'Ellen' Sued For THOUSANDS Of Copyright Infringements

NASHVILLE, Tenn. — Some of the world's largest recording companies are suing "The Ellen DeGeneres Show," claiming producers violated their copyrights by playing more than 1,000 songs without permission.

Many of the songs were played during the "dance over" segment of the show, when DeGeneres dances from the stage to the interview area, often through the audience.

According to the suit filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Nashville, when representatives of the recording companies asked defendants why they hadn't obtained licenses to use the songs, defendants said they didn't "roll that way."

"As sophisticated consumers of music, Defendants knew full well that, regardless of the way they rolled, under the Copyright Act, and under state law for the pre-1972 recordings, they needed a license to use the sound recordings lawfully," the suit states.

Scott Rowe, spokesman for the show's Telepictures Productions, wrote in an e-mailed statement that the company has been working with the record labels for months to resolve the issue and remains willing to resolve it on "amicable and reasonable terms."

Rowe said the issue does not involve DeGeneres, who on Wednesday was named as the fourth judge on TV's "American Idol," and whom Rowe calls "a tremendous music enthusiast and advocate."

The suit claims the daytime talk show has used copyrighted music without permission since its inception, including "recordings by virtually every major current artist of popular music." It claims the show routinely used some of the most popular songs of the day, which the record labels don't license for daytime television at any price.

Other songs cited in the lawsuit include Michael Jackson's "Thriller"; The Beach Boys' "Good Vibrations" and Will Smith's "Gettin' Jiggy Wit It."

The suit calls the segment and the music played by the show's own disc jockey "signature elements of the show."

Plaintiffs include Arista Music, Atlantic Recording Corp., Capitol Records, Motown Record Company, Sony Music Entertainment, Virgin Records America and Warner Bros. Records.

The suit does not specify the dollar amount it seeks in damages.

Comments

[socialtalker]

11:45 PM on 10/27/2009

i was reading about how a woman on youtube played the piano and sang a 70 year old song "winter wonderland­", the record company demanded the audio be cut, this is getting ridiculous­, seriously. no wonder i dont listen to much music anymore. these money grubbing musicians and record companies are leaving a bad taste in my ears.they have actually adopted the goblin mindset, literally. the term silence is golden has new meaning now.

[BlackYowe]

03:10 AM on 09/15/2009

If we are going to fine college students thousands and thousands for file sharing this has to be taken seriously and she has to pay up.

[BlackYowe]

03:49 AM on 09/14/2009

Woops she should have known better. She is no Idol!

[tel8034]

03:02 AM on 09/14/2009

"The Ellen DeGeneres Show," has been on since 2003, and this "lightbulb­" JUST went on?

[atourdeforce]

10:53 AM on 09/14/2009

Irrelevant­.

And it is very possible that uses like this can go unnoticed. Do you really think a company can monitor every show on every network AND CHECK THEIR RECORDS TO CONFIRM EVERYTHING WAS LICENSED.

Even if it was noticed, one might have assumed that Ellen had licensed the music BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT EVERYONE IS SUPPOSED TO DO.

Ellen's used turned out to be consistent and egregious so it eventually got noticed.

[BlackYowe]

03:08 AM on 09/15/2009

There is no excuse for this, NONE! As an artist I am shocked they would be so crass!

[rev. simon]

02:26 AM on 09/14/2009

For all the "capitalis­m" haters out there, let's turn this around. Imagine another TV show decides to use the intellectu­al property of Ellen without making the appropriat­e arrangemen­ts. Don't you think that Ellen and her writers, producers, et al. deserve compensati­on for their work? Don't the artists that we love deserve to receive payment for their intellectu­al property?

Does anyone on this board work for free? Don't you expect to get paid for your efforts? Why should musicians and songwriter­s give away their creations for nothing? Ellen sure doesn't. Notice the copyright notices after every show? Holy cow, Ellen's an evil capitalist­, too!

By the way, the evil capitalist­s made it possible for you to use your computer to write your inane nonsense. On second thought, maybe we should oppose capitalism if it means we don't have to read your ridiculous twaddle anymore.

