Eminem, Apple in settlement talks, ask for trial delay

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Apple and rap artist Eminem are looking to settle their legal dispute outside of court, but will need more time to do so.



Lawyers for Eminem's music label, Apple Computer and MTV have asked a federal judge to delay the trial schedule following settlement talks in the rapper?s copyright infringement suit, according to the Detroit News.



The lawsuit, which was filed in February by Eminem's publisher--Eight Mile Style-- alleges Apple used the song "Lose Yourself" in an advertisement without permission.



In the ad, a 10-year-old sings the lyrics to Eminem's Oscar-winning "Lose Yourself," which was also featured in the rapper's blockbuster flick, "8 Mile." The commercial aired on MTV for at least three months starting in July 2003 and also appeared on Apple?s Web site, the suit said.



The suit alleges that Apple sought Eminem's permission to use the song, but were turned down, with his lawyers saying ?even if (Eminem) were interested in endorsing a product, any endorsement deal would require a significant amount of money, possibly in excess of $10 million.?



The suit also claims that Apple CEO, Steve Jobs, personally called Joel Martin, the manager of Ferndale-based Eight Mile Style, encouraging Martin and Eminem to "rethink their position" about using the song.



Lawyers for all sides reportedly told U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor this week that they have been engaging in negotiations of a stipulated protective order for several weeks now, in hopes of resolving the case.



Court records also show that "Both (sides) have expressed interest in continuing settlement discussions, but have not yet been able to reach any agreement."



The Detroit News says under the revised schedule, a trial date wouldn't be set until late 2005, with witness lists would be due Dec. 1. Both sides would reportedly be able to question up to 10 people before trial, which may include Eminem and Apple Computer CEO Steve Jobs.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 30
    Serves Apple right. I hope they have to pay 10 million dollars for being stupid. Not because they tried to get clearance, failed and used the song but rather because there are PLENTY of artists who'd love the exposure and could have been had for much less. Look at Steriogram's success with "Walkie Talkie Man".



    I like Eminem but he's "sold out" to me. He'd better start rapping about living in a mansion in the burbs or something. I think he has the right to make money but damn 10 million for a snippet?



    on an aside. Note how you haven't seen Chris Tucker in a movie. He's given up 20 million dollars a film to travel to Africa and other areas to help people with Aids. I got respect for someone who's heart has been touched that deeply. Eminem's greed speaks volumes about his character.
  • Reply 2 of 30
    I can't understand why Apple chose to use an Eminem song! I love hip-hop since I was 8 yo, but since when Eminem can be considered a hip-hop artist? Strictly commercial stuff made by a greedy, narrow-minded and sick whitey from the ghetto (at least, that's what he shows to be).



    I am a white man and love hip-hop, but Vanilla Ice and Snow proved to the world that white men can't sing hip-hop. They should let it to the real guys in that business and limit themselves to listening. But that's only my opinion...



    What I really mean is that some 10 yo boy singing some song made by a commercial artist that earns his money telling how bad her mother was is not something I want to see in an Apple ad! And I am sure no sane people on earth would want that.



    Apple could have chosen De La Soul again, as they did in the "Rip, Mix, Burn" ad campaign. Even if they're not on some top-10 list. That is real hip-hop!



    More than ever, I hate Eminem!
  • Reply 3 of 30
    I would disagree with you Ice.



    Growing up with Hip Hop I had respect for the Beastie Boys(they always did their own thing) and MC Serch. There have been a few other white hip hoppers that represented well IMO. I think Eminem has immense talent but honestly getting petty over a snippet from your song because folks don't want to pay millions is silly. I think Hailey's college tuition and then some is well paid by now.
  • Reply 4 of 30
    louzerlouzer Posts: 1,054member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by icebox_br

    I can't understand why Apple chose to use an Eminem song! I love hip-hop since I was 8 yo, but since when Eminem can be considered a hip-hop artist? Strictly commercial stuff made by a greedy, narrow-minded and sick whitey from the ghetto (at least, that's what he shows to be).



    First off, who cares if he's considered hip-hop or not. I don't think that in itself was a determining factor by apple.



    Second, it doesn't matter if you like him or not, he is (was?) very popular, so trying to use his song makes sense from a commercial standpoint. (You're argument about his stuff being commericial kind of explains why it would be used in one - you wouldn't use some way-out-of-the-box artist's work that no one's heard of nor only a few appreciate FOR A COMMERCIAL).
  • Reply 5 of 30
    Commercial or not...like him personally or not...the fact still remains that apple knowingly used someone's song without permission.



    Anyways I don't know if this whole music thing was worth getting into. Seems like all the money Apple has made from ITMS and Ipod is going right back with all these law suits
  • Reply 6 of 30
    I've been following this story since it came out and one thing that surprised me about today's report is: where's TBWA(sp?)/Chiat Day in all this? (While they may have screwed up this time, keep in mind they did the famous "1984" commercial that's considered one of the all-time greats.)



