Knowledge (XXG)

Panayiotou v Sony Music Entertainment (UK) Ltd.

Source 📝

86:
expected return on investment for signing and promoting an emerging artist, leading to fears that the practice would end. Michael argued that the structure of the industry concentrated power in too few hands, and that these companies competed by selling music, but not in the terms offered to new artists. This led to an imbalance of power, where the artist was contractually obligated to produce a set number of albums of acceptable quality and cede copyright to the label, but the label did not bear a reciprocal obligation to market and promote the product, in accordance with the artist's wishes or otherwise.
724: 82:
alleged that Sony under-promoted his new album in response to these decisions. He further charged that the contract restricted him from seeking a new label and prevented him from managing his professional image as he saw fit. Michael described this imbalance of power and his long-term lack of control over his career as "professional slavery".
101:
on 30 October 1992, and Justice Jonathan Parker issued a ruling on 1 June 1994. The plaintiff's claims were wholly rejected. Parker held that Michael's contracts were reasonable and fair, especially in consideration of his access to expert legal advice, several renegotiations, and terms comparable to
39:
with due vigour as punishment when the artist decided to downplay his status as a sex symbol. Michael described his situation as "professional slavery" because his contract required that he produce music and cede the copyright to Sony for many years, leaving him no control over how the music would be
64:
in 1987. Following Wham!'s success and subsequent break up, Michael renegotiated a new eight-album deal with Sony as a solo artist in 1988. This deal was further renegotiated in 1990 to reflect Michael's superstar status, achieving terms comparable to similarly high-grossing artists. Michael's first
81:
represented a new direction for Michael, downplaying the sex symbol status he had cultivated with Wham! in favour of a more reserved identity purely as a serious musician; he decided not to place his highly recognisable image on the album cover and declined to appear in promotional videos. Michael
85:
It was common practice in the recording industry to sign many emerging artists like Wham!, banking that long-term profits from the few commercial successes would cover the losses from promoting the remainder. A decision holding Michael's contract unenforceable could have dramatically reduced the
357: 321: 348: 132:
In July 1995, Sony sold the contract to rival record companies Virgin Records and DreamWorks Records. Virgin granted worldwide rights when DreamWorks granted rights in the U.S. and Canada. All releases for these labels were co-labeled with
109:
the 1984 agreement was a compromise in good faith and the conditions obtained there would pertain to all subsequent renegotiations: there is a legitimate public interest in upholding such a compromise, and the suit fails at the initial
40:
marketed nor placing a reciprocal requirement that the label invest in promotion. Had the case succeeded, it might have curtailed the practice of signing artists to multi-album contracts. The court wholly rejected the claims.
312: 124:
establishing the European Community concerns trade between member states, and was held not to apply; Article 222 governing property ownership, including intellectual property, would have superseded in any
89:
Michael was advanced a sum of £1 million in February 1992 under the terms of the 1990 contract. This amount was returned to Sony in August of the same year in preparation for filing suit in October.
