Universal Music, EMI and a consortium of publishers have filed an opposition to Bertlesmann’s attempts to have their lawsuit against BMG’s support of Napster thrown out of court. The rival majors claim that by offering Napster financial support in its dieing days BMG allowed further piracy to take place – and that they are liable for that copyright violation. But BMG claim their financial support of Napster was a loan – given in order to help Napster become a legit operation. They say that because it wasn’t a true investment they aren’t liable and the lawsuit should be thrown out.
Universal for one aren’t impressed: “As set forth in the opposition, Bertelsmann's motion is not supported by the facts or the law. Neither is Bertelsmann's contention that it was simply a passive investor in Napster whose decision-making was motivated by a 'Good Samaritan' desire to benefit the record industry as a whole. Both today and when it entered into its "strategic partnership" with Napster, Bertelsmann's public claim that it wanted to "legalize" Napster is irrelevant. Bertelsmann made and supported the decision to continue the infringing activity of Napster and its users for its own financial gain and without obtaining, or even seeking, the consent of UMG or other copyright owners. UMG looks forward to a trial on the merits of its claims.”
Maybe Bertelsmann should file to have the complaint about their complaint to have it thrown out of court, thrown out of court.