    They are the ad agency who made the commercial in question. This whole thing is really their problem. They're the ones who are supposed to be expert on copyright law to tell whether the use of "Lose Yourself" was fair. Unless they can show that they told Apple that they couldn't use it and Apple told them to go ahead anyway, the blame for this fiasco goes squarely on the shoulders of the ad agency. Case closed, at least from Apple's point of view.



    It doesn't matter whether Eminem is a saint or a bastard, whether he is a hack or a genius, he created the song "Lose Yourself" (which won an Academy Award) and it's his prerogrative to use it as he sees fit and deny use to anyone else without cause.



    Anyone who doesn't respect basic intellectual property rights is not worthy to participate in this debate. The real issue is who is to blame for this theft; from what I've seen Apple's liability should be minimal.
  • Reply 7 of 30
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by macFanDave

    ...it's his prerogrative to use it as he sees fit and deny use to anyone else without cause.



    Anyone who doesn't respect basic intellectual property rights is not worthy to participate in this debate. The real issue is who is to blame for this theft; from what I've seen Apple's liability should be minimal.




    What about samples? I don't know how much of the song was used, but if it was a sample then I think there's only a minor fee that is to be paid and that fee was set long ago.
  • Reply 8 of 30
    Quote:

    Originally posted by bunge

    What about samples? I don't know how much of the song was used, but if it was a sample then I think there's only a minor fee that is to be paid and that fee was set long ago.



    I know there are laws about "fair use" and when parts of works can be used for educational, satirical or critical purposes, but it seems to me that this case would have been thrown out long ago if the use were clearly legal.



    I'm sure you are right about sampling (you didn't mention if permission needed to be granted or whether the sampler can just pay the fee and use it.) Getting perrmission to use works is also important -- oftentimes these are granted as a courtesy. Eminem explicitly refused to let his music be used for such purposes, so it will be interesting to hear how TBWA/Chiat Day deluded themselves into using it.
  • Reply 9 of 30
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by macFanDave

    I know there are laws about "fair use" and when parts of works can be used for educational, satirical or critical purposes, but it seems to me that this case would have been thrown out long ago if the use were clearly legal.



    I'm sure you are right about sampling (you didn't mention if permission needed to be granted or whether the sampler can just pay the fee and use it.) Getting perrmission to use works is also important -- oftentimes these are granted as a courtesy. Eminem explicitly refused to let his music be used for such purposes, so it will be interesting to hear how TBWA/Chiat Day deluded themselves into using it.




    I don't even know if the amount of music they used was more or less than the length of a sample, but I thought it was important to note.



    From what I understand you don't need to get permission for samples, you just pay the fee. And obviously samples are used for commercial (well, artistic) purposes, so I'm not sure how that would balance out either.



    Lastly, if Eminem did explicitly refuse, then someone needs to be fired.
  • Reply 10 of 30
    stevesteve Posts: 523member
    They didn't even use a sample.



    Literally, no sound was taken at all from the song.



    It was a kid singing the lyrics for 30 seconds.



  • Reply 11 of 30
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Steve

    They didn't even use a sample.



    Literally, no sound was taken at all from the song.



    It was a kid singing the lyrics for 30 seconds.







    Well that's f'd up. I don't know what the precedent is for this, but they didn't use his music, just the lyrics. I think ASCAP has fees associated with this as well, but I'm not sure if an artist has the right to veto some else using the song. Probably not (that means anyone willing to pay a set fee can make and sell a cover of an Eminem song).



    But again, commercial vs. artistic use could be the deciding factor.
  • Reply 12 of 30
    macfan, you are wrong on this one. the ad agency is not responsible for this. i work at an ad agency and the client (apple) makes the ultimate decision. It is our job to inform them of any possible copyright infringement, but if the client says go, you go. the client is the one who pays you



    other than that, i hate eminem. he is a punk who has skills, but is stuck up and thinks he more than he is. he's only human, not a god. he needs to get his attitude in check.
  • Reply 13 of 30
    dfilerdfiler Posts: 3,420member
    A little kid singing along (badly) to a song? It's pathetic that anyone thinks this entitles someone to any money whatsoever.



    All legal challenges are essentially bringing the power of a gun to bear on a dispute. So basically, they are pointing a gun and saying, "You showed people a kid singing along to some headphones, pay up or else."



    Not a society I'm proud to be living in.
  • Reply 14 of 30
    Quote:

    Originally posted by otherguy

    ...the client (apple) makes the ultimate decision. It is our job to inform them of any possible copyright infringement, but if the client says go, you go. the client is the one who pays you





    I'm not wrong and I am not disagreeing with your statement, but I have not seen anything that said that the ad agency warned Apple it was wrong, but Apple said go ahead anyway.



    So, if TWBA/Chiat Day said it was OK, then it is INDEED their fault. However, if Apple ignored their warning, it would be Apple's fault. Please show me where the ad agency alerted Apple to potential problems and I'll accept the liability (I am an Apple stockholder so ultimately I will pay for my company's misdeeds.)
  • Reply 15 of 30
    I would be money that Apple's lawyers are going to argue fair use.



