an abusive child, beat his mother, and is full of s***. What else do you expect from a has-been like him? I rank his music up with Michael Jackson. Passe. He just molests my ears.

where's the frickin melody? the producers and arrangers should get all the money, they are the ones creating the groove. rappers make incredibly similar rhymes.

..that is were he is getting the down payment for Neverland ranch (if you haven't heard, Eminem has made Michael Jackson an offer for the Neverland ranch...I guess next h*** make an offer of Graceland).

Just another greedy thug wannabe.

....did Apple not check that first....it is an oversight that should never have happened. The AD folks should really be paying for this.

...to pay for MJ's Neverland.

apple evangelism

go register on eminem's forums and post in this topic
http://www.eminem.com/embboard/emforum/viewtopic.asp?TopicID=1608870&pivot=0&topic=Eminem+sues+because+someone+sings+his+song+on+an+ad%3F

He may be acting like a little baby right now, but Eminem is neither "talentless," a "loser," nor is he an "idiot." He's one of the few rap artists who actually comes up with his own songs that don't suck and sound like everybody else's. Just because your pissed off that he's suing Apple doesn't mean you all need to start spouting bullshit of which you obviously know very little.

I think that little kid in the apple commercial sings WAY better than e****-m. Maybe Apple should give him the 10 million and a "bling-bling" Escalade.

You think stringing together every obscenity that he can come up with is "actually [coming] up with his own songs that don't suck?"

His music is simply made to offend, he has nothing real to say.

Did Mr. Mathers write the song? Since it was a 10-year-old who sang the song on the commercial, the royalities and permission would need to come from the songwriter.
So it would be the songwriter who is the main concern. If it is Eminen, then so be it. I don't think Apple would've done something so stupid as to air a song without permission. Still, Apple's done some pretty stupid things in the past.

eminem is a idiotic talentless loser. money does not equal talent, intellect, or morals.

Only twice at most.
Then very quickly yanked from airing and on Apple TV ad section.

All I have to say is F! eminen, and wish Apple wouldn't even give that c*** the time of day in their ads and choice of music for promotions.

eminem's music is so c***, I never even bothered to illegally download his music (never mind buy it).

But I would do so, just to spite him, if for the fact that it is so bad, it would actually be a waste of hard disk space.

It's a pity you can't burn illegal downloads...

It would surprise me if it was illegal to have a tribute to a song, even in an advertisement. Using the original track, or a similar production, might be a problem-- but this is a recording of a kid singing along with his iPod. That seems very, very different to me.

Who doesn't know anything? Dude, if you're a fan, you're a fan but back the f*** off. I've read his story, read articles on him, saw the movie, listened to the music, read the lyrics. He's a f****** thug a******. And dude, he writes the lyrics, he doesn't know or do c*** with the music. Rap was intersting in the beginning because of rythyms but that hasn't changed in years.

Who's Eminem?

Eminem, or as I charactically refer to him as, "white boy who wishes he wasn't", is nothing more than a shaked down whitekid™ who trembled under the might of Dr. Dre's "influence". Reminds of me the VH1 Behind the Music episode where Vanilla Ice was bullied outta his ca$h by Biggie Smalls (or was that Notorious BIG? h*** I don't know, let's just call him Mr. Fatblack™).

What are the odds of Eminem getting hit by a stray Civil War bullet on an odd-numbered Sunday when the moon was full? Just a random thought there. Makes you wonder.

I say the only way to fight back is to post on his forums, telling him how much you hate his music, and post this: "but glad I downloaded it from LimeWire/Kazaa/some little kid, 'cuz that s*** sucked. I think I'll save my money for the Captain and Tenille Greatest Hits CD instead. And just so you know "Emmy", 2 of those songs I downloaded had rhymes that seemed to bite off of Vanilla Ice. HOW creative.".

I did't like him. h***, he didn't even make that much money on the song with his wanna be a**!

So a music store that sells your music puts a kid singing your song in a commercial, and you're suing them?

What's next, are you going to sue Amazon for showing your album cover on their web site? What other music stores that bring you your undeserved millions are you going to sue?

Way to bite the hand that feeds you, genius!

ChiatDay's use of the music without permission: Shady.
Eminem's chances of ever again appearing on my iPod or the iPod of any other Apple-lovin Mac fanboy: Slim.

Hah.
Hah.

Weren't they selling his music through the itunes store?
I gotta agree. The guy is a complete idiot! What a weezer!

Well, "eminem" may be a loser, wezer, idiot, "f****** thug a******," etc., but if Apple used his song without his permission and/or without compensating him, then Apple is wrong.

Remember, Steve, "It's corrosive to one's character to steal".

Eminem may be right. Keep that in mind.

Afterthought: Where was the criticism when the ad was played? Nowhere. Not one person spewed the kind of vitrol we're seeing today. Interesting.

I'll write the makers of M&Ms right away. No chocolate candy pieces should be able to sue.

I don't think "worser is a word buddy" The sad part is Eminem has a better grip on the English language than you do. You're just RIPE to take some more English classes.

Eminem's "Lose Yourself" has been off the iTunes top 10 singles for some time now. (Currently at 43) I wonder if he waited this long until he'd milked the itunes cash cow for about as much as he figured he was going to get, and then "dropped this bomb, yo." This really does seem to be biting the hand that feeds you... I can't understand why he would be opposed to Apple using the song to promote the store, when the proceeds go to him anyway. He even gave the store "exclusive" tracks! I'm betting that's the last time THAT happens. The bigger question is who gets hurt more if Eminem is dropped from the store altogether? Eminem or iTunes (Apple) (as eminem buyers will have to look to other sources, be it p2p or other online stores... maybe even an actual CD!)

