# Eminem to sue Apple?



## diablojota (Feb 24, 2004)

http://money.excite.com/jsp/nw/nwdt_ge.jsp?news_id=cmt-055w2047&feed=cmt&date=20040224

According to this article, Apple is being sued by Eminem's label for having a 10 year old sing part of an Eminem song.  Although a fixed figure is not given, it appears that Eminem is going to sue for in excess of 10,000,000 USD.


----------



## hulkaros (Feb 24, 2004)

Eminem that is!


----------



## Randman (Feb 24, 2004)

It's his label, not him. I'm sure he has nothing to do with it. But it is funny that he was one of the first Exclusive artists on the iTMS (again, arranged by his record label). I'm sure it's just a ploy to keep his name in the papers.


----------



## diablojota (Feb 24, 2004)

Randman said:
			
		

> It's his label, not him. I'm sure he has nothing to do with it. But it is funny that he was one of the first Exclusive artists on the iTMS (again, arranged by his record label). I'm sure it's just a ploy to keep his name in the papers.




The label is owned by him (8 Mile Records or whatever).  That is his own label.


----------



## Go3iverson (Feb 24, 2004)

I just read it myself and was about to post it!

LAME!

Ok, so your sick and tired of people stealing your music, so Apple puts you on the front page of the launch with an exclusive and sells your album for you in the hope that people buy iPods.  To promote it, a 10 year old sings your song on TV.  Not you, not your recording, just a kid singing it so that people will visit and buy an album, probably even yours.  So what do you do?  You sue.

I'm sorry, but that just seems lame to me.  Supposedly, Apple isn't making anything besides iPod sales off the store and stopping people from stealing your music, so now you take more.  Yes, Apple should have received permission for use of his words, not even song, that kid wasn't more than doing something we all do at one point or another.  

I mean, really think about it.  If I sang Lose Yourself along to my iPod, would he sue me?  True, I'm not doing it to sell a product, but what product was Apple selling?  Eminem's album.  So, he's suing a company for finding a way to stop people from ripping off what I'd assume was one of the most ripped off artists.


----------



## Go3iverson (Feb 24, 2004)

Interesting note from spymac.com about the whole lawsuit...

"The ad in question featured a ten year old singing the song "Lose Yourself," and ran for three months last summer on MTV. Interestingly, the song wasn't copyrighted until October 27, 2003, long after the ad was run on television."


----------



## j79 (Feb 24, 2004)

Go3iverson said:
			
		

> Interesting note from spymac.com about the whole lawsuit...
> 
> "The ad in question featured a ten year old singing the song "Lose Yourself," and ran for three months last summer on MTV. Interestingly, the song wasn't copyrighted until October 27, 2003, long after the ad was run on television."



That's "legal" copyright.

Any work you create, you have copyright over. You then have the option of registering it with the copyright office to make it legal - which just makes it easier to sue down the road.


----------



## GroundZeroX (Feb 24, 2004)

Whats also amusing is that the Lose Yourself ad was never aired. At least I never saw it. The one I saw on tv, had The Real Slim Shady. I remember seeing the little kid, and him singing that one over and over again, and thinking that the Lose Yourself was better. Did anyone ACTUALLY SEE the Lose Yourself ad? Am I the only one that saw The Real Slim Shady?

Not only that, but chances are, The Real Slim Shady is in control of the label. 8 Mile Records or whatever would have to be reasonably new considering that it is a spin off of the name 8 Mile. The 8 Mile label or group or whatever would have come together around 2002, 2001 at the earliest. The Real Slim Shady came out around 1999 or 2000. I remember because I was on a Senior trip in High School, and I kept hearing it over and over again. When someone goes from one label, to another, very rarely does the artist have the ability to take their works under the label with them. Chances are, who ever published his first two cd's still have rights to those songs. Because of this, the publisher would probably have the rights to the older stuff. When Steve Jobs was unable to get Lose  Yourself, he probably went to the old publishers to get rights to another works of Eminem for the commercial. 

