• Home
  • Latest
  • Fortune 500
  • Finance
  • Tech
  • Leadership
  • Lifestyle
  • Rankings
  • Multimedia

Trendingnow

1

Billionaire Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong says most charities are 'net negative'—and that he has no plans to make his own foundation

2

As the U.S. Treasury shells out $95 billion a month in interest to cover deficits, Trump pitches a $1.3 trillion payout to voters if Republicans win the midterms

3

Tennessee linebacker Arion Carter was suspended over a $427 flight—now he's donating that amount to charity for every tackle he makes this season

1

Billionaire Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong says most charities are 'net negative'—and that he has no plans to make his own foundation

2

As the U.S. Treasury shells out $95 billion a month in interest to cover deficits, Trump pitches a $1.3 trillion payout to voters if Republicans win the midterms

3

Tennessee linebacker Arion Carter was suspended over a $427 flight—now he's donating that amount to charity for every tackle he makes this season

Music label sues Spotify over playlists — and might have a case

By
Dan Mitchell
Dan Mitchell
Down Arrow Button Icon
By
Dan Mitchell
Dan Mitchell
Down Arrow Button Icon
September 6, 2013, 1:34 PM ET
Google source logo
Add Fortune on Google for similar content.

FORTUNE — Ministry of Sound, a British music label that issues compilation albums, is suing Spotify, claiming that the song-streamer is infringing on the label’s copyrights by allowing people to create and share playlists that mirror its albums.

Are lists of particular songs copyrightable? Possibly. U.S. copyright law recognizes compilations, in fact. The Copyright Act says that the “collection and assembling of preexisting materials or of data that are selected in such a way that the resulting work as a whole constitutes an original work of authorship.”

In other words, a particular list of songs in random or alphabetical order isn’t protected, but playlists are — or at least might be. The fact that users are assembling and sharing the playlists might change the equation in this case, as might the fact that online playlists aren’t necessarily the same as compilations issued on a physical medium. The whole issue highlights how the digitization and online distribution of media changes how we view such matters, and how intellectual-property laws written for the analogue era often don’t seem to make a lot of sense. If another label started issuing CDs mirroring the Ministry of Sound’s compilations, it seems unlikely that anyone would be surprised if Ministry of Sound sued.

Still, from a non-legal standpoint, the suit seems rather petty. Crucially, the lawsuit has nothing to do with the songs themselves, which are all legitimately licensed to Spotify, but with the order and presentation of them. Many users apparently label their playlists with the Ministry of Sound’s name. Spotify hasn’t commented on the lawsuit so far.

MORE: Ashes to ashes, peer to peer: An oral history of Napster

Ministry of Sound CEO Lohan Presencer insisted in a column in the Guardian that “the value and creativity in our compilations are self-evident.” He also separately told the Guardian: that “a lot of research goes into creating our compilation albums, and the intellectual property involved in that. It’s not appropriate for someone to just cut and paste them.”

Presencer, then, is a bit like those guys you knew in college who thought their mix tapes were Major Artistic Statements — pretty much the equivalent of actual musicians making actual albums.

“Even if Ministry of Sound claims that ‘a lot of research’ went into compiling the list, what the public sees is just a list of nouns,” E. Michael Harrington, a music-business professor and member of the Future of Music Coalition advisory board, told Time‘s Victor Luckerson. “Compiling a list of songs you like in a specific order deserves as much copyright protection as compiling a list of things one did in Manhattan today.”

Harrington is right about the first part — to most of us, a list is just a list. But he might be dead wrong about the second part. Some lists are copyrightable.

About the Author
By Dan Mitchell
See full bioRight Arrow Button Icon

Latest in


Most Popular

Fortune Secondary Logo
Rankings
  • 100 Best Companies
  • Fortune 500
  • Global 500
  • Fortune 500 Europe
  • Most Powerful Women
  • World's Most Admired Companies
  • See All Rankings
  • Lists Calendar
Sections
  • Finance
  • Fortune Crypto
  • Features
  • Leadership
  • Health
  • Commentary
  • Success
  • Retail
  • Mpw
  • Tech
  • Lifestyle
  • CEO Initiative
  • Asia
  • Politics
  • Conferences
  • Europe
  • Newsletters
  • Personal Finance
  • Environment
  • Magazine
  • Education
Customer Support
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Customer Service Portal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms Of Use
  • Single Issues For Purchase
  • International Print
Commercial Services
  • Advertising
  • Fortune Brand Studio
  • Fortune Analytics
  • Fortune Conferences
  • Business Development
  • Group Subscriptions
About Us
  • About Us
  • Press Center
  • Work At Fortune
  • Terms And Conditions
  • Site Map
  • About Us
  • Press Center
  • Work At Fortune
  • Terms And Conditions
  • Site Map
  • Facebook icon
  • Twitter icon
  • LinkedIn icon
  • Instagram icon
  • TikTok icon
  • YouTube icon

    Latest in


    Most Popular

    © 2026 Fortune Media IP Limited. All Rights Reserved. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy | CA Notice at Collection and Privacy Notice | Do Not Sell/Share My Personal Information
    FORTUNE is a trademark of Fortune Media IP Limited, registered in the U.S. and other countries. FORTUNE may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website. Offers may be subject to change without notice.