Back in the days of the original Napster, the only major label to recognize that Napster represented an opportunity, rather than a threat, was Bertelsmann (BMG). Berteslmann eventually invested in Napster before the court system shut it down and forced the assets to be sold off. After all of that happened, various other major record labels decided to punish Bertelsmann by suing the company for investing in Napster. This was quite surprising -- because usually you have shareholders suing a company for its mismanagement rather than other companies suing shareholders for what a company did. It was a case that investors of all stripes (especially venture capitalists) should have been watching closely, as a finding against Bertelsmann could mean that other investors could be held liable for what the companies they invested in did. As the case went forward, things got awkward last year when Universal Music, who had kicked off the lawsuits against Bertelsmann, bought BMG, leading the two companies to quickly settle. The latest news is that Berteslmann has now settled with EMI as well, while still not admitting any liability. It's good that Bertelsmann never needed to admit liability, but it would have been nice to have a judge point out that making investors liable for what their portfolio companies do is simply not reasonable.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Feds To FISC: Of Course We Don't Have To Share Our Full Legal Filings With Companies Suing Us Over NSA Transparency
- Kansas City Cops Tell Man They'll Kill His Dogs And Destroy His Home If Forced To Obtain A Search Warrant
- Most Big Internet Companies Speak Out For Major Surveillance Reform
- Witness In No Fly List Trial, Who Was Blocked From Flying To The Trial, Shows That DOJ Flat Out Lied In Court
- Feds Insist It Must Be Kept Secret Whether Or Not Plaintiff In No Fly List Trial Is Actually On The No Fly List