60:. In 1984 this contract was nullified as part of a legal compromise wherein Wham! were obligated to produce up to eight new albums for CBS Records; the label and the contract were acquired by 442: 380: 574: 542: 349:"Law Report: Recording agreement enforceable: Panayiotou and others v Sony Music Entertainment (UK) Ltd – Chancery Division (Mr Justice Jonathan Parker), 1 June 1994" 256: 33:, argued that his recording contract constituted an unreasonable restraint of trade. Michael alleged that the defendant had failed to promote his album 758: 447: 417: 510: 649: 588: 753: 137:, a record company owned by George Michael. He, eventually, returned to Sony Music in 2004, on which he released his final studio album, 642: 524: 313:"George Michael and Sony face the music: Rock star's High Court contract case could shake the recording industry to its foundations" 620: 517: 492: 471: 139: 73: 35: 113:
leaving aside the origin of the 1988 agreement, its provisions were justifiable: the label has a legitimate and enforceable
282: 567: 478: 464: 410: 66: 247: 707: 695: 485: 773: 437: 102:
the industry standard for an artist of his commercial success. There were five prongs to the justice's dismissal:
768: 61: 57: 748: 727: 403: 215: 71:, was released in 1987 and had sold 14 million copies by the time suit was filed; his second solo album, 701: 26: 22: 763: 610: 581: 549: 49: 128:
by activating its terms in requesting an advance in 1992, Michael affirmed the 1988 agreement.
98: 191: 143:. Additionally, in 2011, all his catalogue for Virgin and DreamWorks were reissued on Sony. 671: 625: 683: 605: 426: 196: 175: 134: 121: 30: 742: 386: 106:
the case was indeed such that the doctrine of restraint of trade would be applicable;
52:
in 1982 at the age of eighteen as part of the then relatively unknown pop duo
689: 48:
Georgios Panayiotou, known professionally as George Michael, signed with
615: 666: 53: 395: 21:( ChD 142) was a contract and entertainment law case before the 399: 18:
Panayiotou and others v Sony Music Entertainment (UK) Ltd.
381:
Nordenfelt v Maxim, Nordenfelt Guns and Ammunition Co Ltd
77:
was released in 1990 and had sold 5 million copies.
659: 634: 598: 559: 534: 502: 456: 575:Ladies & Gentlemen: The Best of George Michael 543:Ladies & Gentlemen: The Best of George Michael 347: 311: 246: 678:Panayiotou v Sony Music Entertainment (UK) Ltd. 341: 339: 240: 238: 236: 411: 8: 305: 303: 283:"George Michael Loses Lawsuit Against Sony" 120:restraint of trade under Article 85 of the 418: 404: 396: 169: 167: 165: 163: 161: 159: 157: 155: 117:in an exclusive contract of some duration; 276: 274: 209: 207: 195: 248:"'Pop slave' George Michael to fight on" 151: 281:Stevenson, Richard W. (22 June 1994). 650:George Michael: Portrait of an Artist 7: 180:– A Challenge to Artistic Freedom?" 197:10.1111/j.1468-2230.1995.tb02047.x 56:. Innervision were distributed by 14: 643:George Michael: A Different Story 310:Lister, David (19 October 1993). 723: 722: 360:from the original on 24 May 2022 324:from the original on 24 May 2022 259:from the original on 24 May 2022 759:1994 in United Kingdom case law 472:Listen Without Prejudice Vol. 1 214:Ipsen, Erik (19 October 1993). 74:Listen Without Prejudice Vol. 1 36:Listen Without Prejudice Vol. 1 346:Tan, Ying Hui (24 June 1994). 97:Michael filed suit before the 1: 245:Smith, Giles (22 June 1994). 29:. The plaintiff, entertainer 216:"Sony Suit Plays High Court" 754:High Court of Justice cases 696:Imagine Piano Peace Project 486:Songs from the Last Century 178:George Michael v Sony Music 790: 718: 433: 378:Under the first wing of 174:Coulthard, Alan (1995). 