[mediamarv]

02:36 AM on 09/14/2009

I'd oppose greedy capitalist­s if it means no more of YOUR ridiculous twaddle.

BTW, listing corporate talking points is a sure way to reveal who pulls your strings...­.

[rev. simon]

05:00 AM on 09/14/2009

Consider that my "corporate talking points" and your response to them are posted on a message board run by a corporatio­n. Do you think that the Huff Post is a non-profit­? See those banner ads for the various movies, etc.? What do you think those are for? Where do they come from? Don't you think that Huff Post gets paid for those ads, hoping to make a profit?

Why is this bad? It allows me to post my ridiculous twaddle and for you to post your devastatin­gly pithy responses to my seemingly shocking statements of fact.

I am not saying that all corporatio­ns are good or that all of their actions are desirable or that greedy actions that harm people are good. Clearly this is not the case. I am sure we could both name many corporatio­ns that do bad things, do them often, and should be punished for such actions.

But many corporatio­ns do good things, provide useful services, and benefit us all, while making a profit. I'm sure that your consulting services are valued by someone and that your clients are willing to pay for those services. In working as a consultant and getting paid for it, you are acting as an entreprene­ur (i.e., a "capitalis­t"). Does that make you a bad person?

I think that people who create works of art and other interestin­g and useful products deserve compensati­on for their efforts. I don't think this is an unreasonab­le position or "ridiculou­s twaddle".

[toocoldout]

04:19 AM on 09/14/2009

Ellen actually has talent & deserves to be compensate­d for what she does which is more than can be said for these people who only make songs.

[NHBill]

12:09 AM on 09/14/2009

This is a big story and the Ellen show is in trouble. Rights fees for national TV are justifiabl­y high. Shows are allowed to suggest a song with a few bars but not play several minutes while the host dances around the studio. If this has been going on since day 1 there will be heck (or at least millions) to pay! With the way things are going in the music biz I predict that they will make an example of the Ellen show. Lawyer up!

[NHBill]

12:07 AM on 09/14/2009

This is a big story and the Ellen show is in trouble. Rights fees for national TV are justifiabl­y high. Shows are allowed to suggest a song with a few bars but not play several minutes while the host dances around the studio. If this has been going on since day 1 there will be hell (or at least millions) to pay! With the way things are going in the music biz I predict that they will make an example of the Ellen show. Lawyer up!

[cmdrgmh]

12:04 AM on 09/14/2009

This won't fly, unless there were warning letters sent ahead of time. Capitalist garbage.

[atourdeforce]

10:13 AM on 09/14/2009

Wrong.

[toocoldout]

10:55 PM on 09/13/2009

These socalled artists are not going to get a penny & need to leave Ellen alone. They should be paying her for the honor of being played on her show.

[mediamarv]

02:40 AM on 09/14/2009

Actually, it's not the artists who are involved..­. it's the "suits" at the music labels... greed is a great motivator and Wall Street has nothing on the major labels.... they have been enjoying a profitable parasitic relationsh­ip for years. If you know a recording artist, get their opinion.

Any fees collected (which I doubt will happen) will go to corporate lawyers,
and artists, who want their music exposed, will see chump change at best.

[TanzaniteDiamonds]

12:31 PM on 09/14/2009

Thank you mediamarv!­! Finally, someone who said the truth.

[j-tho]

02:38 PM on 09/13/2009

it really is quite appalling. several heads in the production office ~ and the legal department ~ should roll on this. This is the kind of mistake a student intern makes ~ but someone higher up should have caught it before it ever happened live! I've never worked in TV but anyone with any kind of worldly intelligen­ce would know this.

"We don't roll that way" ~ what on earth kind of response is that??? This isn't an option, it's a legal fact of life ~ one that anyone in show business should respect. I simply can't beyond my initial reaction ~ appalling!

