Originally posted by: PowerMac4Ever
We'll see if this thing even gets to court. And if it does get to court, we'll see what kind of "court" it is.Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: ViRGE
Even if that's the case, then it simply becomes an issue of false-representation on the part of the entity that gave permission. The only way Apple could be found liable is if they explicitly knew that they didn't have permission, but went ahead anyhow.Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: ViRGE
Exactly. Apple isn't stupid enough to try this without permission from someone(they have 20+ years of marketing experience to back this up); someone gave them permission that didn't have the right to, or Eminem is simply mad because his label is giving his stuff out.Originally posted by: PowerMac4Ever
The record companies own eminem and his "song." Apple does not make money off of iTunes so, as I said, I'm sure the RIAA will back Apple.Originally posted by: Dezign
Originally posted by: PowerMac4Ever
Yeah, Apple is doing him a favor by carrying his songs and this is his reaction? What an idiot. I have a feeling that the RIAA will strong-arm eminem to drop the lawsuit.
Legally, it's his song. Your argument could be used to say that any person or business could use any artists's songs or works to sell their product, because it'd be "doing the artist a favor". The artist produced the material, and that material belongs to the artist... he has to give permission for others to use it, and if others use it without permission, they're subject to heavy penalties.
Wasn't there a Best Buy case recently settled... they used images from "The Sorpanos" in one of their ads without permission, the actors sued, and won a few million each.
The label cant do that. The song writer has to be contacted, and they have to have a written contract signed BY the songwriter. If they dont have a contract with the songwriter, they(Apple) are in the wrong. Eminem is the songwriter. I think he would know if he signed a contract for them to use his personally copyrighted material.
Actually no. If they dont have his signature on a contract, they ARE liable. A court would laugh Apples lawyers out of the room if they went in there and said "we got premission from so and so(anyone but the songwriter himself). Its a laughable defense. You have to have the expressed premission of the copyright owner.
You're right it wont get to court. Cases like these are typically settled privately. I bet Apple gives $5million to him and $5million to some Detriot charity, or something similar.
I guess you actually think the RIAA is going to get him to drop this case. I dont see him doing what the RIAA tells him to do.