The kid was merely holding an iPod, singing the lyrics in his own voice without any accompanying music or lyrics from M&M. How is this M&M promoting a product? This is no different than an actor singing a song in his/her own voice in a movie or the same being done on radio. As long as M&M's song can't actually be heard, I don't think this waste of a perfectly good human skeleton has a leg to stand on. The punk needs to grow up! Either that, or he needs a good a** whipping. If I wasn't so busy, I'd debone the dumbshit myself!

No talent assclown

Re: eminem is a idiotic talentless loser. money does not equal talent, intellect, or morals.

I would have to disagree. Maybe you don't like his music and you don't think the man has talent but obviously a lot of people do. To be able to sell millions of albums takes talent whether you agree or not.

Sit through two Wayne Newton songs than even half an eminem song (ideally none of either)

Uhm... it takes marketing talent yes. But it certainly doesn't take musical talent, of which Eminem has *very* little. He is a product that was marketed well. Nothing more.

Remember, dogs and cats "singing" Christmas carols sold millions of albums too. I wouldn't call them talented.

just cuase yall aint famous like him you curse him and s*** like that? come on, you people are on some real bullshit. his music rocks, and yer s*** doesnt, thats why yer crying. i mean, im a working artist also, you gonna hate on another artist?. ven though yall might be a bunch of mac peeps like me and respect that, f*** YOU ALL. business is business you f****** fools. just like you would cry over a company using your work without permission, they want their due compensation. And with corporate america, you better be greedy when going after it or you already fucked yourself.

Y'all are embarassing to mac users everywhere. lifeless f****. rock on em' ya killin them.

Learn to talk, or shut up man....

Wake up bozo...

Apple! I hope they give him 10 million. I also hope his wife gets a judgement for 20 million against him instead of 10 million.

I'm not ashamed to say that I really like Eminem's music. I have several of his CD's, including a couple I bought off of iTunes. Although he has his share of songs that aren't THAT good, he's got quite a few that are very good to listen to too.

THAT SAID, I think this move is really, really stupid. I'm ashamed of him. To complain that a ten-year-old singing your song on TV is equal to a product indorsement is just inane. Dumb, dumb, dumb.

Hmm... I just used the word "Eminem" - I wonder if that means that Eminem endorses the MacNN? =)

All said and done, I'll still listen. I enjoy music that I can groove to, and his is no exception. There's a lot of heart in some of those songs, yep.

I'm as big a Mac fan as anybody but I seem to be one of the few users here who understands the difference between a product and a cult. Not everything Steve Jobs does is right and beautiful and beneficent. Eminem is a talented guy. Sometimes I find his lyrics obnoxious but the songs are almost always compelling. And just like Apple he's out to protect his image and make a buck.

Personally, I liked the ad and would imagine it's good publicity. But if Apple didn't clear it then guess what? He's in the right. So grow up and get over this creepy Apple idol worship.

I actually think they could win the lawsuit, if they argue that the song is disseminated widely enough that a 10 year old singing it would be a plausible representation of reality, a reasonable derivative work, and thus not an infringement.

Seriously, this is a battle that needs to be fought, and Apple can fight it. The overzealous attitude of complete control that pervades the music industry has to be beaten back a few pegs. They've only gotten this way, because no one has tried to stand up to them seriously.

Eminem has his 15 mins of fame. Now it's time to go back to the trailer park....

I'd say since Jobs is big on karma he should propose settle with Eminem in some fashion, but then ban him from iTMS. That should upset his label, who will then realize they are stupid. Plus nobody will want to use his songs in commercials, etc...

permission.

I don't think Apple needs permission from Eminem for someone else to perform his song. As long as they pay the performer for their performance and the songwriter their appropriate songwriting royalties Apple has met its legal obligations.

For instance:

Is John Fogerty "promoting" the Atlanta Braves when "Centerfield" plays over the loudspeakers at Turner Field? Not as such, but Fogerty does get royalties for each performance based on audience size.

Is [insert crappy pop musician here] promoting [insert crappy radio station here] when said radio station plays [insert crappy song here]? Not as such, but the crappy pop musician does get royalties for each performance based on audience size.

...DONT BE MAD.

STOOPID BEYACHES.

understand that? wow, and im more talented than you also. you are gonna be mad at the fact that im buying a new dual 2ghz+ g5 as soon as it comes out. for my bedroom. and my girl looks better than yours, if you evern have one. and your mother hates you (really!). take your tiny d*** off your mac and find a woman, then you wouldnt complain so much you talentless b******.

look, its all spelled correctly!!

f*** YOU

While it may seem a little odd to say that the use of his song in a commercial constitutes his endorsement of the product, typically a production company would have to pay royalties for use of music in an ad. You think Madonna gracefully loaned Ray of Light to AT&T? This is a totally legitimate lawsuit. Also, some artists, particularly early punk bands like the Clash, have been criticized for letting their songs be used by corporate interests to sell cars, etc. Someone's music showing up in an ad can lead to a lack of credibility to their fans.

I'm not a big defender of intellectual property and the RIAA, but Apple, or their ad agency, or the production company, is clearly in error for not clearing this music for use in their commercial. I'm sure it will all be settled.

So since when have we been against an artist saying he's not interested in endorsements? The reason his price is ridiculous is because he's not for sale.

Apple is Right. Always. Even when they steal music for their ads.

Yep. Drink that Apple Kool-Aid, and sing the Apple Anthem:

"Apple is always right
Apple is never wrong
Steve Jobs is our hero
Let us sing our song

"All praise to the Apple
Forever wave our flag
If you don't agree with us
Then you're a f****** f**

"All praise to the Apple
forever let us sing
Steve Jobs is our god
Steve Jobs is our king

"All praise to the Apple
forever may it stand
We steal, we lie, we fudge the truth
Oh bless Cupertino-land

"All praise to the Apple
Thus ends our happy song
We bow to decreased market share
Lo, all the whole day long"

I've had all day! Way to go Eminem!!!


Sue the h*** outta them!

