EMI Demands IP Addresses From Everyone Who Downloaded Beatles/Beach Boys Mashup

from the DJ-Dangermouse-Part-II dept

EMI, it appears, just doesn't learn. Two years ago, DJ Dangermouse (now gaining a ton of fame for the ridiculously popular Gnarls Barkley tune Crazy) created a mashup of the Beatles' White Album and Jay-Z's Black Album, called the Grey Album. It was a big hit, and probably attracted some fans of one artist to the music of the other. One thing it clearly did not do, is hurt the sales of either artist. It was clearly not a replacement for the music of either one. But, EMI and Capitol Records, who own the rights to the Beatles music, apparently didn't understand that. Their lawyers went nuts sending out cease and desist letters. Jump forward to a few weeks ago, when producer Clayton Counts, mashed up the Beatles' Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club album with the Beach Boys Pet Sounds. Considering the history of the two albums, and the constant comparisons between the two, this seems like a natural "mashup" project. So, what happens? As Boing Boing points out, EMI and Capitol Records have pulled the same stunt, sending out a nastygram cease-and-desist letter, which you pretty much had to expect. However, rather than just demanding that Counts take down the music, the letter (which, of course, is meaningless from a legal standpoint), also demands the IP addresses of anyone who might have streamed or downloaded the songs. Counts is ignoring the cease-and-desist, and it's anyone's guess if the label will pursue this issue, but it again raises issues about lawyers making business decisions without thinking through the actual impact on their business.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. icon
    MadJo (profile), 9 Sep 2006 @ 3:51am

    Re:

    The RIAA need to stop wasting their time fighting p2p downloads and focus on the real problem; people are getting free music through broadcast radio and nightclubs!! If you count every song played on air times the number of people who heard it and may even have recorded it on tape, this 'broadcast piracy' is clearly costing the industry billions in potential profit!!
    Point is, that radio stations pay royalty fees to labels when they play those songs (most times it's a blanket fee payed to your country's local RIAA). So the RIAA does benefit from music played on the radio.
    And most nightclubs also pay a similar kind of royalty fees.
    But those P2P programs don't pay that royalty fee, and that is bothering RIAA...

    That said, I'd like to state, that I do think that RIAA is entirely going about this in the wrong direction. And what EMI is doing has totally no merit. Those songs they are trying to 'protect' can't be bought easily (if you're in luck you might find a copy in a cd-store).
    And remixes and mashups have always existed! And they are legal to create, because of the fair-use provision in any copyright law.

Add Your Comment

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



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: Copying Is Not Theft
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.