Record companies are, you'll recall, fond of behaving like they're part of the criminal justice system - going on raids, pushing prosecutions. And yet, when it comes to their own behaviour, they're slightly more Capone than cop.
Robert Fripp, for example, has detailed what he claims is a slightly-less-than honest range of behaviour by EMI:
But it goes further. Not only has EMI "accidentally" been selling records it had no rights too, but King Crimson tracks have been popping up on download sites, with EMI's blessing:
Fripp then sidebars that the artists - in whose name the battle against illegal downloads is fought - aren't actually any better served by legal downloads.
So, we have EMI taking money for putting online King Crimson tracks it doesn't own the rights to. Isn't that, ooh, illegal uploading of the sort for which the RIAA punishes single mothers and postmen to the full extent of the law?
Oh, and it turns out that EMI were tardy in returning the master tapes to King Crimson material when it no longer had legal rights to them.
[Thanks to y for the tip]