"To be able to sell millions of albums takes talent whether you agree or not."

You can't possibly be serious? This in our country where our idea of culture is reality TV shows? Pathetic.

AFAIK you can't copyright the spoken word (just the performance of it). M&M will have his lyrics under copyright for print (for songbooks etc.) and the music will of course be copyright, but the basic right to freedom of speech precludes copyright of the spoken word. As the kid in the advert wasn't accurately singing the track (and it being rap, there's not a significant amount of recognisable tune), there's probably no case at all.

It is amazing to me that some of the people who comment here would react so harshly to this story. Apple makes millions of dollars, more money than Eminem. Apple used Eminem's song to sell a product to makeeven more money. They used his art, and his name to earn a profit without compensating him. This is against the law for obvious reasons. I am against the RIAA and insane copyright laws in general, but come on people, Apple can afford to compensate the artists' whose music they use to sell their products. This is the most basic aspect of copyright law; someone can't make money off of your art without your consent.

It is simply ludicrous that you people would make personal comments about "wishing death" and other pathetic insults on a man who is simply earning a living. Apple claims to be the computer company of the creative, and to suppport artists, but then attempts to profit from someone else's music without their consent.

Apple fan boys rejoice in the obscurity of your comments to this site! Moan and groan, but the law is on Eminem's side, and rightly so!

You don't like his music? So what? It is art, and it is his. Em is not suing some 10 year old kid RIAA-style, he is suing a multi-million dollar company who infringed on his copyright to sell their product.

I don't think Apple needs permission from Eminem for someone else to perform his song. As long as they pay the performer for their performance and the songwriter their appropriate songwriting royalties Apple has met its legal obligations.

You need permission to use it to advertise a product. To play it (like on the radio) doesn't require it, unless its used to advertise something, like, say, some car dealer.

While it may seem a little odd to say that the use of his song in a commercial constitutes his endorsement of the product, typically a production company would have to pay royalties for use of music in an ad...This is a totally legitimate lawsuit. Also, some artists, particularly early punk bands like the Clash, have been criticized for letting their songs be used by corporate interests to sell cars, etc. Someone's music showing up in an ad can lead to a lack of credibility to their fans.


It all depends on WHO owns the rights to the music. When Nike put out their Revolution ads, Michael Jackson owned the rights to the song, and so they didn't need the Beatles permission. Note, though, that they used the beatle's performance in the ad, which was a violation. But I believe all the Beatles got out of the deal was a court order to stop running the ad, which came well after it stopped running anyway. I don't think they got any cash out of the deal.

Oh, and by the way, Enimem is JAWR (that's 'just another white rapper') who's success, like the Beastie boys and Vanilla Ice before him, is mostly tied to the fact that he's the next "great white rapping hope", which allows those white kids to try to be hip-hop without having to be black.

BTW, sampling is legal. Rap artists for years have sampled other artist's music without permission, and have done so legally. I wouldn't be surprised if this white boy has done the same thing. Couldn't this be argued as sampling?

Liking the music is all a matter of opinion-- Compared to most other rappers, Eminem is far better. As for using his song - well, he has every right to sue if Apple did not properly get his permission. You are not ALLOWED to use someone else's intellectual property when attempting to profit off of it. FOr instance- the online comic www.nuklearpower.com -- this does not get sued by square-enix becuase he does not profit off of it; if he were to charge people to read his comics, he too can get sued for it.

Whether his music sucks or not is not the point, posting all these irrelevant comments is rediculous.

The better question is- Can Apple handle this lawsuit, if it is for about 10 million? How will this affect its stock?

Ok guys, with all of this RIAA s*** going on, everyone here should no better than to blame the artist. Could it POSSIBLY be that Eminem has little to do with the lawsuit? Could it be his record company who owns the rights to his music is who's sueing? Which is it??? greedy record execs and lawyers or the very wealthy Eminem.. Hmmm... My guess is the record company.

If Apple didn't get permission, then it's thier own fault. You don't see Apple posting Beatles songs on iTMS. and why not? cause they've sued Apple twice already and Apple knows better.

And for the pathetic losers out there bashing Eminem... why is his talent in question. It has nothing to do with the case. If you dont like his music, fine. Dont listen. But most of you are bashing Eminem for no other reason than him sueing Apple. Nice arguement. maybe if you actually listened to his music, you could admit he is a talented rap artist. I hate Celine Dion, but that doesnt make her a bad performer. It just means I dont like her music.

Sure, I could say Celine Dion is a stupid loser who cant write her own songs, but I dont. I accept that people like her music and just make sure I dont listen to it. She doesnt affect me, just like Eminem doesnt affect me.

I wish you people would just move on and quit this senseless bashing. I love Apple (and all my macs) too, but come on... save all of this hostility for Microsoft!!! =)

I thought Sampling was just the audio-- do lyrics also fall into sampling?

Based on the fact that the kid singing his song was used to promote a store selling his product, I don't know if he has a case. He hasn't sued Amazon for displaying his album cover? Doesn't that belong to his record company too? h***, even if a record store advertised they have Eminem's album wouldn't he have to sue them too - after all, he owns the name, not the record store?

If this song was used to sell other than his own product, then he may have a case. But I don't think he does since he's suing a music store.

The better question is- Can Apple handle this lawsuit, if it is for about 10 million? How will this affect its stock?

Oh, they can handle it (that's why they have lawyers). It won't affect the bottom line or the stock (10 million, a drop in the bucket).

Apple used it to promote iPods.
M&M may have made out too, as it was showing that particular song as available on the iTMS. So, where's the harm? Some looser will download the M&M song, making him more money, and that's a good thing....

Still don't know how anyone can say M&M has talent either, but whatever. His 15 mins are at about 14.5 mins and ticking away fast....