    You "have" to get permission from an artist to sample and in many cases pay their fee for the sample. However, as Steve succinctly pointed out, there was no sample but rather sung lyrics for less than 10 seconds.



    The performer singing the lyrics is undoubtedly not a professional singer(perhaps a dancer but obviously not a singer) and not one musical note was taken from the orignal performance.



    Apple threaded the line here but I do not believe they are guilty. Copyright does not exist to prevent fair use it exists to ensure that there is adequate protection so that artists can profit from their orginal works. Fair Use principals hold that if a performance(satire, parody etc) does not interfere with the copyright holders ability to profit from their work then that usage is ok.



    What Eminem's legal beagle is trying to say is that they own the keys and even the citizen on MTV that decides to sing a couple bars of their favorite tune are in copyright violation. That's just not the case. Copyright is not your license to collect money in perpetuity.



    Apple could lose this case or they could win. I still feel that Apple should be ashamed though..there are plenty of more deserving artists that could have been highlighted.
  • Reply 16 of 30
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    Beastie Boys (...) and MC Serch



    Damn! You're right. White men can rap. MC Serch was cool. I gotta be ashmed I forgot about the Beastie Boys.



    Well, well... It still doesn't make Eminem any better. AFAICT, I am sure to let my son sing some MC Serch and even some Beastie Boys songs. But hey, my point is still valid: a 10-year-old singing some Eminem song is a bad sign. Very bad sign...



    It's pop, it's on the top of many minds, but it's still nasty.



    Cheers,

    _iCeb0x_
  • Reply 17 of 30
    Quote:

    Originally posted by macFanDave

    It doesn't matter whether Eminem is a saint or a bastard, whether he is a hack or a genius, he created the song "Lose Yourself" (which won an Academy Award) and it's his prerogrative to use it as he sees fit and deny use to anyone else without cause.



    So many right words. It's true. He wrote it, he deserves his money for the use of the excerpt. That's is very true to the American principles, which I admire...



    But... How can some things be so right and other things be so wrong?!? That piece of crap wins an Academy Award?! Hey, Academy!! What the hell were you people on?





    _iCeb0x_
  • Reply 18 of 30
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    Apple threaded the line here but I do not believe they are guilty. Copyright does not exist to prevent fair use it exists to ensure that there is adequate protection so that artists can profit from their orginal works. Fair Use principals hold that if a performance(satire, parody etc) does not interfere with the copyright holders ability to profit from their work then that usage is ok.



    What Eminem's legal beagle is trying to say is that they own the keys and even the citizen on MTV that decides to sing a couple bars of their favorite tune are in copyright violation. That's just not the case. Copyright is not your license to collect money in perpetuity.




    I have to say that I agree and I hope Apple holds out and what's-his-name loses. Of course, Apple would probably settle to keep/get his tunes in iTunes and to keep artists happy.
  • Reply 19 of 30
    http://boss.streamos.com/download/i...loseitclean.mp3



    Thats a link to eminems new single if anyone cares.

    Subpar for someone who was once a great lyricist
  • Reply 20 of 30
    How easily they forget.



    When Linux users started creating Aqua look-alike desktop themes for KDE and GNOME, Apple immediately started firing off cease and desist letters to anyone creating or hosting the themes. They also sent the letters to anyone using the word Aqua in their desktop themes.



    Why? To protect their property. They're required to do this by law.



    For this example, you could say that Aqua is to Mac OS X what lyrics are to a song. All parts are copyrighted, and protected under law.



    Now, after being told no, Apple still used the lyrics from one of Eminem's songs to promote their products. These lyrics are protected under law.



    This isn't a home movie of some kid singing an Eminem song, and his talent or lack thereof is irrelevant. This kid is an actor hired to sing this song. It has nothing to do with the kid. Fair Use does NOT apply here. This is a commerical business stealing the copyrighted materials from an artist to promote their products and MAKE MONEY. Regardless of how you feel about Eminem, it is illegal.



    If someone steals your work in an effort to capitalise off of your work or image, you'd do the same thing. Just like Apple did to people making (free) themes. Just like Apple did to all the companies who made colorful computers AND TV'S that even remotely resembled the old iMacs several years back. It is the reason we have laws.



    Apple protects their property, you can't have double standards and get mad at Eminem for protecting his. You call him a sell-out, but what products have you seen him endorse? Why do you think he's so mad about Apple using his fame to sell their products? Jessica Simpson selling pizza and breath mints, MC Hammer with a Saturday morning cartoon, LL Cool J selling Dr. Pepper, that's selling out. It could even be argued that any artist that signs a recording contract with a big label is selling out. Want the name of a band that doesn't sell out? Big Engine in Florida. Been going strong for 12+ years, and refuses to sign with a big label. They have thousands of fans, and do it all themselves, and have turned down many recording contracts.



    Eminem's doing what any other artist would do, and has done many times in the past. It's not greed, it's common sense. It was wrong, Apple knows they're wrong, and if they weren't, they wouldn't be trying to settle out of court.
Sign In or Register to comment.