Well, that was fast. Just two days after Pink Floyd announced they were suing label EMI for unpaid online royalties, the band have emerged triumphant.
Earlier this morning (March 11), a high court in the UK ordered EMI to stop selling individual downloads of the songs from the band's original studio albums. As CBC points out, Judge Andrew Morritt ruled that a clause in the band's contract made clear that EMI was to protect "the artistic integrity of the albums," meaning they can't break the albums up for the sale of individual tracks.
EMI was ordered to pay the band's legal fees (40,000 pounds, or $61,800 Canadian) and will pay damages later, once the Judge has settled on an amount. The amount owed for royalties, for which the band were originally suing, was settled privately, after EMI lawyers argued the information should be covered by commercial confidentiality.
The trial embodied the post-digital struggle between artists and labels quite aptly. During the trial, an EMI lawyer tried arguing that the word "album" only applied to physical product, while the band's lawyer contended that the band should also maintain artistic control over its compilations, given that they, like albums, are "seamless."
Earlier this morning (March 11), a high court in the UK ordered EMI to stop selling individual downloads of the songs from the band's original studio albums. As CBC points out, Judge Andrew Morritt ruled that a clause in the band's contract made clear that EMI was to protect "the artistic integrity of the albums," meaning they can't break the albums up for the sale of individual tracks.
EMI was ordered to pay the band's legal fees (40,000 pounds, or $61,800 Canadian) and will pay damages later, once the Judge has settled on an amount. The amount owed for royalties, for which the band were originally suing, was settled privately, after EMI lawyers argued the information should be covered by commercial confidentiality.
The trial embodied the post-digital struggle between artists and labels quite aptly. During the trial, an EMI lawyer tried arguing that the word "album" only applied to physical product, while the band's lawyer contended that the band should also maintain artistic control over its compilations, given that they, like albums, are "seamless."
