The Wolfhounds would like their publishing back

Back in 1987, young, fresh-faced band The Wolfhounds signed a deal with Working Music for their publishing. What happened next is a common story of young people being screwed over by a multinational:

By 1989, the company had gone bust and its property – the songs of its contracted artists – were subsumed into Warner Chappell, its parent company.

However, none of The Wolfhounds ever received any payment or statement from either Working Music or Warner Chappell, and instructed their solicitors at the time – Stevens Innocent – to give notice of termination for breach of contract, and to have their song copyrights returned to the authors. Through their own solicitors, Warner Chappell claimed that none of our songs had ever earned any money, despite the fact that we had received payments from the Performing Rights Society for the songs, been played on the radio numerous times and played hundreds of gigs, all of which meant that royalties were coming in. The band has irrefutable documentary proof of this.

As if that wasn't shitty enough, WC have also taken the songwriters' individual names off the copyright.

Because WC don't seem capable of doing the right thing - why would they want to hang so desperately on to publishing rights they claim have never earned a single brass tuppence anyway? - there's a petition calling on them to talk to the band.

Gordon in the morning: Sometimes, we share the same thought

Gordon brings news of a future publishing sensation:

LITTLE MIX are barely out of their school uniforms but have announced plans for an autobiography.

The girlband will put out Little Mix: Our Story So Far on September 16 with publishers HarperCollins.

Jesy, Perrie, Leigh-Anne and Jade will also release an official annual for 2013 in the same month.

From time to time, Gordon and I do react in the same way:

They'll need a hit first.

Being fair, they have had a hit, Gordon - they had a number one last year - but the spirit of your response is spot-on. Announcing an annual aimed at the Christmas 2012 market when you'd mostly been forgotten by Easter is a bit of a bold move.

But it's good news for Poundland, who can expect to take delivery of both books around this time next year.

EMI's likely buyers

It's looking more and more likely that EMI will be split into two as the auction continues.

Warner Music will probably pick up the recorded music part of the company, with BMG Rights Management - a 50-50 Bertlesmann/ KKR group - taking the bit that makes money.

Ah, yes, KKR are private equity - that's been something of a success for EMI in the past, hasn't it?

Warners are expected to kill the EMI brand in America - or at least finish off the parts that are still twitching following Bungling Hands' time in charge - but might retain it in the UK. It wouldn't be too surprising if some form of EMI America label clung on at the edges, just to play to the sentimental amongst the people who still buy records.

British music publishers try to seize domain over 90 year old music

The International Music Score Library Project is many things - a wonderful public resource; an index of public domain sheet music; a good deed in an ugly world.

What it isn't - and let's be clear about this - is some sort of Pirate Bay/Napster type outfit, creating listings without considering the copyright status of what it indexes.

So it was a bit surprised when the British Music Publisher's Assocation made its domain name registrar, the supine GoDaddy.com, seize its address because it listed a link to Rachmaninoff’s Bells. Which is in the public domain in the US and Canada.

The takedown demand sent to GoDaddy contained a massive lie:

Dear sirs

We, the Music Publishers Association, take action to remove unlicensed copyright material from infringing websites.

We understand that Godaddy are the sponsoring registrar for the website http://www.IMSLP.ORG which makes available unlicensed copyright protected sheet music notation which is an infringement of copyright. By assisting this website, Godaddy are liable to pay damages for secondary copyright infringement once notice of the infringement has been given.

We therefore request that you withdraw from all associations you have with http://www.IMSLP.ORG and retract their domain name so that the website cannot be accessed.

An example of the infringing material on http://www.IMSLP.ORG is ‘The Bells’ by Rachmaninov which can be reached via: [link]

This material is copyright protected in most counties including all European countries and the USA.

Here are the registrant’s details to the best of our knowledge:

Registrant Name:Edward W. GuoRegistrant Organization:Project Petrucci LLCRegistrant Street1:205 S. Charles St.Registrant Street2:Registrant Street3:Registrant City:EdwardsvilleRegistrant State/Province:IllinoisRegistrant Postal Code:62025Registrant Country:USRegistrant Phone:+1.6186565143Registrant Phone Ext.:Registrant FAX:Registrant FAX Ext.:Registrant Email: imslproject@yahoo.ca

We have good faith belief that use of the material in this manner is not authorized by the copyright owner or the law.

