not be sold without permission.
In the latest stage in the dispute over an alleged £10m in unpaid royalties from sales between 2002 and 2007, lawyers acting on behalf of Pink Floyd argue that its 1999 contract with EMI required the label to sell its works only as albums, even in a digital context.
This comes as a further knock to EMI’s stock this week, following reports in the financial press that Guy Hands has lost the confidence of key investors and is preparing to relinquish Terra Firma’s control in EMI to Citigroup before Christmas.
In the latest stage in the dispute over an alleged £10m in unpaid royalties from sales between 2002 and 2007, lawyers acting on behalf of Pink Floyd argue that its 1999 contract with EMI required the label to sell its works only as albums, even in a digital context.
This comes as a further knock to EMI’s stock this week, following reports in the financial press that Guy Hands has lost the confidence of key investors and is preparing to relinquish Terra Firma’s control in EMI to Citigroup before Christmas.
” in relation to appeals, the Court of Appeal should not depart from the general rule that litigation is to be conducted in public, unless a judge of that court is persuaded that there are cogent grounds for doing so.”
In mid-November 2009, Terra Firma announced it would be writing down its investment in EMI by 90% (approximately €1.5 billion) after the record label’s creditors Citigroup turned down a deal to restructure its debt. Hands acknowledged that the EMI deal had been a mistake when he said, “If we hadn’t done that, we’d have 90% of our funds still to invest and we’d look like complete geniuses. Instead, having written off well over a billion, we look like chumps.” Hands has stated that 67% to 70% of his personal net worth is tied up in the EMI deal. Given that Terra Firma has written off its entire investment in EMI, this implies that Hands himself thinks he has lost approximately 70% of his net worth.
With a brief review of Terra Firma, it has the red flags of a holding company for a Cosa Nostra family. Any which way, you can bet his “assets” are floating high in Dubai now. In addition, a brief review Terra Firma’s Wikipedia page, it appears as if the shell game is still being tempted toward Mr. Hand.
I have included as an attachment of an RTF from:
Pink Floyd Music Ltd & Anor v EMI Records Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 1429 (14 December 2010)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2010/1429.html
Cite as: [2010] EWCA Civ 1429
It is interesting and worth a read, especially if you are a musician that is or ever might be dealing with a contract. The Chancellor goes into detail about electronic media.
In other news, Iron Butterfly has found their voice have a court review of two claim, one being a breach of contract claim and the second an accounting of all exploitations claim against Atlantic Recording, Elektra Entertainment and Warner/Chappell
This is an excellent document for review. It is an example of a basic claim any musician might encounter when dealing in the life of a royalty contract musician.
Here is a bit of the script:
{...}
The Preliminary Audit reveals that Plaintiffs' Minimum Statutory Rate Claims for the Preliminary Audit Period exceed $75,000.00.
{...}
The Preliminary Audit reveals that Plaintiffs' Deluxe Album Claims exceed $119, 200.00
{...}
The Preliminary Audit reveals that Plaintiffs’ Free Goods Claims exceed $11,300.00
{...}
The Preliminary Audit reveals that Plaintiffs' Minimum Statutory Rate Claims for the Preliminary Audit Period exceed $75,000.00.
{...}
The Preliminary Audit reveals that Plaintiffs' Deluxe Album Claims exceed $119, 200.00
{...}
The Preliminary Audit reveals that Plaintiffs’ Free Goods Claims exceed $11,300.00
{...}
The second attachment is Iron Butterfly's Complaint.
I could not add the files as attachments, they are too large. These links are good for 7 days from Dec 28, 2010.
Contact me if you want a copy after Jan 3, 2011
Iron Butterfly Attachment
Iron Butterfly complaint.pdf
Pink Floyd Attachment
1429.rtf
Reference :
~