On another note, shouldn't M&M Mars sue Eminem? After all, they share the same name, and one may get confused between the tasty candy and the trailer trash...

eminem v. steve jobs
now that's a clash of some pretty stubborn characters
this will be interesting
plus we all know how much jobs values loyalty

given the exclusive tracks and, if i remember correctly, eminem's mug featured prominently on ads displaying a screenshot of the ITMS, it is surprising that eminem is turning on apple like this... i thought they had a special marketing relationship set up. jobs is surely quite upset. i love it.

Let's see ... how could we combine S***** music with S***** software and an even shittier OS??? .... Hmmmm ....

I got it: it's time for MSM&M !!!!

Apple would've needed permission from the song authors, which, according to a quick ASCAP search, results in title code 420650086

Writers:
   BASS JEFFREY IRWIN
   MATHERS MARSHALL B III
   RESTO LUIS EDGARDO

Publishers/Administrators:
  JACEFF MUSIC
    % JEFFREY BASS
    1525 E 9 MILE ROAD
    FERNDALE , MI, 48220
    Tel. (248) 547-6863

Also, if you plan to hire your own musicians and singers and create an original recording of a copyrighted song, then you need the permission of only the music publisher. (source) So IF Eight Mile Style is really the publisher, then Apple may have a problem, but according to the database search, it's not. Since Eminem didn't write the song, he doesn't own copyright over the lyrics (unless they were transferred to him or his publisher)

Anyone else notice how the apple store is still selling eminem songs?

Anyone else notice which of his songs has been sold the most?

One of the big deals of the event was the announcement of a number of "exclusive" songs in the iTMS. One of those "exclusives" was a song by, you got it, Eminem. Apple will claim promotional use to the benefit of Eminem; the judge will throw the suit out.

If Apple's smart, they'll pull Eminem from the iTMS.

Take any EMINEM s*** off of iTunes, and call it even. Who downloads this guys s***? Wel, who pays for it anyway? I wouldn't steal his f****** rapcrap. Stuid a** whiteboy don't know music nohow.

Writers:
   BASS JEFFREY IRWIN
   MATHERS MARSHALL B III
   RESTO LUIS EDGARDO

Since Eminem didn't write the song, he doesn't own copyright over the lyrics (unless they were transferred to him or his publisher)

--

Marshall Mathers is Eminem

"Since Eminem didn't write the song, he doesn't own copyright over the lyrics (unless they were transferred to him or his publisher)"

He did - he's Mar$hall Mathers III....And JACEFF MUSIC % JEFFREY BASS may be someone in his "music" organization. After all, he's the 8mile Trailer Boi.

Some Eminem apologist (on the first page of posts) said that he was neither talentless, a loser nor an idiot.

To which I say: fair enough...apart from one thing. He is a f***** idiot. He has made a career out of 'wee man' syndrom and anything original he has to say gets lost in his bullshit nihilism. As a result he is a fad, a blip, an 80s rara skirt. Don't get me wrong, I'm not mirroring his idiocy, I actually bought the Eminem Show and liked some of it. It's just not something I see staying at the top of the pile for long.

And Apple? Well, for over 20 years Apple has been saying something original and you would think that Eminem and his publishers would see even a tenuous link with the greatest innovation in the music business as kinda cool. But no. They want to shake Apple down. Idiots.

As for blame. If you ask someone to create an advert you expect them to dot all the 'Is' and not do a half arsed job. Sorry Chiat/Day but then who could get mad at the people who gave us the Think different advert.

I guess what I am trying to say, to use the Scottish vernacular, is: Eminem, away an' shite. Although I am quite preared to accept that there is a more legal terminology that could be used.

Eminem may not perform as you people like (me either), and may not make legal choices you people like, but Apple allegedly used his song (even if it was just the lyrics) in an effort to sell its product without permission. Maybe this is true, maybe it isn't.

Seems like a reasonable thing for him to be annoyed with, as it's his bread and butter, AND he apparently never endorses any product for his own personal reasons. If I was an artist, and I never endorsed any product, I'd not want someone using my intellectual property to sell their product.

Otherwise, they completely could not protect their interests, and art would be even less protected than it is now. Would it be right if some artist with strong political/social views (for example) would be not be able to get damages when someone thay completely disapproved of decided to use their work product without permission?

Now perhaps the argument is flawed, because ASCAP (sp?) or the like was already involved, or maybe their contract with the music's distributor allows this use, but we don't know this yet.

From the little in the article, there is little reason to argue against it yet.

this rapper is just RIPE to write 10-15 Apple hate songs.

It is my understanding that since Apple did not air the original recording of the song (Eminem singing) but instead used the kid's voice only that they are required to only pay a compulsory licensing fee, but there is nothing that Eminem can do to prevent Apple or anyone else from using the song.

The kid was singing along. It was a recording of a user chosing to sing along with a song they like. I just can't see that requiring any sort of permission, even if used for promotional reasons.

Also, the advertisement was promoting sales of Eminem's song. Music stores, websites, etc. play actual portions of the tracks all the time-- in TV ads, in stores, on websites, etc. in order to help sell the songs. Apple is doing a variation on the same thing here.

Using a professional performance of an Eminem song to sell Hondas, or String Cheese, or Macs, might be a problem. Using an amateur performance of that song to sell copies of that song just can't be.

Maybe Michael Jackson could sue for the horrible rendition of "I'll Be There" so that his idiot accountant can finally pay me my money

it's pretty obvious that the iTunes music store and the iPod itself would be a complete utter failure if it weren't for eminem's music! apple should pay!

http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_324b.html

while it doesn't mention anything about marketing, it says that its almost impossible to deny the right to perform a song. There may be some royalties involved, but not $10 M worth.

apple should just call it a parody. then he'd get nothing.

As expected, 10000 idiots come out and immediately bash Eminem for suing apple. As if apple is some pearly white company who doesn't do anything wrong and so it must be Eminem who's the b******.