The information in this notification is accurate and we confirm, under penalty of perjury, that we are authorized to act on behalf of the copyright owner of an exclusive right of that is infringed.

I would be grateful for your response detailing your undertakings by 3 May 2011.

Yours faithfully,

Jake Kirner Printed Music Publishing Administrator Music Publishers Association 6th Floor, British Music House, 26 Berners Street, London W1T 3LRDirect Tel: +44 (0)20 7637 4052Fax: +44 (0)20 7637 3929 (please confirm fax by sending me an email)jkirner@mpaonline.org.uk http://www.mpaonline.org.uk the_MPA on twitter

When the ISMLP published this letter online, pointing out that it simply wasn't true to claim that the piece was in copyright in the US, how did the Music Publishers Association react?

Why, yes, the apologised, sent round a big basket of muffins and promised to be more careful in future.

Not really. The Music Publishers Assocation tried to get ISMLP to remove the takedown notice from the internet.

Eventually, the MPA realised it was in the wrong, withdrew their demands to GoDaddy and the website was back working normally. The ISMLP were graceful in their victory.

There remain questions, though.

Why did the Music Publishers Assocation send the takedown in the first place?

Did they really believe that the piece was in copyright in the US - in which case their lack of understanding of copyright law suggests they're not the right people to represent music publishers in an increasingly complicated IP environment.

Or did they know it wasn't in copyright in the US, but decided to have a crack at getting a site closed because they perceive it as an irritant to their business - in which case they'd be open to accusations of immorality and underhand tactics?

Or do they simply churn out these demands without even reading what they're putting into the post (no better than a common blogger) which suggests they're simply incompetent?

I've tried to think of an explanation that doesn't make the Music Publishers' Assocation sound like either a Keystone Cops or Luther Industries style outfit, but I really can't.

Even if there had been merit in the case, does the MPA really have so little to worry about that it has resources to burn through protecting the work of a Russian who died in 1943? The implication that there's no living, British songwriters whose work needs their protection suggests that that piracy they're so worried about is almost at an end.

EMI suddenly decides 'stealing' isn't that bad

Here's a funny thing - Eddy Grant has accused Gorillaz of ripping off one of his tunes:

Grant says Gorillaz copied his 1977 song Time Warp on their new single.

"I am outraged that the Gorillaz have infringed the copyright of my song Time Warp, claiming their song Stylo to be an original composition," he said.

Breach of copyright, eh? Now, there's something the RIAA are always quick to have something to say about. You only have to try and remember what a song sounds like, and the BPI will hit you with a lawsuit for copying the music to your cerebal cortex without the correct licence. Clearly, Grant's publisher, EMI, will be fuming over one of its artists having his copyright abused, right?

[They] said it was "a private matter between Eddy Grant and Gorillaz".

Oh. Um... well, what about Gorillaz's publishers? They, surely, won't sit back and be accused of stealing copyright - that's like stealing hangbags, remember?

[They] said it was "a private matter between Eddy Grant and Gorillaz".

Oh, yes. It turns out that, at least, the publishing arm of EMI aren't actually that upset at the thought of copyright being abused at all. Indeed, it's nothing more than a "private matter". Perhaps they might like to have come to this conclusion before the BPI tried to write UK legislation in the Digital Economy Bill.

Gordon in the morning: JLS have some money. Sort of.

Aren't we all a little too sophisticated these days to hear the headline figure on a publishing deal and think "wow, the songwriter is going to get that headline figure in cold, hard cash"?

Apparently not:

JLS have signed the BIGGEST publishing deal of the year - worth a cool ONE MILLION POUNDS.

It gets worse:

The boss of JLS's new company [EMI], Guy Moot, said: "The UK has been crying out for a new boy band. They are so talented.

"It's great to be associated with success like this and we're glad to be given the chance to develop them as songwriters."

Well, it can't hurt to give them the chance. Just so long as there's some proper songwriters on call to help out when it all goes wrong.

I'm not sure where Mr. Moot gets the impression that the UK was "crying out" for a new boy band. Perhaps he saw people looking quite cheerful and able to process thoughts and decided that needed nipping in the bud.

Eminem and Apple make peace

Eminem's publishing team, Eight Mile Style, and Apple, have come to an agreement over the Em's complaints that Apple had no right to be selling his music, Variety is reporting.

No word on what the deal is, but the smart money is that the millions of dollars demanded won't be turning up anywhere.