Now, I don't know for a fact that the Lose Yourself ad never aired on TV, but I'm positive it didn't air for 3 months.

The bottom line, Eminem and Steve Jobs (still love what he does) are both ego-maniacs. They do what they want, when they want. Am I the only one who has read "The Second Coming of Steve Jobs", and remember where it talks about how Steve Jobs' favoriate sentence was "*uck em?"

Any comments?


----------



## cory1848 (Feb 24, 2004)

I havent seen this ad at all, so I can speak for its validity, but if apple uses someone elses material and doesn't give credit for it, than Apple is liable for proper credit to the artist, weather that be record sales, acknowlegement or 10 million dollars. Apple is using a well known popular artist to help sell its own products, that would make apple liable for credit. If the same ad ran with row row row your boat, would it have the same effect? I don't think so, and I would assume Apple wouldn't think so either. I can agree with eminem because I am an artist and musician and I would want credit for the work I created.


----------



## MBHockey (Feb 24, 2004)

Wait...Apple ran that commercial without permission from eminem's record label?  That's kind of like asking to get sued...


----------



## Go3iverson (Feb 24, 2004)

Yup, Apple ran an ad with a 10 year old singing an Eminem song, with no accompanying music, in an attempt to get people to buy Eminem's music, rather than stealing it.

Apple should really be sued for that!


----------



## Go3iverson (Feb 24, 2004)

It's funny because Eminem just wishes people would "leave him alone" and stop suing him and boycotting him.  So someone promotes him to sell his music, so what's he do?  He shows off how much of a hypocrite he can be and sues them back.


----------



## GroundZeroX (Feb 24, 2004)

The rights of the song that WAS seen on tv, probably didn't belong to him directly.


----------



## Satcomer (Feb 24, 2004)

I was wondering if this is the commercial?


----------



## GroundZeroX (Feb 24, 2004)

Do you know where the one where he does The Real Slim Shady is? Like I've said many times before, that one was on the keynote, but to the best of my knowledge, never aired on TV. The one with the kid singing The Real Slim Shady was the one that was commercials.


----------



## JetwingX (Feb 24, 2004)

Satcomer said:
			
		

> I was wondering if this is the commercial?


yep this it the song

the thing i don't understand is that apple SELLS his music in iTMS which would be making him/his label money (i just don't get it)


----------



## Total Konfuzion (Feb 24, 2004)

Blah Blah...Another lawsuit....but let me ask this....What the hell is this little kid doing listening to Eminem anyway....hmm   Are all the Eminem songs on iTunes edited or something?  Heh


----------



## diablojota (Feb 25, 2004)

Well, the problem is actually with Apple's company that makes the adverts.  If they failed to get permission, then they are more liable then Apple is.  The way I see it, if Apple loses the suit, they are going to collect the money directly from their advertising agency.


----------



## wnowak1 (Feb 25, 2004)

this country is going to shit with all the law suits for stupid things.


----------



## GroundZeroX (Feb 25, 2004)

There are edited, and non-edited versions of these songs on iTunes Music Store.


----------



## fryke (Feb 25, 2004)

It's just too strange, I think. But, well, what do we care: Apple will handle this. They'll either win, lose or find a solution that both parties can agree with. Move on, people, nothing to see here but the US legal system in action.


----------



## whitesaint (Feb 25, 2004)

Wow i thought Eminem was smart but this shows he must be a simplistic idiotic retard.  I use to like Eminem, but after ive read this, this is horrible, i hate eminem.  Eminem needs to die and go to hell (he prolly is anyway).  I'm making sure i never again spend another penny towards eminem to encourage this kind of behavior... he was smart with 50 cent, but this really pisses me off and its like what a !@#$in moron.