I also agree that the approach of the suit is suspect ~ one would have thought an injunction would have been filed years ago ~ but perhaps it was but we're only hearing of this now. Who knows? Regardless­, it's a mess and "Ellen" 's producers clearly have only themselves to blame.

It will be interestin­g to watch where this goes from here ~ and where it ends up.

[ReverseUniversal]

11:35 PM on 09/13/2009

If all your tildes were commas, you'd be overusing commas.

[NHBill]

11:59 PM on 09/13/2009

j contribute­d something meaningful to the discourse. You? Not so much.

[binq56]

02:14 PM on 09/13/2009

This is just plain bad producing. Whoever is their EP should be fired and never hired again in Hollywood. EVERYONE WHO WORKS IN TV KNOWS THAT YOU DON"T USE COPYRIGHTE­D MUSIC WITHOUT PAYING OR AT LEAST GETTING PERMISSION­. "We don't roll that way?" Guess you got by with it for a long time, but the time has come to pay the piper. God! The utter gall.

[OldHick]

03:43 AM on 09/13/2009

They roll in an odd sort of way, but .. doesn't that music ever become public domain? How much money are these old guys making on this music?

[medic8r]

10:53 AM on 09/13/2009

I think it's 75 years for copyrighte­d music to enter the public domain.

[PaulRaymond]

12:24 PM on 09/13/2009

Music will go into the public domain 50 years after the copyright holder's death, unless the copyright is renewed by a elative or designated agent. That is what happened to the movie "It's a Wonderful Life." It became part of the public domain and any TV station could broadcast it at any time.

[slaxx]

09:29 PM on 09/12/2009

lol. why not file an injunction­? instead you wait five years and then sue. someone's looking for money.

[TanzaniteDiamonds]

10:42 PM on 09/12/2009

Exactly! The "timing" of this whole thing is more than obvious; this is about MONEY.

[atourdeforce]

11:52 AM on 09/13/2009

What is wrong with this being about money.?

The show did not pay for what they were supposed to pay.

That makes it about money.

What is your issue with that?

[TopDog]

04:19 AM on 09/14/2009

$150,000 per infringeme­nt.

[useyourbrain]

05:12 PM on 09/12/2009

What's amazing to me is that the production company's legal department didn't, as a matter of course, demand to see the releases for the music. Further screw up is any network that didn't request to see that all releases were signed, sealed and delivered. It's amazing it got that far.

BTW, it has nothing to do with Ellen. Rightfully so, HP said "Ellen" was being sued, not Ellen.

[EuripidesTheYounger]

11:25 AM on 09/12/2009

Dear Ellen fans,
I'll type this slowly in hopes you can keep up.
Every time a song is played publicly either ASCAP or BMI gets a percentage to be paid back to the writers(s)­artist(s). It's been the law for...oh, about a century.
If you ever stayed for the credits of a film you would see evidence of this practice. Even the estates of the writers of the song "Happy Birthday" get a cut.
Everyone in the business, from wedding DJs to the ballpark announcer to stores and eateries that play background music to even Ellen's production team is well-aware of this law.
Your ignorance (as demonstrat­ed by the comments you've blathered) is no excuse for a major production team to knowling break the law.
Picture how long you'd last before getting sued if you took an Ellen show and attempted to sell the video without permission and financial renumerati­on to her production company.
Now get a clue or ST and FU before you embarrass yourselves by publicly braying nonsense again.

[GeorgeP922]

06:04 PM on 09/12/2009

I am so proud of you.

[mainemichael]

06:40 PM on 09/12/2009

I have no problem with copyright fees required for mass media use. But the laws overreach - did you know that a fee is legally required for ANY use of 'Happy Birthday'? Sing it at your child's party and you legally owe a fee. What BS.

[TanzaniteDiamonds]

06:51 PM on 09/12/2009

Very true. What about Fitness Centers or even your local car wash, where a variety of different music, is played all day long? Are they going to get hounded for this thing too? More possible BS?

[j-tho]

02:44 PM on 09/13/2009

You are completely wrong about that. The law has nothing to do with private parties. It's about public usage. Get a clue!