Not sure if this has been posted...Record Labels Sue Porn Websites
 

http://www.mtv.co.uk/artists/justin-...-porn-websites

also on TMZ.

Times must be hard for these Mainstream sites.

Elektra, Atlantic, Warner Brothers and Bad Boy are among 11 record labels that have clubbed together to sue adult websites RK Netmedia and RealityKings for using their music in porn films.

Songs such as Michael Jackson?s Don't Stop (Til You Get Enough), Justin Timberlake?s SexyBack and Katy Perry?s I Kissed a Girl have been used as background music in various adult films, while "models or actors are performing their scenes".

The 18-page lawsuit suggests that in some cases the titles of the films have taken their inspiration directly from the songs, such as one called Bringing Sexy Back.

It also states that sometimes, "performers 'lip-sync' the lyrics of a song while engaged in intercourse or other sexual activity". The record labels are demanding $150,000 for each copyright infringement listed in the suit.

Yeah at least 2 other threads about it.

Knowing licensing i cant say that i disagree with the lawsuits.
If the brief describtions of the suit are correct that is.

I see this happening ALL the time in our industry and even have producers especially from south america send us productions with copyrighted music as they think it makes the product stand out more not for one second thinking about what they just did.

I'm surprised there hasn't been a ton more of these types of lawsuits actually. With all the reviewing I've done over the years I've seen literally thousands of porn clips that used copyrighted music in the background. I've always wondered how producers continue to get away with it.

I really hope all the cam sites don't ban us from being able to play music when we are online.

Why?
You can buy pretty damn good licensed music
And its not even going to break you either money wise....

Some sites ban you from playing music when you are online & it makes being online rather boring.

I haven't worked on a site that uses licensed music, but I have worked at the Gap & their approved licensed music made me want to stab my eyes out after hearing the same music for 2 months.

The world doesn't revolve around your pussy.

Why would you think you could use their music ...anymore than they could use your video?

Because they are enforcing their rights? I am surprised the adult companies thought they could get away with it. They could not monetize a YouTube video with that music in the background.

Fortunately for them, RK has enough money to be able to hire good lawyers. They will not get steamrollered in court.

Yes they will, but im sure will just settle for a LOT less.
I dont see it being easy to get out of.

They violated copyrights. That is okay with you?

I can see both sides of the argument & I'm not going to throw a tantrum if they do ban us from playing music.

I see it is as kind of a grey area because I always buy my music because I want to support the artists I love. I also always tell the people in my chat room what music I'm playing when I'm online & a lot of guys have commented that they got the albums after hearing me play them. Hopefully they paid for them of course!

I see it is as kind of the same thing as all the fans who are posting our private shows on forums. Watching a pre-recorded cam show isn't the same as watching a live show. So the guys who like what they see might find the model when she is online and buy a show with her. It also helps when you can broadcast your name or URL over your feed like you can on MFC.

Likewise, you aren't getting the best sound quality when you hear a cam girl playing music in her room. But if you like the sound of it, you might go out and buy it.

Anyway if they do ban us from playing unlicensed music, I hope they let us find bands & artists who want to have their music promoted online. It would just make things more enjoyable for everyone if the same music wasn't being played in every single chat room.

Sounds to me like they have no chance even if they hire the best lawyers...
they either licensed the music or they didn't, if they didn't, how are they going to defend themselves? The only debating point will be if 150k per infringement is a a fair compensation...

I would think that is this instance the max is appropriate.

Sometimes the profits are just way bigger when you settle.
Less lawyer fees etc

But i agree

When do you think Vimeo will get hit? Unlike Youtube, Vimeo lets you upload any song you want to your videos.

Dave, it's still a TUBE though, with Vimeo itself there is DMCA and that's it...

Completely different. They could get hit all the same (as youtube did), but it bears no similarity to these cases. I don't know the ins and outs of vimeo, but going off the recent youtube case, and others, they'd likely be fine.

When enough people use it.

How so? Its clear cut copyright infringement. Case closed. Its kind of hard to argue anything since they have it all on tape.

If Federal court judges are handing down $600,000 dollar judgements against college kids for sharing 30 songs, what makes you think they wont fucking slam them? This one, no doubt, is gonna sting.

Yeah there's a 2 page thread already.

Yep it has been posted already...