----------



## UNIX X11 (Feb 25, 2004)

whitesaint said:
			
		

> Wow i thought Eminem was smart but this shows he must be a simplistic idiotic retard.  I use to like Eminem, but after ive read this, this is horrible, i hate eminem.  Eminem needs to die and go to hell (he prolly is anyway).  I'm making sure i never again spend another penny towards eminem to encourage this kind of behavior... he was smart with 50 cent, but this really pisses me off and its like what a !@#$in moron.


Get over yourself, boy.
Seriously, anyone who is like you, must be retarded.
As much of a Mac fan I am, I think it is COMPLETLY stupid that Apple didn't ask for permission. It's like _asking_ to be sued...
Oh, and, Eminem had nothing to do with this, his label Eight Mile Style is suing.


----------



## Natobasso (Feb 25, 2004)

j79 said:
			
		

> That's "legal" copyright.
> 
> Any work you create, you have copyright over. You then have the option of registering it with the copyright office to make it legal - which just makes it easier to sue down the road.



Technically, yes, but not in the eyes of a court. If you don't have some way to prove that you were the original creator of the song (ie. mailed yourself the lyrics and a tape via us mail or applied for copyright through the US government) then your claim for copyright is much more tenuous.


----------



## Natobasso (Feb 25, 2004)

As far as a 10 year old kid singing an eminem song and violating copyright, I find that highly questionable. They didn't use the actual song but an adaptation of it. They do this in commercials all the time; re-recording an original song and changing the lyrics slightly. See "car commercial theme songs." It's unfortunate that apple didn't get permission first, but eminem doesn't have much of a leg to stand on if he didn't at least have a copyright pending on the song until after the commercial was aired. 

Seems a bit like money grubbing and attention mongering to me if these things are indeed true.


----------



## Natobasso (Feb 25, 2004)

The biggest problem these days is that every one in the US thinks that suing is the answer for everything. I believe this, and I am an American! Pretty soon you won't be able to wipe your a** or say "breast" without offending someone and getting sued.

Don't even get me started!


----------



## MBHockey (Feb 25, 2004)

UNIX X11 said:
			
		

> Get over yourself, boy.
> Seriously, anyone who is like you, must be retarded.
> As much of a Mac fan I am, I think it is COMPLETLY stupid that Apple didn't ask for permission. It's like _asking_ to be sued...
> Oh, and, Eminem had nothing to do with this, his label Eight Mile Style is suing.



Yep, stupid move on Apple's part.


----------



## jeffrito (Feb 25, 2004)

The first thing that came to mind was the fact that (though spelled differently) this dumba** takes the name M&M.  It would tickle me pink to see M&M/Mars sue this a-hol* for that alone.  Afterall there was MikeRoweSoft.  And we know what happened there.  So I guess it's OK to go after someone (in another country even) if they have a name that is phonetically the same as yours.  Yep.  I think it's time to write a letter to M&M and complain that some hooligan is using a name that sounds like their BRAND of candy.  Or maybe this is all just so the ENEMA guy can steal the spotlight from Janet Jackson, who stole it from Michael Jackson.  So next I guess Michael will sue Janet and Janet will sue ENEMA, and Martha Stewart will sue ENEMA for taking the spotlight off her case.  And I guess Bush's amemnment thing is really all about Martha getting too much air-time too!  Please.


----------



## GadgetLover (Feb 25, 2004)

Fact: The kid did *not* violate *any* recording copyright *if* the actual recorded song was never played in the commercial!  There are two copyrights potentially at issue here: [1] the recording (p) ("circle p") copyright and [2] the lyrics/sheetmusic which is a (c) ("circle c") copyright.  This is exactly why people are allowed under the law to sing their own version of the song in bars, etc. as a "cover band!"  However, it *is* true that the music *publisher* who owns the (c) sheet music and lyrics (unless Eminem owns these himself) theoretically could sue the kid if it could be argued that b/c it was a commercial and not 'non-commercial free-speech' that there was no "fair-use" to the sample ... but that is the key: fair-use or not fair-use that is the question (the fact that it was a for-profit commercial won't help Apple).


Interesting issue if true.  God speed Apple ....


