Pink Floyd Wins Legal Settlement From EMI Records

 

Commerce takes one on the chin from Art, as a UK judge upholds Pink Floyd's right to sell their music in album form only. The move puts an end to EMI's selling of PF singles online

You’d; think by now after all the weeping and wailing over declining sales the major record companies would have learnt something about artist relations and level playing fields.. Old habits still die hard and EMI and pink Floyd who’ve been dancing together since 1967 found themselves in court basically over the concept of a ‘concept’ album. PF charged that by splitting off and selling singles from their albums, EMI was in breach of contract. The rock legends, signed to EMI since 1967, said their contract meant their albums could not be split up without their permission. A judge agreed, saying the contract contained a clause to "preserve the artistic integrity of the albums". EMI has been ordered to pay £40,000 ($60,000) in costs, with a further payout to be decided later. The group, whose latest contract was signed before download stores like iTunes appeared, also disputed the way royalties for digital sales were calculated. In court, Chancellor Sir Andrew Morritt declared that the contract means EMI is not entitled to exploit recordings by online distribution or by any other means other than the complete original album without Pink Floyd's consent. Although he didn’t note it, his lordship was presiding at a collision of musical cultures; one that supported ‘concept’ albums, as works to be experienced in their entirety and another which values singles uber alles. No wonder the depth of misunderstanding what exactly was being engaged here. Which led to EMI lawyer Elizabeth Jones QC, appearing for EMI, disagreed and said the word "record" in the band's contract "plainly applies to the physical thing - there is nothing to suggest it applies to online distribution". The band is well known for putting out few singles during their career, focusing on ‘concept’ albums for fans that preferred to listen to entire albums such as Dark Side of the Moon, which has sold more than 35 million copies around the world. Earlier this week, Robert Howe QC, appearing for the group, told the BBC the band's deal with EMI stipulated that their "seamless" albums should not be split up and that they "wanted to retain artistic control". He said it would have been "a very odd result" if band members were able to control exactly how their music was sold as a physical product but there was "a free-for-all with no limitation on online distribution". The band was not present to hear the judgment at the High Court in London. The issue of selling individual tracks online has been a thorny one for many artists, who want their albums to be seen as complete works. Bands also receive less money if fans pick and choose tracks instead of buying a full suite of songs. It’s widely thought this is reason the Beatles EMI-owned catalogue have not been offered in download stores like iTunes.