Home › News › The Web
Lawsuit finds that EMI distributed music illegally on Rapidshare
In court, EMI is accusing MP3tunes of allowing illegal music downloads. The stance now appears to be highly hypocritical. The company distributed its music via file sharing websites and then sued users for downloading their music without paying. It has come to light that EMI employs a team of advertising people, artists, and agents who have placed together so many free music downloads on the Internet that EMI itself has trouble distinguishing between authorized and unauthorized links. It's thus no surprise that Robertson wants the 41-page lawsuit dismissed. The case could be closed as soon as January 2011.
EMI Group (Electric & Musical Industries) is a British music company and the fourth-largest record label in the recording industry. The group is thus one of the big four record companies and a member of the RIAA. It goes without saying that this news is highly embarrassing for the label and could have devastating effects in court.
Related Stories
User Comments (9)
Post a comment|
stensland
on December 6, 2010 3:07 PM |
I think everyone kind of assumed that record labels were doing this, but now there is proof |
|
yRaz
on December 6, 2010 3:30 PM |
you know...wtf...this kind of thing makes me want to fight people...and I'm not a fighter. When are they going to give it up. Downloading music is not stealing because there isn't anything to steal. There isn't anything lost and most people, like me, wouldn't even listen to music if it wasn't available for free on the internet or youtube. (excuse me, I pay for netflix) If people truly believe that music and movies are art, then why shouldn't they be available for free? As an artist, I would love for people to see my work. If I wrote a song and 10,000 people downloaded it, I would be honored. It isn't about the artists anymore... There is only one thing I really have to say: asdgqewrgasdfaqsw34tqwrg! |
|
KG363
on December 6, 2010 7:28 PM |
Record labels have been doing this for years. Statistically, it works. They end up making more money. That's why I hate the RIAA |
|
Guest
on December 7, 2010 7:11 AM |
@yRaz Two wrongs don't make a right. EMI should be penalized for doing wrong. Just because something is considered art does not make it free. Based on your logic, if I went into your home and copied all data from your computer, all papers, etc. but you still had the originals, I wouldn't be stealing. Where do you live? |
|
lawfer
on December 7, 2010 1:18 PM |
Is this really the type of people TomSEA has been fighting for? Oh the irony... |
|
Guest
on December 7, 2010 2:29 PM |
you would have to be some kind of massive knobber not to understand that EMI ( however much you think they are wankers ) can do what they like with files of music if they have paid for them to be created , and have funded the musicians to help them pursue their art |
|
lawfer
on December 7, 2010 6:11 PM |
Guest said: you would have to be some kind of massive knobber not to understand that EMI ( however much you think they are wankers ) can do what they like with files of music if they have paid for them to be created , and have funded the musicians to help them pursue their art That's not the problem. The problem is that they are suing people for doing things that they pay other people to do. That's hypocrisy at its best. It's like a corrupt cop suing a criminal. |
|
Guest
on December 10, 2010 11:17 PM |
Just to put my 2 cents in. I pay for most of my music. Usually through iTunes (I know, I know) as it is the easiest medium available to me. However, I much prefer what Radiohead and NIN (and probably others I'm unaware of) did which is taking out the middle man of the record company and releasing their music on _their_ website. When you pay for it that way it feels like your money is actually going to the band. Paying for music via iTunes mean that money goes to Apple as well as the record company and then finally to the artist. Now this money does go to use in terms of marketing and reputation respectively. But then this means that those companies can promote other bands with the money they got off the first band! I will admit that I illegally download movies and TV shows, but there are a couple of reasons for this. a) I'm not sure I'll like it or not (which I'll be able to tell by the 3rd or 4th epp) and b) All the good shows don't come to Aus until ages later. I offset this by actually paying to see the movie in a cinema when it comes out, and then buying the DVD. The only problem with my system of self satisfaction and karmic alignment, is that I'm still using a service which other people use who don't see it the same way as I do. =/ |
|
Guest
on December 11, 2010 1:17 PM |
If more record labels are caught illegally distributing music, what does this mean for the RIAA's anti-piracy stance? We'll definitely be discussing this during the music business chat @MBizchat on Monday! |
Most Popular
| Trending | Featured |
-
iOS 5.1.1 untethered jailbreak tool released, supports 4S, iPad 3
-
After five days, Facebook ranks as worst IPO flop of the decade
-
Rumor: Windows 8 RC will launch June 1, will ship with Adobe Flash
-
Rumor: AMD "Piledriver" FX CPU production to begin Q3 2012
-
Is Apple's USB wall adapter really worth $29?
Editors' Keyboard Picks
Subscribe to TechSpot
Get free exclusive content, learn about new features and tech breaking news.