Warner Music Decides That Imeem Doesn't Have Enough Publicity

from the publicity-by-lawsuit dept

The recording industry really is impressive in its near complete inability to learn from previous mistakes. Every time it sues or tries to shut down some service, it first attracts much more attention to that service and then, even if it’s successful in shutting it down, all of the users move on to more underground services that are even less likely to provide the industry with new opportunities for profit. The latest such case is Imeem, a moderately popular service for users to create playlists of music, videos and photos and share it with others. As far as I can tell, users can’t download from the service — they can only stream and listen to or view others’ playlists. There are, obviously, a ton of legitimate purposes for such services — though, you’d never know it listening to the lawyers at Warner Music Group who have decided to sue the company, claiming that it’s making money on “the illegal use of free music.” Once again, this is actually a service that is helping to get people to promote the recording industry’s music for them (at no cost!) and the recording industry’s reaction is to sue it. The industry has done this over and over and over and over again, and so far all its done is make the situation much, much worse. Who in their right mind would think that it would make sense to keep doing it? You would hope that the folks behind this decision are so crafty as to realize that by suing it, they’re giving it more publicity that will lead to even more people using the service to promote its music… but it’s difficult to believe that the decision makers here are able to think that far ahead.


Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Warner Music Decides That Imeem Doesn't Have Enough Publicity”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
17 Comments
Michael Long (user link) says:

Check your facts...

Here’s some quotes from the TechCruch article covering the same story: “Late in 2006 they de-emphasized their client download and started focusing on a widget strategy, letting users upload any music and stream it to others via a widget.”

As such, “Warner Music sued Imeem, alleging massive copyright infringement by allowing users to stream music to others.”

So, apparently, it’s not just about simply swapping playlists, but streaming and sharing music among tens of thousands of people, a fact buried within two words in your own story “…they can only stream and listen to and…”.

It’s one thing to be biased, but this is a little heavy-handed, don’t you think?

Mike (profile) says:

Re: Check your facts...

So, apparently, it’s not just about simply swapping playlists, but streaming and sharing music among tens of thousands of people, a fact buried within two words in your own story “…they can only stream and listen to and…”.

I fail to see which “facts” are missing from my post. I made it clear that Imeem was used to stream and listen to playlists… which is true. So, I’m confused why you would claim that we made a mistake.

Josh says:

Internet Radio

Not as familiar with the US regulations as I am the Canadian, but regardless I’m sure that WMG would prefer that a company get permission for this kind of use (as per the notice and any and every CD released) and that the site pay royalty fees to WMG and the artists. From a business perspective WMG only uses a numebr of services to promote their music. they use as many as the have the capacity to monitor. Once their monitoring capacity is exceeded, anything can happen. This concern is very similar to release of counterfeit goods in black market. When you can’t monitor your product and it is altered in someway, you are still ultimately responsible (or will at least get the backlash from the situation). I think it’s important for companies to monitor their product and the use of this product. At the same time I think WMG is at point where it can afford to increase staffing to monitor sites like this and if they were smart, embrace it and work with it to ensure that WMG comes off looking good all the way through. Imeem should be left alone until users start modifying the music to misrepresent it. As long as it’s being played in it’s true form, without lyrical changes (language editing not included) and people are listening, sit back and wait for the cash register to start ka-chinging. Imeem should continue and should do so with the support of a major label or two.

rEdEyEz says:

Logic? Language?

“…Warner accused Imeem of building a base of 16 million users by capitalizing on the “illegal use of ‘free music.'””
(Reuters)

I ask, “What is the legal use of free music?”
…so Warner acknowledges the concept of “free music?”

They’re suing because of the growth of the customer base?

Bizarre

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...