Eminem's publishers turn up in court

It's been a while since we've heard from the publishers of Eminem's music, who seem to be objecting to the presence of Eminem's tracks on legal download services. After a long period of bubbling discontent, they've finally got Apple and Eminem's label into court in what seems to be an attempt to legally enforce the ability of the tail to wag the dog:

Publishers Eight Mile Style, along with an affiliated company, Martin Affiliated LLC, allege that Apple had no right to sell the songs on iTunes. The company also says that Eminem's contract with Aftermath Records did not give Apple any rights to market his songs online.

The idea that a label can't market a track digitally seems to be an odd one, and while it's clearly a nonsense, it's nice to see a record label having to defend itself in the face of an irritating, grasping sort of legal action.

And, clearly, Eight Mile Style have some explaining to do as well:

Speaking in court in Detroit, Apple lawyer Glenn Pomerantz told US District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor that Aftermath Records have the rights to use Eminem's recordings as they wish, and added that despite taking Apple to court, Eight Mile Style had still cashed royalty cheques and hadn't asked Apple to stop selling Eminem's music, reports Associated Press.

Eminem, notes NME, was not in court for the business. The case is expected to last a week. Or possibly forever.

EMI reject new PRS streaming rate

Uh-oh - more trouble as the music industry tries to pretend that infinite supply won't drive down prices. EMI publishing have refused to accept the hard-won new PRS rate for online streaming, and so henceforward will opt out of having PRS collect their royalty earnings for them.

"We are not currently satisfied that the new rates - in particular the minima - proposed by PRS for Music for streaming services are appropriate", said EMI Music Publishing's general counsel for Europe Antony Bebawi.

Quite how EMI hopes to get any value from collecting its own royalties isn't clear - even at the old rate of 0.22p a stream, without the bulk processing power of a central clearing house it's arguable that EMI will wind up with even less than at the new PRS minimum rate of 0.085p by the time they've added on their administration costs.

It's also absurd because EMI are behaving as if the PRS organisation are the sort to have accepted a crappy deal. Given that at the start of negotiations the PRS were every bit as gung-ho and unrealistic as EMI are being now, you might think that someone might have worked out that 0.085p is all there is on the table.

Please, Hammer, don't desert them

Simon & Schuster have instructed lawyers in a bid to claw back an advance they paid to MC Hammer for a book that he never quite got round to writing.

Enemies of the Father: A Message from the Heart On Being a Family Man, to be precise. Apparently, Hammer took on the task of writing this in 2002; by 2004 the publishers realised they weren't going to get it, and have been trying to get the cash back ever since.

Frankly, they should probably be thankful that they didn't get the book - after all, who wants a moral parable written by a bloke who sinks USD61,000 into his incredibly deep pockets and shimmies away? It'd be like getting Noel Gallagher's Guide To Mediation.

Music industry sued by Hall, Oates for not suing

Given that most music companies can't help themselves for firing off legal complaints, it's something of a surprise to discover that Warner/Chappell publishing didn't bother to spew out a writ when someone did an unauthorised cover of Maneater. Now, as if to demonstrate how no good deed goes unpunished, Hall And Oates are suing Warner/Chappell for not protecting their copyright. W/C say they'll defend themselves "vigorously"; it's not known if they'll be able to explain why they are and their sister companies are quite happy to pursue to the full extent of the law, say, mechanics whose radios might be audible to the public, but don't actually seem that arsed by more open-and-shut copyright 'theft'.

Bob Dylan: He's in The Times, a-raging

In a bid to promote his London art show, Bob Dylan's been in town, talking to the Times.

He doesn't like the music industry:

"The music world's a made-up bunch of hypocritical rubbish. I know from publishing a memoir that the book people are a whole lot saner. And the art world? From the small steps I've taken in it, I'd say, yeah, the people are honest, upfront and deliver what they say. Basically, they are who they say they are. They don't pretend. And having been in the music world most of my life [he laughs again], I can tell you it's not that way. Let's just say it's less...dignified.”

Yes, publishing's much better, with the over-bidding for unsalebale memoirs, the ghost-written, disposable guff from X Factorites and sportocelebs, the sexing-up of covers and thinning out of considered works. Given that most of the big publishers are part of entertainment industry megaliths like most of the large record labels, why does Dylan think its any different there?