----------



## GadgetLover (Feb 25, 2004)

Natobasso said:
			
		

> As far as a 10 year old kid singing an eminem song and violating copyright, I find that highly questionable. They didn't use the actual song but an adaptation of it. They do this in commercials all the time; re-recording an original song and changing the lyrics slightly.



You are right on the money (pun intended).  If Apple did an original recording (new musicians, etc.) or if the kid sang the song acapella (spelling) then the only copyright at issue is the sheet music.  As far as that goes, I disagree with the people who claim that the music wasn't copyrighted in time -- nonsense.  There is a common law copyright if he simply "copied" on paper (or other permament structure including RAM! [yes, RAM, according to the Court of Appeals and U.S. Supreme Court]) for a fixed period of time the lyrics and music -- even on a photocopier!  The whole U.S. Library of Congress Copyright Office is for Federal protection (but protection would theoretically still exist).


----------



## Studio Zero (Feb 26, 2004)

Wouldn't Fair Use protect them being sued, since they used only a small bit of the song?


----------



## GadgetLover (Feb 26, 2004)

hard to have "commercial" ($$) fair use


----------



## Go3iverson (Feb 27, 2004)

If I didn't think it would adversely affect Apple sales, I would think removing Eminem content from the online store would be a good idea, especially if the other online companies, no matter what their share, agreed to remove as well.

I'm not telling people to steal music and I'm not saying Apple is 100% in the clear on it, but I'm sure Eminem wants *sales* of his album and not *steals*.  Let P2P be his #1 online distribution channel.  He could move into suing his fans then for his $12.99.  lol


----------



## Gnomo (Feb 27, 2004)

If I were Apple, I would drop Eminem regardless of how this lawsuit turns out.  Yes, they should have made sure to have the artists permission to use the song, but still the phrase applies "don't bite the hand that feeds you."  Plus, its not like they are going to lose any money by not having Eminem's crap on their site, iTMS doesn't make any money anyway.


----------



## Go3iverson (Feb 27, 2004)

True, but people may want their purchased Eminem music to work on their iPod, which they don't own yet. 

That's the issue.

Personally, I'd take a stand and drop him for that same saying.  If your not willing to give of yourself, you can't expect to get in return.  In this case, all he had to do was absolutely nothing.  Just let the kid sing your words with no music and let the money roll in and the piracy fade, a little at least.  Instead, he sued the company that's bringing him a check.


----------



## Arden (Feb 28, 2004)

He should see it this way: free advertising!


----------



## gerbick (Mar 1, 2004)

that's the problem.  it's free advertising for Apple, not Eminem.  As far as I can tell, Apple goofed on this one.  If they allowed the content to be used in the commercial - they commissioned the commercial, and they approved it - and they knew they didn't have the rights to it, they basically goofed up by doing so.

If it were your music, and it was being used, I doubt that any of you would not want to seek payment for your work.  

and if you say you wouldn't, then congrats on being careless about who uses your music/image... can I use your music in something that you might not appreciate... for free?


----------



## Go3iverson (Mar 4, 2004)

Eminem to sue NBA/TNT?

I just heard one of his songs on the promo for the return of Rasheed Wallace to Portland with the Pistons.  We all know that Eminem doesn't want to endorse any product, so it would make sense that he would sue the NBA and TNT broadcasting for using the *actual* recording of his song to promote their product, right?


----------



## Go3iverson (Mar 4, 2004)

I response to gerbic, from what I can tell, Apple was giving payment to Eminem in the form of reducing piracy of his music, increasing legal purchasing of his music, and giving him more exposure with the exclusive on the front page of iTunes launch.  

For the argument of the artist doesn't get as much as the label; its his label!


----------



## diablojota (Mar 31, 2004)

Okay, sorry to bring back an old thread, but I thought this would be good for a little irony.
Eminem's newest video with D12 (I think?) at the very start of the video, there is an iPod mini.  And he doesn't endorse products?


----------



## pds (Mar 31, 2004)

heh heh


----------