79:Listen Without Prejudice 62:Sony Music Entertainment 184:The Modern Law Review 23:High Court of Justice 387:ZTT v Holly Johnson 384:and in contrast to 115:recoupment interest 50:Innervision Records 774:Entertainment law 736: 735: 621:Live in Australia 448:Live performances 99:Chancery Division 27:Chancery Division 781: 726: 725: 420: 413: 406: 397: 391: 376: 370: 369: 367: 365: 351: 343: 334: 333: 331: 329: 315: 307: 298: 297: 295: 293: 278: 269: 268: 266: 264: 250: 242: 231: 230: 228: 226: 211: 202: 201: 199: 171: 789: 788: 784: 783: 782: 780: 779: 778: 769:Sony litigation 739: 738: 737: 732: 714: 672:Boogie Box High 655: 630: 626:Symphonica Tour 594: 555: 530: 498: 452: 429: 424: 394: 377: 373: 363: 361: 354:The Independent 345: 344: 337: 327: 325: 318:The Independent 309: 308: 301: 291: 289: 280: 279: 272: 262: 260: 253:The Independent 244: 243: 234: 224: 222: 213: 212: 205: 173: 172: 153: 149: 95: 46: 12: 11: 5: 787: 785: 777: 776: 771: 766: 761: 756: 751: 749:George Michael 741: 740: 734: 733: 731: 730: 719: 716: 715: 713: 712: 711: 710: 702:Last Christmas 698: 693: 686: 684:Aegean Records 681: 674: 669: 663: 661: 657: 656: 654: 653: 646: 638: 636: 632: 631: 629: 628: 623: 618: 613: 611:Cover to Cover 608: 606:The Faith Tour 602: 600: 596: 595: 593: 592: 589:Live in London 585: 578: 571: 563: 561: 560:Video releases 557: 556: 554: 553: 546: 538: 536: 532: 531: 529: 528: 521: 514: 506: 504: 500: 499: 497: 496: 489: 482: 475: 468: 460: 458: 454: 453: 451: 450: 445: 440: 434: 431: 430: 427:George Michael 425: 423: 422: 415: 408: 400: 393: 392: 371: 335: 299: 287:New York Times 270: 232: 220:New York Times 203: 190:(5): 731–744. 150: 148: 145: 135:Aegean Records 130: 129: 126: 122:Treaty of Rome 118: 111: 107: 94: 91: 45: 42: 31:George Michael 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 786: 775: 772: 770: 767: 765: 762: 760: 757: 755: 752: 750: 747: 746: 744: 729: 721: 720: 717: 709: 706: 705: 704: 703: 699: 697: 694: 692: 691: 687: 685: 682: 680: 679: 675: 673: 670: 668: 665: 664: 662: 658: 652: 651: 647: 645: 644: 640: 639: 637: 635:Documentaries 633: 627: 624: 622: 619: 617: 614: 612: 609: 607: 604: 603: 601: 599:Concert tours 597: 591: 590: 586: 584: 583: 579: 577: 576: 572: 570: 569: 565: 564: 562: 558: 552: 551: 547: 545: 544: 540: 539: 537: 533: 527: 526: 522: 520: 519: 518:MTV Unplugged 515: 513: 512: 508: 507: 505: 501: 495: 494: 490: 488: 487: 483: 481: 480: 476: 474: 473: 469: 467: 466: 462: 461: 459: 457:Studio albums 455: 449: 446: 444: 441: 439: 436: 435: 432: 428: 421: 416: 414: 409: 407: 402: 401: 398: 389: 388: 383: 382: 375: 372: 359: 355: 350: 342: 340: 336: 323: 319: 314: 306: 304: 300: 288: 284: 277: 275: 271: 258: 254: 249: 241: 239: 237: 233: 221: 217: 210: 208: 204: 198: 193: 189: 185: 181: 179: 170: 168: 166: 164: 162: 160: 158: 156: 152: 146: 144: 142: 141: 136: 127: 123: 119: 116: 112: 108: 105: 104: 103: 100: 92: 90: 87: 83: 80: 76: 75: 70: 69: 63: 59: 55: 51: 43: 41: 38: 37: 32: 28: 24: 20: 19: 700: 688: 677: 676: 648: 641: 587: 580: 573: 566: 548: 541: 535:Compilations 523: 516: 509: 491: 484: 477: 470: 463: 385: 379: 374: 362:. Retrieved 353: 326:. Retrieved 317: 290:. Retrieved 286: 261:. Retrieved 252: 223:. Retrieved 219: 187: 183: 177: 138: 131: 114: 96: 88: 84: 78: 72: 67: 65:solo album, 47: 34: 17: 16: 15: 582:Twenty Five 550:Twenty Five 503:Live albums 438:Discography 58:CBS Records 764:Sony Music 743:Categories 708:soundtrack 525:Symphonica 364:28 January 328:28 January 292:28 January 263:28 January 225:28 January 147:References 44:Background 690:Eli Stone 511:Five Live 728:Category 493:Patience 358:Archived 322:Archived 257:Archived 140:Patience 93:Decision 660:Related 616:25 Live 110:hurdle; 443:Awards 667:Wham! 568:Faith 479:Older 465:Faith 125:case; 68:Faith 54:Wham! 366:2012 330:2012 294:2012 265:2012 227:2012 192:doi 25:'s 745:: 356:. 352:. 338:^ 320:. 316:. 302:^ 285:. 273:^ 255:. 251:. 235:^ 218:. 206:^ 188:58 186:. 182:. 154:^ 419:e 412:t 405:v 390:. 368:. 332:. 296:. 267:. 229:. 200:. 194:: 176:"

Index

High Court of Justice
Chancery Division
George Michael
Listen Without Prejudice Vol. 1
Innervision Records
Wham!
CBS Records
Sony Music Entertainment
Faith
Listen Without Prejudice Vol. 1
Chancery Division
Treaty of Rome
Aegean Records
Patience








"George Michael v Sony Music – A Challenge to Artistic Freedom?"
doi
10.1111/j.1468-2230.1995.tb02047.x


"Sony Suit Plays High Court"

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.