Guys, it doesn't f****** matter if you like Eminem or not. Apple is the one who screwed up here, by not checking permissions on the song before they put it in a commercial. They screwed up, and now they're getting nailed for it. Just because it's apple doesn't mean they get off and "f*** Eminem". Eminem has every right to sue. I would have done the same thing.

If only it were that simple. It isn't. Apple may have not believed they needed to get permission - (Mechanical license). Eminem believes they did.

Regardless, we don't have all the facts but we can voice any relevant opinions. It's for the courts to decide who is right in the end.

"apple should just call it a parody. then he'd get nothing."

my exact thoughts. If they call it a parody, then it would be covered under the whole Penthouse court case from the 70's - Emninem won't have a leg to stand on.

I actually like alot of Eminem's stuff - anyone who says that he doesn't have talent should try writing a peom in real time while keeping a beat and a rythem structure.
However, suing a record store is pretty dumb.

There's no such thing as bad publicity.

Apple and Eminem will settle out of court, everyone's happy (especially the lawyers)

Let's all jump on eminem. FYI, Apple jumps down the throat of anyone who even thinks of using their logo. Everyone's quick to blame eminem, but it's his lawyers who did this, and they probably made the correct legal decision. Sadly, copyright protection is such that you have to go after every little infraction, or it becomes a slippery slope. I think this is petty, as I think it's petty when Apple ends up suing it's enthusiastic fans, but it's not really Apple's fault nor Eminem's. It's a systemic problem. Don't shoot the messenger.

P.S. I really like Eminem's music. I just thought the tone was very anti in here. Just balancing the Karma.

this apple is just RIPE to steal 10-15 songs

Ummm...Michael Jackson sleeping with young boys. I think that consitutes as bad publicity

"I actually like alot of Eminem's stuff - anyone who says that he doesn't have talent should try writing a peom in real time while keeping a beat and a rythem structure.
However, suing a record store is pretty dumb."

Uhm... many musicians can write and play music in real time while keeping a beat and staying in key.

(BTW, keeping a beat and a rythm structure are the same thing - he's rhyming to a beat - lots of people can do that.)

So Howard Stern's doing an ad for iPod this morning and the background music is the instrumental version of an eminem song.

Oh the irony.

Like or Hate... Apple or Eminem... this amounts to a helluva lot of free publicity for BOTH!

Way to go M-boy!
Another Some-Hits-Wonder sliding into oblivion. Give Vanilla Ice a call!

"Interestingly, the song wasn't copyrighted until October 27, 2003, long after the ad was run on television."

Can anyone confirm?

always trailer trash.

It doesn't matter who wrote the song, it matters on who has the rights to the song. Based off the previous poster, if they got permission from that Jeff Bass guy who's the administrative contact, that's enough.

But I think you're all missing the point. By singing the song, the kid and Apple were actually repeating copyrighted material and bypassing the DRM. Its time to sic the DCMA at Apple for this c***!!!

First off, no matter who writes the song, the *publisher* owns the rights to it, unless they work out some quirky agreement stating otherwise... but generally, that's not how it works in the biz. However, if it wasn't "published" until after October 27 (as one poster indicated), then the composers would still hold the copyright -- because all intellectual property is owned by the creator the moment they create it. Even if it's just reciting the lyrics, the composer/lyricist would still own the copyright the moment it comes out of their brain. So either way, Apple had to get permission to use the lyrics, and they'd have a very tough time claiming it was a parody, because a parody has to be for humorous or satirical purposes; Apple's intent was clearly to use a well-known song to promote its product.

HOWEVER, until we have more details, NONE of the 95 people who have commented on this so far can make an educated judgement unless they were directly involved in the situation. That being said, I would think Apple would be smart enough to know how these things work.

But if Apple didn't get permission, then they should pay.

But it would be too bad if they had to pay this woman-beating pile of s***.

"Just because your pissed off that he's suing Apple doesn't mean you all need to start spouting bullshit of which you obviously know very little"

Kinda like you're doing?

"Guys, it doesn't f****** matter if you like Eminem or not. Apple is the one who screwed up here, by not checking permissions on the song before they put it in a commercial."

Well, IANAL, but I'd say the ad agency Chiat Day are the ones that should be held accountable. They were contracted to make ads of this type in a *very* lawsuit happy world. The i's should have all been dotted and t's crossed before the ad was ever filmed. Period. Sueing Apple for a sub-contractors snafu is prob possible and legal, but as others have pointed out, dumb. Biting the hand that feeds it. It's as dumb as the MikeRoweSoft VS M$ thing. Anyone of Apple's, um, fans, will never buy another M&M song. Stupid and shortsighted. But as others have pointed out, Apple (or it's legal team) are just as vicious, if not more so, when they feel the need to defend any intelectual property. "Look-and-feel" lawsuits of the past set the tone here. The kid was dressed up looking abit like M&M (as I remember)... Bringing the "look-and-feel" thing into play, at least possibly.. Parady may cover things, but I wouldn't depend on it. Apple will have to prove to the court/jury (if it goes to trial - doubtfull) that the ads were either parodies, or that there was some type of agreement in place (the exclusive song deals may come into play here) I doubt it will go to trial. Apple will make the idiot(s) an offer (a better cut of sales of his songs perhaps) and a cash amt smaller than the 10mil.. This will go away.

They now have to incur to full Wrath of Steve...

1. Spin, Press Release #1: "In response to Eminem sueing a 10 year old..."
2. Technical Glitch: Eminem music disappears from ITMS.
3. The Vanilla Ice Effect: Next commercial contains a 10 year old singing Ice Ice Baby followed by 8 Mile.
4. Eminem ends up on reality TV.

