3 Count: Non-Exclusive Lawsuit

Pablo's life can be hard...

3 Count: Non-Exclusive Lawsuit Image Have any suggestions for the 3 Count? Let me know via Twitter @plagiarismtoday.

1: Kanye West and Tidal Sued Over The Life of Pablo Not Actually Being a Tidal Exclusive

First off today, Marc Hogan at Pitchfork reports that proposed class-action lawsuit has been filed against the music streaming service Tidal over allegations that it misled consumers into thinking that Kanye West’s latest album, The Life of Pablo, would be exclusive to their service.

The lawsuit cites various tweets by West himself, who claimed the album would only appear on Tidal and would “never be on Apple”. Initially, the album was exclusive to Tidal but that led to widespread piracy of it that helped push West to release it on other services.

Now one Tidal user and Kanye West fan, Justin Baker-Rhett, claims he was deceived into registering for Tidal because of the exclusivity of the album and is now seeking compensation for himself and others who were similarly misled.

2: Australia’s Music Industry Files For Kickass Torrents Ban

Next up today, Amma Wollacott at Forbes reports that, in Australia, the major record labels have combined with other rightsholders to file a lawsuit to force local ISPs to block access to the pirate BitTorrent and streaming site KickassTorrents.

The labels are hoping to use a relatively new law that requires ISPs to block access to websites if a court rules that they are primarily for the purpose of infringing copyright. Though passed two years ago, the law has seen little use as rightsholders have only recently begun filing lawsuits to take advantage of it.

This also represents the first time that the music labels have gotten involved, with TV and film producers previously filing a case against The Pirate Bay as well as other alleged infringing sites.

3: Graffiti Cannot be Copyright Protected, Claims Moschino, Jeremy Scott

Finally today, The Fashion Law reports that in a filing by fashion designer Jeremy Scott and Moschino, they are claiming that graffiti artist Rime’s lawsuit against them should be tossed because there can be no copyright in graffiti since it is a crime and such violations of the law can not receive copyright protection.

The case centers around a Moschino collection designed by Scott that made heavy use of Rime’s work, even featuring a forgery of his signature in some of the items. Rime, whose real name is Joseph Tierney, sued Scott and Moschino for copyright infringement but the case has dragged on, in large part due to repeated filings from the defendants.

The arguments have little chance to succeed, especially since Rime claims he was invited to create at least one of the murals. However, that didn’t stop the defendants from making the argument and even likening granting copyright to graffiti to granting copyright to the Black Dahlia murderer over his or her “handiwork”.


That’s it for the three count today. We will be back tomorrow with three more copyright links. If you have a link that you want to suggest a link for the column or have any proposals to make it better. Feel free to leave a comment or send me an email. I hope to hear from you.

The 3 Count Logo was created by Justin Goff and is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License.

Want to Republish this Article? Request Permission Here. It's Free.

Have a Plagiarism Problem?

Need an expert witness, plagiarism analyst or content enforcer?
Check out our Consulting Website