A US judge yesterday refused to dismiss a case being brought by Universal and EMI against fellow major BMG over the whole Napster Original debackle.
As previously reported, the two majors are suing both BMG parent company Bertelsmann and venture capitalists Hummer Winblad because they provided funding to the original Napster platform in the months prior to its bankruptcy - at the time BMG hoped that their funding would enable the people behind the then controversial P2P network to find a viable legal model. Universal and EMI say that by providing that funding BMG and Hummer Winblad enabled the original Naspter to continue operating several months longer than would have otherwise been possible, and they argue the two firms are therefore liable for all the lost record sales caused by file sharing via Napster during that period.
Bertelsmann and Hummer Winblad argue that they essentially gave Napster a loan rather than buying into the company, and therefore cannot be held liable for anything Napster bosses did while spending their cash. On those grounds they requested that the US courts dismiss EMI and Universal's case against them - but US District Judge Marilyn Hall Patel yesterday refused to do so explaining: "courts have long recognised that in certain circumstances, vicarious or contributory liability will be imposed". Bertelsmann are now expected to appeal the decision.
The whole legal case has nothing to do, of course, with the new Napster download service. That service's owner, Roxio, simply bought the Napster name and URL at the car boot sale that followed the original company's demise.