...only requires talent on the part of the marketing team on the project. The artist is optional and disposal. How else do you explain the huge financial successes of recordings by Britney Spears, J-Lo, Puff Daddy and every boy band that has ever existed in the history of the world? Don't underestimate the ability of the marketing machine to make tripe sound abso-freakin'-lutely delicious to the unwashed masses of the lowest common denominator whom will gladly part with their money to have what they have been brainwashed to believe is "cool". And, really, don't underestimate the lack of sophistication the public at large has in their entertainment choices. There are reasons outside the marketing hype that crapola songs like "Genie In A Bottle" and movies like "Kangaroo Jack" are so widely popular.

Eminem has done some mildly interesting things lyrically, and has good music composition and production teams behind him. He's also got some hella-slick marketing people, which is why he's been so successful. He's struck me as extremely arrogant in the interviews I've seen with him, but he's also extremely resourceful and speaks straight up without a lot of bullshit (even if the philosophical basis isn't always palatable to me) so I have to respect him for those things, even if I don't really care for the music he makes. That being said, this lawsuit against Apple seems odd from a business perspective and shows he's focused on the short term rather than what long term benefits his association with Apple might bring him. Short term thinkers are usually a flash in the pan, and I will bet that five years from now, people will have tired of the novelty of a white boy who raps well and his shock-style lyrics and his obnoxious attitude and he'll be just a memory after everyone's found a new act d'jour to fixate on.

"First off, no matter who writes the song, the *publisher* owns the rights to it, unless they work out some quirky agreement stating otherwise... but generally, that's not how it works in the biz. However, if it wasn't "published" until after October 27 (as one poster indicated), then the composers would still hold the copyright -- because all intellectual property is owned by the creator the moment they create it. Even if it's just reciting the lyrics, the composer/lyricist would still own the copyright the moment it comes out of their brain. So either way, Apple had to get permission to use the lyrics, and they'd have a very tough time claiming it was a parody, because a parody has to be for humorous or satirical purposes; Apple's intent was clearly to use a well-known song to promote its product."

Finally, someone gets it right. I work at an ad agency, and this poster is totally correct. Whenever you use any published song in an ad, you have to get permission and pay for the rights to use them. If you get the Master rights, than you can use the original track, as is. If you get the publishing rights only, than you can use the song, but it has to be a different arrangement, as it was when this kid sang it.
This is a no brainer. I find it very hard to believe the Broadcast Production Business Manager did not do this. It's something that is done automatically when using a licensed music track.
What happens many times however, is someone within the record company, or the publishing company gave permission to Chiat/Day, and never let their client, Eminem know they did. This happens alot when there are many different composers involved.

Either way, am I the only one that remembers this to be a different song? I could have sworn when I saw the ad it was "The Real Slim Shady", and not "Lose Yourself"?

I'll never buy a single tune from him, ever again. He lost.

Apple's ad agency likely would have sought permission or licensing to use all the songs in that context.

I don't remember ever seeing the "Lose Yourself" iTunes commercial, which means it was probably shot as part of the initial series, but never released to the public because obviously, they weren't able to license the song for use in the campaign.

Steve Jobs showing the spot once at Macworld should not be cause for a $10M lawsuit.

"This is a no brainer. I find it very hard to believe the Broadcast Production Business Manager did not do this. It's something that is done automatically when using a licensed music track.
What happens many times however, is someone within the record company, or the publishing company gave permission to Chiat/Day, and never let their client, Eminem know they did. This happens alot when there are many different composers involved."

Yep. Another possibility is that Apple or Chiat/Day was in a hurry to get the commercial ready, and merely had a verbal agreement while a formal, written one could be drawn up and signed. But in today's age of PDFs, faxes, and on-hand lawyers, this also seems unlikely. Who knows.

"Another possibility is that Apple or Chiat/Day was in a hurry to get the commercial ready, and merely had a verbal agreement while a formal, written one could be drawn up and signed."

Somebody is getting fired.

"Either way, am I the only one that remembers this to be a different song? I could have sworn when I saw the ad it was "The Real Slim Shady", and not "Lose Yourself"?"

There was an ad with a kid singing "The real slim shady". It ran on broadcast TV. I can't find a link to it, but I remember it specifically. This suit says the ad ran only on MTV. Maybe this is a different ad?

BTW, the suit is against Apple, Chiat/Day, and Viacom.

You know, I don't like Eminem that much either, but you fanboys make him look like Maya Angelou in comparison. His lyrics aren't much worse than the language in most of these dumbass posts. At least he's coming up with his own content, unlike, say, a mindless Apple zealot spewing the party line no matter what the situation.

We all know Apple would sue the c*** out of someone who created a Windows app with pinstripes... If the allegations are true I'd say Apple Legal and Eight Mile Style deserve each other.

yep you are the only one that remembers it that way....

The idiocy of the Apple zealot is on display here in full force. Get over it kids. Eminem will win this either in court or through a settlement. Count on it.

I don't remember seeing Eminem sing that song in the Apple ad; it was just some kid singing along to a song with his iPod. Maybe (just maybe) the kid bought the song (legally on iTunes), then was listening to it on his iPod. If anything, it was cute and showed that the lyrics of Eminem's song shouldn't be so objectionable. Maybe Eminem owes Apple for this service they provided.

Greedy jerk!

who is eminem?

Oh wait is he the guy that packs fudge?

I'm amazed at the idiocy of some of these posts. It's crazy that you would support Apple to such an extent that when they make a colossal blunder, you start ranting against the victim of that blunder (a very rich victim, I admit). I'm also a big, big fan of Apple and the Mac. But if this is true, then they will be paying out a very large settlement, as they should. I'm not mad at Eminem - I'm mad at Apple for s******* up something so simple. How could they make such a HUGE mistake? If Eminem chooses not to license his music, that is his choice. And if he chooses to ask for $10 million to license his music, then again, that is his choice. It is Apple's choice whether or not they want to pay that price. If they do not, then obviously they can't use the song. Duh. By using the song (even if it's just a kid singing the lyrics) without his permission, they are taking advantage of his image and could even be damaging it a bit. For a star with a rebel image like Eminem, selling out to the big corporations like Apple would work in the short-term, but would kill his fanbase in the long term. If he is going to take that risk, then obviously he would want a huge amount of money. He is not Celine Dion, and his fans (the ones that support his lifestyle) will not continue to pay to see a sellout.

