Capitol v. Multiply Inc. UPDATE

/
A stipulation, dated 1/16/08 and filed 1/17/08, in the Capitol Records v. Multiply Inc. suit pending in the federal District Court, Southern District of New York (Judge Stein), granted defendant Multiply Inc. until February 15, 2008 to answer the complaint. Though an initial pretrial conference remains scheduled for 2/8/08, it is unlikely the public (and OTCS's loyal readers) will have access to any further information on this matter until that time -- unless, a settlement is reached and disclosed, the latter of which is unlikely.

...so stay tuned...

Of note, an electronic copy of the complaint with attached exhibits was too large a file to electronically file, and Judge Stein granted (by endorsed letter dated 1/2/08) Plaintiffs permission to file the exhibits as paper documents only. That is one large complaint!


[Capitol Records Inc.; Caroline Records Inc.; EMI Christian Music Group Inc.; Virgin Records America Inc.; Colgems EMI Music Inc.; EMI April Music Inc.; EMI Blackwood Music; EMI Full Keel Music; EMI Grove Park Music Inc.; EMI Longitude Music; EMI Robbins Catalog Inc.; EMI U Catalog Inc.; EMI Virgin Music Inc.; EMI Virgin Song Inc.; EMI Waterford Music Inc. v. Multiply Inc.; filed 12/18/2007; case CV-11357]

Multiply Inc. Sued by Major Label

/
Capitol Records, and a host of other entities owned and/or controlled by label giant EMI Music, sued the company Multiply Inc. in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York. Plaintiffs allege copyright infringement arising from unauthorized use and exploitation of original sound and video recordings by encouraging and enabling users of Multiply to upload and share performances of well-known musical groups.

What gives? This sounds like EMI is suing YouTube type service. But, after casually visiting Multiply's website, which boasts "Multiply makes it easy to create, share and discuss your blog, photos, videos and music with more of the people you know, and less of the people you don't"; it looks like this is more of an online storage site, giving users their own "homepage" to share with the world. But, is this any different than MySpace? Is EMI just going after the little-guy, hoping for precedential effect against the behemoths in the future?

[Capitol Records Inc.; Caroline Records Inc.; EMI Christian Music Group Inc.; Virgin Records America Inc.; Colgems EMI Music Inc.; EMI April Music Inc.; EMI Blackwood Music; EMI Full Keel Music; EMI Grove Park Music Inc.; EMI Longitude Music; EMI Robbins Catalog Inc.; EMI U Catalog Inc.; EMI Virgin Music Inc.; EMI Virgin Song Inc.; EMI Waterford Music Inc. v. Multiply Inc.; filed 12/18/2007; case CV-11357]