Yeah, every band should have to record a song with a name that can be used as a headline when the inevitable financial disputes kick in. Simply Red are suing EMI over record sales money caught up in the collapse of Woolworths' owned music distributor eUK.
The dispute relates to the band's greatest hits album that was released last September by the band themselves, and distributed by EMI. According to the legal papers, EMI paid Mick Hucknall et al £750,000 upfront, with a commitment to pay a share of net sales once that payment had been recouped.
It seems that 50,000 copies of the album were shipped to Woolies' eUK division just before they spiralled into bankruptcy. EMI, presumably, is yet to be paid for those units. However, Simply Red's lawsuit claims that, under their contract with the major, such incidents are irrelevant and that EMI is liable to cover any losses caused by the collapse of third-party distributors or retailers.
As far as I can see, the major is delaying paying the band its cut of net sales while it goes through the motions of claiming back money off eUK's liquidators, but the band claim because EMI is liable for that money anyway they should pay now rather than later.
Responding to the lawsuit, an EMI spokesperson told reporters: "We are doing everything we can to recover the money that Entertainment UK owes us in connection with Simply Red and are fully committed to sharing the proceeds with them. Simply Red management is well aware of that commitment, which we made some time ago".