>>Bummer. - MacNN.com Reader 141497 2/24/04, 10:01 am EST said: I'm not ashamed to say that I really like Eminem's music.

"He is not Celine Dion, and his fans (the ones that support his lifestyle) will not continue to pay to see a sellout."

Too late, the day he appeared on the MTV awards (the FIRST time) he was part of the culture machine. ie a "sellout"

"a mindless Apple zealot spewing the party line"

Spewing the party line? It's "toeing the party line" as in to step on the line to count yourself in. Before criticizing other people's use language in here, perhaps you should have a better grasp of the English language yourself.

Although I have to admit, you certainly creatively came up with your own content. :-D

Before calling everyone here a loser, stop and use your brain for a second. The ad was to sell the song on the iTMS. They were selling Eminem's song. Why is this any different than a record store putting a picture of Eminem's album cover in a sales flyer?

Apple wasn't even using it to sell iPods - they were selling Eminem's song!!!

...who wants to be black. What a joke. People really pay money for that?

...he endorsed the iPod. They simply used one of his songs, and I'm sure they got permission to do so. What a moron! NEXT!

yeah he's a wigger

Eminem is not the one that is fighting with Apple... its the people around him that is always looking for trouble... He is the last COKE of the desert right know for the industry of hip hop... right now somebody is telling him all of thid c***, and he will not now what to do, so... be careful about you wish for innocent people like him. remember he is just living the live... tomorrow he will be the same person he was in the beginning.. thats life.

that M&M slamed the phone down on Steve Jobs and made him cry! Little boy b******!

That's it - I'm deleting ALL the Eminem MP3s I've downloaded.

eminem is just RIPE to lose 10-15 record sales from angry Mac fans.

for him steal other peoples work, just don't take his.

"Eminem is the target of his own copyright claim after a California woman sued the rapper last fall alleging that he illegally sampled a section of music from her late husband's film score for his 1999 debut The Slim Shady LP.

Harlene Stein accused Marshall Mathers and his mentor Dr. Dre of swiping a 24-second instrumental cue titled "Pigs Go Home" from her hubby Ronald Stein's composition for 1970's Getting Straight for Em's tune "Guilty Conscience" without paying her a dime.

And it's not the first time Em's been accused of losing himself in other people's music.

In April of 2002, French jazz artist Jacques Loussier filed a $10 million copyright infringement suit against Eminem, claiming he stole parts of his tune, "Pulsion," for his violent tirade on the track, "Kill You," off 2000's Grammy-winning album The Marshall Mathers LP."

he's sueing apple to pay for all the lawsuits againt him.
Little dinky boy.

I hope he knows what he has got himself into. From what I remember, Apple has some pretty good lawyers. I hope they tear him a new one :D.

The guy's got no case, and he knows it ... I guess he's just in need of a little publicity, since he's got no titty to bare ...

The suit has NO merit whatsoever, but somebody earlier made a point: Eminem is every bit as much a legitimate "artist" as Sheryl Crow or any other sellout commercial pablum performer. "Lose Yourself" is a true achievement and a terrific bit of lyricwork.

That doesn't mean the guy's not a prick. Look at Jackson Pollack -- genius, and a****** all in one. :)

Bottom line: don't waste your time thinking about this "lawsuit" -- it's a publicity stunt.

... go Lose Himself?

Whatever....

Why the h*** is MacNN keeping this the top 'news' (I use the term VERY loosely here) when there have been other news since.

Answer: MacNN is just as crappy as manmenmwhateverthefuckhisstupidsocallednameis!

This stayed on top all day? Garnered 130+ postings so people obviously want to talk about it ...

I'd rather talk about the future of OS, what's happening to Appleworks? Why hasn't Quicktime garnered more support than it has? Is it true that Apple's slowing going to move down the Linux route with 10.4 to garner more support in the server end? Why doesn't Apple have a stripped down iBook as a PDA? What happened with Apple licensing wind-up battery power? ... and so on and so on...

Will the real Slim Shady please shut up.

Is this the M & M commercial? Why would any candy company want to sue Apple? I don't get it?

no, talking about a 'musician' or 'artist' called "Eminem"

People use "M & M" because it's isn't as retarted as the 'name' of that 'artist' and it simpler to write. No relation to the candy (fortunately for the candy!)

...but after reading a few of these posts here I'd have a hard time making a case for the intelligence or integrity of this particular group of MacNN posters. You all dislike Eminem as much as you love Apple computers (or S. Jobs) so you all have to go off the deep end? I'm not familiar with the ad but I know that if you use someone's song in an advertisement (even as a cover by a child), you have to get permission and pay the fee you've negotiated with the owner (hopefully that's the author) of the music. If you do not you are guilty of at least a copyright violation and a judge will determine what you owe if the owner pursues the issue.

steve jobs should start rappin' he'd be a hit with this crowd

Just imagine if Microsoft had used his song without permission. You all would be cheering him on and you know it.

I'm pretty amazed with all the racist comments here too. I thought Mac users were more progressive than that.

Apple is NOT infallible. If they didn't seek permission, they WILL pay. Certainly not 10 million, but there will be a settlement.

Let me now correct some of the many incorrect postings I've seen:

Regarding Eminem being "just a fad", "15 minutes of fame", "talentless wannabe", etc.

His 15 minutes of fame have lasted nearly 10 years now.

He writes his own lyrics, many of which are very clever and prove he's got a good command of the English language. You don't have to like his subject matter, the sound of his voice, or even rap music in general, but he's certainly not an idiot.

