Pink Floyd win ruling against EMI - Only full albums sold

[Viaene 0]

Pink Floyd have won a court battle stopping their tracks being sold individually online.

The psychedelic band had argued a clause in their record contract should prevent their record company, EMI, from selling songs separately from their full albums online.

At the time the band last signed their contract, 1999, online distribution was in its nascent stages, but has since grown to become the most popular method of people buying new music.

The band's lawyer, Robert Howe QC, said the lawsuit was brought by the 'Another Brick In The Wall' group because they wanted to "know where they stand as a matter of contract,'' and questioned EMI's ''entitlement to sell individual tracks, or indeed any tracks, otherwise than in the original configuration of the Pink Floyd albums," saying they believed they were "wrongly exploiting" the band.

Pink Floyd initially won the case at Britain's High Court in March, although it was appealed by the record label, which is currently facing huge financial trouble.

However, the Court Of Appeal ruled again ruled in the band's favour on Tuesday (14.12.10).

During the court case, much of Pink Floyd's music has been available through download sites, such as iTunes, individually.

The case is also part of a larger dispute between the band and EMI, as the rockers allege they are owed over $15 million in unpaid royalties from sales between 2002 and 2007.

Pink Floyd - whose album 'Dark Side of the Moon' is one of the biggest selling of all time - signed with EMI in 1967 and are the label's second most successful artist after The Beatles, although they are presently defunct.

Struggling record company EMI reported in February it made a £1.5 billion pre-tax loss in 2009.

[Carl 22]

They're owed $15 million and they're worried about their songs being sold individually? That either shows tremendous artistic integrity or skewed priorities.

[pinkstones 0]

If we're talking about Pink Floyd as opposed to some other groups, tremendous artistic integrity. They always had a vision for their work, and a way they felt their work should be listened to and experienced by the fans. They want that to continue, even though they are no longer making music together.

Good for them, I say -- it's their work, they should be the people responsible for determining how its offered to the public.

[Viaene 0]

Plus, once you sold millions of albums, I don't think you're harmed by those few people that won't buy your music because it's not sold individually.