And the art world? If you're placing your faith in the honesty of people who sell art, you're setting yourself up for a major disappointment.

EMI: Economies of scale - they'll save us...

With money getting tight and a label losing talent both artistic and managerial, what can Guy Hands do to try and salvage EMI?

Erm, spend more money buying Chrysalis, apparently.

It suggests that Hands' strategy is going to concentrate more on catalogue and publishing than the riskier business of making new records. But it also suggests a certain degree of creeping desperation at the top level of Terra Firma.

DownwardSpiralFrog twitches

The much-hyped, little-seen SpiralFrog ad-supported music download service has done the equivalent of a coma patient twitching and signed a licensing deal with Sony-ATV music. This would ensure that - should anyone ever use their site - songwriters as well as performers would get a share of the non-existent advertising revenues.

It's heartbreaking, like watching someone prepare for a date you know they're going to be stood up on.

Publishers take on YouTube

In what appears to be a move not entirely unrelated to Eminem's publishers suing for a share of the iTunes cash, the American National Musical Publishers' Association has joined the action against YouTube - an interesting move given that many of the record labels have come to terms with Google on this one, or are working towards agreements.

Eminem takes a second bite at Apple

No, no, this isn't the lawsuit which Eminem brought when Apple used Lose Yourself in an iPod advert; this is an all-new lawsuit and one which could spark a sticky time - not just for Apple, but all the record labels and download sellers as well.

Eight Mile Style LLC and Martin Affiliated LLC have ordered Apple to stop selling unlicensed downloads of Eminem tracks on iTunes.

Unlicensed? But isn't iTunes the shining paragon of legal music downloads, that which makes the RIAA purr?

Up to a point, it turns out. At the moment, it's the record labels which give consent to songs going on iTunes, and the deal has been cut to suit them - Apple gives about 70% of the sales to the labels, and the labels, in turn, pass about nine cents on to the publisher of the music. What Eminem's publishing company say, though, is that as owners of the tracks being performed, rather than the actual performances, they should be involved in actively agreeing to the songs being made available digitally. In other words: they don't want to leave it to the record companies to cut a deal and then decide how small the slice the publishers will take. In other other words: the publishing industry wants some of that sweet digital bonus for itself.

Which could all get rather interesting - in effect, this has little to do with Eminem or Apple as such; it's a war between the record companies and the music publishers.

Let's hope they get it settled quickly, otherwise nobody will come out of it well - because if Eminem songs aren't on iTunes, there's not going to be any money for anyone. Except, perhaps, people flogging contextual ads on bittorrent search sites.

Sony BMG asks Jackson to let it sign writers

In one of those shrewd business moves which only highly paid music industry executives could come up with, it turns out when Sony cut its deal with Michael Jackson to get together to buy the Beatles publishing, they agreed to never launch a rival publishing business in competition with their Sony/ATV concern. In other words, every time it wants to sign a publishing deal, it has to go via Sony/ATV, and wait for Jackson's OK.

Yes, a major record label made a blood oath to not invest in songwriting unless Michael Jackson said okay.

It has, somewhat belatedly, realised that this is like a butcher signing a deal to never sell cheese, and is trying to weasel out of the deal ("trying to renegotiate"), reports The Times.

Jackson buys Amore

We suspect the main impetus for the Sony/ATV purchase of the Famous Music LLC catalogue from Viacom has come from Sony, which is doing quite well, rather than Michael Jackson. It does suggest that Jackson's outrageous cash demands for simply turning up at places might have left him a bit a better off than this time last year.

Sony/ATV have now got publishing rights for songs ranging from The Real Slim Shady through Silver Bells to Amore, and the collection they've scooped up also includes work by Bjork, Akon and Shakira.

Big music gets that little bit bigger

The EU has said "oh, alright, then" to Universal and BMG's publishing arms merging together. Universal has promised to sell off some of its catalogue, convincing Europe it's a good idea. They're going to trade as Universal. This is great news, unless you're a songwriter, or musician, or like music.

I believed they were older

So, the R Kelly book for children is being brought back into publication. And why not? From the looks of that video, who knows more about making children squeal with delight than R Kelly.

"Due to the encouraging nature of 'I Can Fly!' we feel that the book falls right in line with our mission to inspire readers to dream, work hard, and overcome any obstacles that try to keep them from their goals," [His publisher] Dulaney said.

Obstacles like statutory rape charges, for example?