He was hugely popular in the Detroit underground before he got a major record deal and hooked up with Dr. Dre. He wasn't "created" by the the marketing machine, although of course that helped him achieve the level of fame he has now.

Apple cannot simply pull his songs from iTunes. There are things called contracts, folks. It would also be stupid from a business standpoint, as well as very immature. Many companies that are in litigation continue to do business with each other. After all, it's business.

It is interesting. While we don't know the details of the suit, or what the outcome will be, I have a hard time justifying the logic. If Apple used the song to endorse a hardware product (of whatever the nature) unrelated to the music, then fair enough. But what is the iTMS advertising? Isn't it a record store? Arn't they advertising the sale of Eminem's music through the store?

If this is the case, then why not launch lawsuites against Virgin Megastore, or HMV etc for putting pictures of Eminem's latest CD in the window and playing the music over the in-store system.

Granted, this form of music store is at the forefront of a new way of sharing material, so does blur the lines between old style and new, but this does seem a little gratuitous, especially when you never actually hear his music, just see a young boy doing his own "cover" of the song.

eminem smokes pipe

As far as I knew, you could use up to 30s of a any song without authorisation without infringing copyright laws...

As far as people commenting on his skills and such I have to call you all out. As a dj and mc I can tell you while he might have sold out a very small amount when he hit mainstream, he earned his way through the underground. His skills are amazing. His freestyle is some of the best i've heard... and he is definitly in the top 5 of battle mc's. it's wack he is suing apple.. but i bet there is more influence from his bosses then himself when it comes to it. to each his/her own when it comse to taste in music. but anyone involved in the hip hop scene can tell u he is on point..

If you are recording songs for commercial release, you are required to obtain a mechanical license from the publisher. (If you are using a song for a film, television show or commercial advertisement, you are required to obtain a synchronization license from the publisher.) The mechanical royalty rate is set by the Compulsory License Provision found in Section 115 of the U.S. Copyright Act; for the period January 1, 2002 to December 31, 2003 the statutory mechanical rate is 8.00 Cents for songs 5 minutes or less, or 1.55 Cents per minute or fraction thereof per unit sold — whichever is greater. The majority of large U.S. music publishers are members of the National Music Publishers Association. NMPA’s administrative agent, the Harry Fox Agency, is available to grant mechanical and synchronization licenses for its publisher clients.

He's just a sue-happy publicity hog.

Technically, stores are supposed to pay royalties for playing music over the PA system, because it constitutes a "public performance" -- however, I don't know if there's an exception for the case of record stores, which are merely advertising a product they sell. However, by having a child sing the lyrics, Apple's commercial might constitute an "arrangement" of the song, which *does* require permission, no matter how you slice it.

As far as I knew, you could use up to 30s of a any song without authorisation without infringing copyright laws... "

You're referring to Fair Use; that's offically a dream now, thanks to the US government and US Corporations controlling it.

eminem's music is good as long as your deaf and retarded and smoke d*** pipe.

Look, if you had one iPod, or one opportunity
To seize every tune you ever wanted-One moment
Would you iTune store-it or just Kazza it?

Yo, His keyboard is sweaty, gnutella weak, connection heavy
There's vomit on his stereo, mom's Liberache
He's nervous, but on the screen hes got Gnutella ready
To drop connections, but he keeps on forgetting
What he wrote down, the commercials so loud
A little kid opens his mouth, and the words come out
He's chokin his chicken, how everybody's chokin now
The batteries run out, time's up over, bloah!
Snap back to reality, Oh there goes royalty
Oh, there goes Emmy, he choked
He's so mad, but he won't give up
No, he won't have it , he knows his attorneys phone
It don't matter, he's a dope
He knows that, but he's dork
He's so stacked that he knows
When he goes back to his mobile home, that's when it's
Back to the blab again yo
This whole rape city
He better go capture the money and hope it don't pass him

[Chorus:]
You better never use my music, for iTunes
I own it, you better let me know
You only get one shot, do not miss your chance to blow me
This opportunity cums once in a lifetime yo,

Yeah, I think that his fee of millions is outrageous. But, maybe Apple should reconsider going willy-nilly with intellectual property rights. They do have a track record of taking ideas and making them their own. Also, to all you music-haters, Eminem is not my favorite artist, but I'll be the first to admit that my head bounces when I hear some of his music.

that's all that counts !

Eminem is a fruit, he has nothing better to do than complain that he has the worst life in the entire universe. He spends all of the money on drugs, and expects to have a good and happy life with his daughter, what is up with that?

Eminem has proved to be more savvy than Steve Jobs in his approach of this matter. Whine all you want to about how bad you think his music is- he has been reported as being the number one rap artist in 2003; his talent is not what's in litigation here.

His team of lawyers revealed his song being used in a commercial advertisement without his permission, bottom line, he has a case.

I just had to laugh when I heard that Mr Jobs tried to take the matter in his own hands and personally try and handle the lawsuit and was outwitted by this young white rapper when he stopped all communications with apple. Touché pussycat.

Perhaps Steve was offerring Eminem some apple stock or a few cases of iLife '04, or maybe it was those mystery grab bags from the san fransisco store...

"Apple is NOT infallible. If they didn't seek permission, they WILL pay. Certainly not 10 million, but there will be a settlement."

And there it is.

I think Steve's playing hardball. Eminem wants so much more than Apple thinks is fair that Steve figured he could save a lot of money by provoking a lawsuit and paying a settlement.

It certainly wouldn't be the first time Steve's dealt with people this way.

As a musician myself, I can't say I'm thrilled to see multi-billion dollar companies blowing off contracts like this; on the other hand, I'm not particularly sympathetic to anyone trying to extort an outrageous price. If Eminem really didn't want his name associated with a product he could have said no the first time...

Ideally, Apple would simply have used another song from another performer, but as it is I don't really see a clear-cut distinction between good and bad. I see two jerks playing hardball.