Pink Floyd win EMI court battle over online sales

[klr]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/8561963.stm

Pink Floyd have won a court battle with record label EMI over how their music is sold over the internet.

The rock legends, signed to EMI since 1967, sued the label over its decision to sell individual album tracks online.

EMI has been ordered to pay £40,000 ($60,000) in costs as an interim payment. The judge is to rule how much more the label should pay as a fine.

EMI has also been banned from selling single Pink Floyd tracks online without the band's permission.

The group, whose latest contract was signed before download stores like iTunes appeared, also disputed the way royalties for digital sales were calculated.

They largely avoided releasing singles during their career, instead preferring fans to listen to entire albums such as Dark Side of the Moon, which has sold more than 35 million copies around the world.

Artistic control

Earlier this week, Robert Howe QC, appearing for the group, said the the band's deal with EMI stipulated that their "seamless" albums should not be split up and that they "wanted to retain artistic control".

He said it would have been "a very odd result" if band members were able to control exactly how their music was sold as a physical product but there was "a free-for-all with no limitation on online distribution".

Elizabeth Jones QC, appearing for EMI, disagreed and said the word "record" in the band's contract "plainly applies to the physical thing - there is nothing to suggest it applies to online distribution".

The band were not present to hear the judgment at the High Court in London.

The issue of selling individual tracks online has been a thorny one for many artists, who want their albums to be seen as complete works. Bands also receive less money if fans pick and choose tracks instead of buying a full suite of songs.

It is believed to be one reason why The Beatles - whose catalogue is also owned by EMI - have not appeared in download stores like iTunes.

Garth Brooks and AC/DC are among the others who have objected to their albums being split up.

[Animavore]

Wankers.

[devogue]

Money, it's a crime
Share it fairly
But don't take a slice of my pie

[kiki5711]

I guess I don't blame them. But people will always find someway to get something for free. In Russia they have a site that you can download new movies that have not even come to the theater yet.

[Feck]

Get your hands off my STACK .

[klr]

So intent was I on posting the article that I missed the Money connection.

Seriously though, this is likely to lose them money, as people will be more likely to download individual tracks illegally rather than buy an entire album. I guess it's a point of principle with them.

[Ian]

I think they sued for the principle rahter than the money. They're notorious for not caring much about money.

Gilmour donated a very expensive house to charity (and then received a CBE for it), and they led the charge after Live 8 for established acts to donate post-concert surpluses in album sales to charity. (Floyd's back catalogue got a massive boost in sales after they appeared, and the band then gave the excess away).

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I have all their albums already, so it's moot. (Those who don't can fuck off.)

[orpheus]

I'm glad for this. Their albums are complete works. Doesn't make sense to cut them up into bloody chunks of meat.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I'm glad for this. Their albums are complete works. Doesn't make sense to cut them up into bloody chunks of meat.

They're like operas. The concept is incomplete unless it's a whole.

[orpheus]

I'm glad for this. Their albums are complete works. Doesn't make sense to cut them up into bloody chunks of meat.

They're like operas. The concept is incomplete unless it's a whole.

Well put.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I'm glad for this. Their albums are complete works. Doesn't make sense to cut them up into bloody chunks of meat.

They're like operas. The concept is incomplete unless it's a whole.

Well put.

It's interesting that The Who made Tommy with an eye toward getting singles out of it. And people seldom remember where "Pinball Wizard" came from.

[orpheus]

I'm glad for this. Their albums are complete works. Doesn't make sense to cut them up into bloody chunks of meat.

They're like operas. The concept is incomplete unless it's a whole.

Well put.

It's interesting that The Who made Tommy with an eye toward getting singles out of it. And people seldom remember where "Pinball Wizard" came from.

Yes, it opens up a Pandora's Box labelled "Artists' Intentions, Ethical and Aesthetic Priorities - assorted". I actually have a number of contradictory thoughts on this, but the currently prevailing ones side with the Floydsters.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Yes, it opens up a Pandora's Box labelled "Artists' Intentions, Ethical and Aesthetic Priorities - assorted". I actually have a number of contradictory thoughts on this, but the currently prevailing ones side with the Floydsters.

We should take each case on its own merits. Meatloaf's albums have a theme, but only if you listen to the whole album at once. Each song can stand by itself and mean one thing, and be part of the album and mean another.

[RuleBritannia]

Kind of pointless I think, if people don't buy it on iTunes they'll get it free else where.