Universal Music Lawyers Realize That Taking Down Charlie Brown / Smiths Remix Not The Brightest Idea They've Had

from the about-time dept

We've already written about Universal Music issuing totally bogus takedowns to Lauren LoPrete for her amusing remix that takes Peanuts comic strips and replaces the text with lyrics from The Smiths. And we wrote about the counternotice she sent to Tumblr, done via awesome law firm Booth Sweet. Apparently, someone within the lawyerly ranks at Universal Music realized that this was an incredibly stupid thing to be doing, and told the LA Times that it is "dropping its pursuit" of LoPrete's site. Why it even started in the first place is a question for another day. Of course, now we await the news that Iconix Brand Group, the owners of Peanuts Inc., decides that it, too, wants to be ridiculously overly lawyerly. After all, it's done it before.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    out_of_the_blue, Sep 26th, 2013 @ 3:14pm

    Oh, maybe you've been manipulated yet again.

    Bu congratulations on a victory, Mike! Break out the bubbly -- by which I mean good old Coca-Cola (R), the real thing. You see, sometimes ad agencies stage battles sheerly because any press coverage is to the good. It's even (things go) better (with Coke) than subliminal techniques.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      S. T. Stone, Sep 26th, 2013 @ 4:32pm

      Re: Oh, maybe you've been manipulated yet again.

      Most press companies donít resort to government-sanctioned censorship vis-Š-vis the DMCA to drum up press coverage.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      jupiterkansas (profile), Sep 26th, 2013 @ 9:15pm

      Re: Oh, maybe you've been manipulated yet again.

      The website was already giving the Smiths great (and free) publicity that could last and grow and inspire others to do the same. It made people want to listen to the band. I know because that's exactly what I did when I first saw the website.

      Going legal might have gotten a headline or two, but it created a bad reputation for the Smiths (because most people equate the label's actions with the band). It doesn't make them want to listen to them. Not all publicity is good publicity, esp. in the arts.

      But go ahead and believe it was all a scheme if that makes you feel superior.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        jupiterkansas (profile), Sep 26th, 2013 @ 9:18pm

        Re: Re: Oh, maybe you've been manipulated yet again.

        I might add that it's highly unlikely that Universal is spending a single dime promoting a 25-year-old band like the Smiths.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Sep 27th, 2013 @ 12:17pm

          Re: Re: Re: Oh, maybe you've been manipulated yet again.

          But they are probably still charging annual promotion fees against any royalties that the band would be earning....


          Bada bing, bada boom....

          Now they can charge additional "Band Protection" services against the royalties as well... if this sounds like Mob protection ... it is, you wouldn't want anything "bad" to happen to your band now would you?

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      btrussell (profile), Sep 27th, 2013 @ 4:35am

      Re: Oh, maybe you've been manipulated yet again.

      A confessed coke head.

      That explains lots, Lucy.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Keroberos (profile), Sep 26th, 2013 @ 3:51pm

    Two words sum up the take down--billable hours. And two words sum up them dropping it--bad publicity.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Sep 26th, 2013 @ 4:05pm

      Re:

      You beat me to it. "Billable Hours" was exactly what I was going to say.

      How long will it take before companies realize that their law firms don't necessarily have clients' best interests at heart.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        bigpicture, Sep 26th, 2013 @ 6:05pm

        Conflict of Interest

        Are you just noticing the "conflict of interest" now? With lawyers it is never about giving ethical legal advice, it is about giving actionable advice with the most billable hours. Same for Doctors, it is not about making you well, it is about temporarily masking the symptoms. In ancient China you only paid your doctor when you were well, not when you were ill.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    PaulT (profile), Sep 27th, 2013 @ 12:47am

    "After all, it's done it before."

    The more optimistic among us would hope that the lack of any action in this case means that they learned their lesson and realise that legal action will do nothing to protect their material, and that there's nothing negative to come from leaving it up. I try to be optimistic that these people will eventually learn, anyway.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Ninja (profile), Sep 27th, 2013 @ 4:29am

    Why it even started in the first place is a question for another day.

    Obviously because lawyer. Think of the poor lawyers!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Sep 27th, 2013 @ 6:10am

    And another one that got DMCA'd

    http://calvinanddune.tumblr.com/

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This