Spanish Recording Industry Lobbyists Sue Professor For Highlighting Its Monopolistic Practices

from the how-do-you-say-streisand-in-spanish? dept

Yet again, we're left scratching our heads at the basic failure of recording industry lobbyists to think about the consequences of their actions. The latest is that Promusicae, the Spanish recording industry lobbying group that is associated with the IFPI (which, itself is associated with the RIAA) has sued Spanish professor Enrique Dans for daring to state, in his opinion, that Promusicae violated Spanish antitrust laws. The blog post in question (Google translation) is actually mostly about the legal troubles of SGAE, the Spanish collection society which was accused of being involved in a massive criminal fraud operation. In the post, he also mentioned Promusicae and how it set up a system that he believes violated antitrust laws in effectively limiting access to radio airtime to members of Promusicae.

In response, Promusicae sued him for "violating their honor," demanding either 20,000 or 50,000 euros. Professor Dans explains the details on his own site (Google translation).

It seems pretty clear that this is nothing more than a SLAPP-style lawsuit -- with the recording industry lobbyists suing Dans to shut him up and to create chilling effects to silence other critics. It's a shameful way of dealing with critics, and, as Rick Falkvinge notes in his story (the first link up top), even if Dans is legally in the right, a court battle is very costly. Again as Falkvinge notes, perhaps it's time for the EU to start setting up anti-SLAPP laws to avoid these kinds of lawsuits as well.

But, more to the point, all this really does is call much more attention to Dans' original blog post from July, and the accusations he made about Promusicae. In what world does an industry lobbyist think that it's a smart move to call attention to a respected professor's blog post that describes some of their questionable behavior? A normal, thinking, individual would either respond directly to the charges with a detailed explanation for why it's wrong, or just let it go away. Suing only makes it worse in almost every way. Not only does it call worldwide attention to this blog post and the claims against Promusicae, but it also will likely make more people look more closely at Promusicae and what it's done... all the while showing off Promusicae lobbyists for the obnoxious bullies that they are. It's really quite incredible. As Falkvinge notes:
Perhaps what amazes me most is that the public backlash to this kind of behavior is as predictable as a grandfather clock. How can the copyright monopoly lobby’s lawyers live in so completely disconnected an ivory tower, that they thought it was a good idea to file lawsuit against a reputable professor for claiming they’re a monopoly, using monopolistic practices – when this fact is not only well-established to the point of being in dictionaries, but even legislated? What kind of survivability would such a parasitic misantropic business have in the wild, if it were not protected by obsolete laws?
Of course, I guess they're thinking that the resulting chilling effects scaring away others from commenting might be worth any backlash. Or they're so focused on protecting "their honor" that they never bothered to think at all. I am curious, of course, how "honorable" it is to sue a respected professor for expressing his opinion? How can you sue someone for violating your honor when you have no honor at all?
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: copyright, enrique dans, free speech, spain, violating honor
Companies: ifpi, promusicae


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    Zakida Paul (profile), 27 Mar 2012 @ 8:43am

    My head hurts...

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 27 Mar 2012 @ 8:45am

    violating their honor?

    I recommend a duel. A joust would be acceptable too.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      :Lobo Santo (profile), 27 Mar 2012 @ 8:52am

      Re: violating their honor?

      Cage Match - with chainsaws and adrenaline injection.

      (Live on Pay-per-View?)

      link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      varagix, 27 Mar 2012 @ 8:54am

      Re: violating their honor?

      Reminds me of another comment about tilting at windmills... Mayhaps we have a modern day farcical in the works?

      The Misanthropic Misadventures of Don Promusicae?

      link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Don, 27 Mar 2012 @ 8:54am

    It's personnal

    It seems to me that Promusicae and the RIAA are taking these kinds of things very personally and reacting in such a manner. Otherwise they would take a more tactful approach.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    BentFranklin (profile), 27 Mar 2012 @ 8:55am

    Funny: Use of SLAPP to defend honor.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Joe Escalante (profile), 27 Mar 2012 @ 8:57am

    Anti-trust

    There are all kinds of anti-trust problems with music organizations. I'll save you the trouble of reading my boring law review article (Western State U. Vol. 22 No. 1, Fall 1994) and just say this. When organizations create barriers to enter markets, like the market for radio air play, it violates the Sherman Anti-Trust act.
    By charging one price for all music (the blanket license), why would broadcasters mess with people trying to break into the market? It all cost the same.
    It appears as if Spain has some sort of developed anti-trust laws. Let's hope they have anti-slapp motions as well.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 27 Mar 2012 @ 9:07am

    One can only hope that ProMusicae gets Bitch-SLAPPed.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    ChimpObama McBinLadenBurton, 27 Mar 2012 @ 9:31am

    Freudian SLAPP

    Strange, when I read the name of this Spanish Lobbying group, my mind parsed it as Promiscuae. Then I re-read it and saw that I had it wrong...

    On second thought, I must have had it right, because it appears that they like fucking a lot of people.

    COMBB

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    MrWilson, 27 Mar 2012 @ 9:48am

    The Emperor's New Monopoly. He actually isn't naked. He's wearing a suit made out of all of your money.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    JayTee (profile), 27 Mar 2012 @ 9:51am

    For some reason I kept reading their name as "Promiscuous" the whole way through this article.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 27 Mar 2012 @ 9:56am

    had politicians in all countries, not just the EU done the jobs they were entrusted with, instead of allowing themselves to be bought by industries and corporations, this type of disgraceful behavior wouldn't happen!

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Pickle Monger (profile), 27 Mar 2012 @ 10:22am

    Say what?

    Am I the only one to have first read "Promusicae" as "Promiscuous"?

    link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 27 Mar 2012 @ 5:19pm

      Re: Say what?

      No, I read it that way too. And then I thought: How can your honour be violated when you gave up that honour long ago?

      link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    crade (profile), 27 Mar 2012 @ 11:02am

    These guys don't seem to play for public opinion and only seem to give it token attention.. they play by going over the public's head and trying to make sure the public can't do anything about it. They probably want to prevent this being acknowledged officially and couldn't care less what people actually "think" about it.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      crade (profile), 27 Mar 2012 @ 11:05am

      Re:

      Also, we definately need a "violated my honor" law here!

      It might put an end to all the dueling going on...

      link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Grover, 27 Mar 2012 @ 11:19am

    Re.

    Its going to be immensely enjoyable watching Promusicae self destruct over this.

    /gets out the popcorn

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    uh, 27 Mar 2012 @ 1:57pm

    he only said the best-seller lists are just bogus, what´s the big new?

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Ninja (profile), 28 Mar 2012 @ 6:12am

    No surprises here, the MAFIAA has been shooting itself in the feet with nuclear bombs regularly for a while now. Just another chapter in the history of a dying industry.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    firefly (profile), 28 Mar 2012 @ 8:58am

    Monopoly

    I've noticed the copyright maximalists are so afraid of that apt word that they really can't think straight when it is uttered. Makes sense though. Given a choice between a monopolist and a pirate, which do you think is the more politically damaging term? Especially since the public can recognize (or read in the US Constitution) that copyright maximalists really are monopolists.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Lou Nisbet, 29 Mar 2012 @ 4:19am

    Lou Nisbet

    Are you being ironic Mike? You can't understand that lawyers work FOR MONEY? That bad lawyers will accept any case FOR MONEY? The lawyers get paid - win or lose - it's all win-win to them for THE MONEY.

    link to this | view in chronology ]


Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.