<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
   <channel>
      <title>The Sports &amp; Entertainment Law Playbook - Record Companies</title>
      <link>http://www.sportsandentertainmentlawplaybook.com/entertainment-law/record-companies/</link>
      <description>New Jersey : Lawyer &amp; Attorney : Joe Bahgat</description>
      <language>en</language>
      <copyright>Copyright 2013</copyright>
      <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 May 2013 12:26:35 -0500</lastBuildDate>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2013 12:26:35 -0500</pubDate>
      <generator>http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/?v=4.32-en</generator>
      <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs> 

      
      <item>
         <title>&quot;Big Four&quot; Record Companies Headed Back to Court on Price-Fixing Allegations</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><img class="mt-image-right" style="float: right; margin: 0 0 20px 20px;" src="http://www.sportsandentertainmentlawplaybook.com/italianjobdavid.jpg" alt="I am the Napster!" width="353" height="217" /></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Sony BMG, Universal, Warner Bros. and EMI, a/k/a the big four record labels are all headed back to court over price-fixing allegations, after Monday's ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court, denied their <a href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2375535,00.asp" target="_blank">petition for certiorari</a> in <em>Sony Music Entertain- ment v. Kevin Starr</em>, No. 10-263. Denying the certiorari petition (this is a fancy term for "request to hear this appeal") has the effect of up- holding the decision being appealed, which in this case was by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. That court <a href="http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-2nd-circuit/1497177.html" target="_blank">overruled the trial court's order dismissing the case</a>.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The basis of the Second Circuit's decision was that it was sufficient for the plaintiffs to allege facts that suggest a conspiracy, and that the trial court should not have required them to allege facts that ruled out any possibility that the record companies were acting independently.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The irony of this case, however, is that the alleged unlawful conduct occurred back in 2001, i.e., pre-iTunes. Shortly after iTunes' launch, in 2003, the big four record companies' combined 80% ownership of the digital music download market was all but eclipsed.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.sportsandentertainmentlawplaybook.com/entertainment-law/record-companies/music-labels-to-face-price-fixing-lawsuit/</link>
         <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sportsandentertainmentlawplaybook.com/entertainment-law/record-companies/music-labels-to-face-price-fixing-lawsuit/</guid>
         <category domain="http://www.sportsandentertainmentlawplaybook.com/entertainment-law">Record Companies</category>
         <pubDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2011 14:07:23 -0500</pubDate>
         <dc:creator>joseph bahgat</dc:creator>




      </item>
      
   </channel>
</rss>