https://goo.gl/mV3e9E
The copy-right infringement issues plaguing Spotify may have reached their
apex in a new billion-dollar lawsuit.
Spotify的侵權問題在最近因為上億美元的訴訟案件，事情會炒得越來越大。
Wixen Music Publishing, the publishing company responsible for the songs of
Tom Petty, the Black Keys’ Dan Auerbach, Weezer’s Rivers Cuomo, Stevie
Nicks and countless more notable musicians, is alleging that Spotify is using
tens of thousands of songs without proper license or compensation.
一間名為Wixen的音樂推廣公司(旗下有Tom Petty，The Black Keys的主唱Dan Auerbach，Weezer樂團主唱Rivers Cuomo，Stevie Nicks以及無數的有名音樂家)宣稱Spotify在沒有經過同意，以及金錢提供下使用他們成千上萬的歌。
In Wixen’s lawsuit, provided here by The Hollywood Reporter’s Eriq Gardner,
they claim that compositions by their artists have been streamed or
downloaded on Spotify billions of times. Considering that they own tracks
like Tom Petty’s “Free Fallin’” and The Doors’ “Light My Fire,” it’s
probably true.
在Wixen的案件中，他們認為他們歌手的創作被Spotify拿來串流並且下載好幾億遍。以這公司擁有Tom Petty的"Free Falling"還有 The Doors的"Light My Fire"的情況來看，這可能是真的。
The company claims to be the “exclusive licensee of the copyrights”
pertaining to approximately 10,784 compositions currently on Spotify:
Wixen宣稱他們在Spotify上面約10784首歌中，他們是擁有獨家的財產權的。以下是公司聲明。
Wixen has the exclusive right to conduct all administration activities with
respect to these musical compositions, including registering them with
performing rights organizations, filing copyright applications with the
United States Copyright Office, negotiating and issuing licenses (including
mechanical license), collecting royalties, and filing lawsuits for copyright
infringement.
Wixen公司擁有能夠對於音樂家財產權做所有的更動，包含把這些創作給予有買權的組織、跟美國著作權局提出申請、跟權利問題做協商(包含任何結構上的問題)、以及對權利等問題提出訴訟。
Wixen says that although Spotify did obtain the rights for sound recordings
via record labels to many of these songs, that’s only half the battle. The
company alleges that Spotify took a major shortcut by not obtaining the
equivalent rights for the actual compositions. “As a result, Spotify has
built a billion dollar business on the backs of songwriters and publishers
whose music Spotify is using, in many cases without obtaining and paying for
the necessary licenses,” they claim.
Wixen說雖然Spotify有藉由唱片公司拿到歌曲的權利，但這只是一半而已。公司說Spotify沒有拿到歌曲的創作構想權，而這是偷雞摸狗的手段。「在這情況下，導致Spotify在沒有給予音樂創作人錢以及必要的許可的情況下賺進大把大把的鈔票。」
The lawsuit goes on to say that it’s typically labels that get revenue from
a sound recording license, whereas songwriters and publishers get revenue
from the license of a song’s composition.
這段訴訟表示，通常來說，唱片公司藉由歌曲聲音等許可證來得到錢，
而創作家以及發行商藉由歌曲創作的許可證來得到錢。
The lawsuit was filed on December 29 ahead of a copyright law amendment that
applies to digital music providers.
這個官司在去年12/29號智慧財產權法修訂有關數位音樂發行商的法條的前提出來。
This is definitely not the first time Spotify has been in hot water over
copyright infringements. In May the company arranged a $43-million-dollar
settlement over a class action lawsuit brought by a group of songwriters led
by Melissa Ferrick and Cracker/Camper Van Beethoven’s David Lowery. The
plaintiffs had claimed that Spotify hadn’t coughed up the adequate cash for
licenses to their songs’ compositions. A judge has yet to rule on the
settlement.
這絕不是Spotify第一次被提告智慧財產權的事情。在去年五月時Spotify花了4千3百萬來解決一群由Melissa Ferrick以及Cracker/Camper Van Beethoven的 David Lowery創作者提出的訴訟。原告聲明Spotify在創作上給的錢不夠多。法官還沒對該和解做出聲明。
In July, two more lawsuits hit Spotify, both aimed at the same issue of
composition-related copyright infringement. One of the lawsuits, brought by
Bluewater Music Services Corporation, called Spotify’s settlement in May too
little too late. “Such a settlement is essentially an empty gesture that
encourages infringement and is entirely insufficient to remedy years of
illegal activity,” it said.
去年七月時，Spotify也遇到兩個一樣跟創作有關的智慧財產權的官司。其中一件是由Bluewater音樂公司提出。他們說Spotify在五月的和解來的太晚了。「這樣的手段有跟沒有一樣，根本是在鼓勵侵權，而且對多年來財產的侵犯根本於事無補。」