Hacker News Reader

Comment by tejohnso | Hacker News Reader

How do you know that a worthwhile check has anything to do with Radiohead's motives? What other artists are you implying belong to this group?

View on HN

They sue artists who are successful and ignore smaller artists. Clearly it's about the money, otherwise they'd protect their songs against every infringement even if it costs them to do so rather than only protecting songs when there's the possibility of a pay out.

These law suits are not about art.

I don't think it's clear at all. They could be ignoring smaller artists because:

  - They haven't heard of those smaller artists
  - They want to give the struggling small timers a break
  - They don't think it's worth their time because nobody is going to hear those small timers' songs anyway
  - They don't want to appear as though they are bullying vulnerable smaller artists

I think any of those options are more believable than the idea that a band worth tens of millions of dollars is suing just to pull in publishing royalties on a song that wasn't even one of the singles from an album that didn't even reach gold certification.

They are seeking 100% of the profits for that song. They could ask her to remove the song from the album if they felt like she was biting their music and had no monetary motives.

Perhaps they think that a financial penalty will best discourage future infringers.

Unless you’re basing that on some extra information, you seem to have not read the article.

“To set the record straight, no lawsuit has been issued and Radiohead have not said they ‘will only accept 100%’ of the publishing of ‘Get Free.’ ”

Reply on news.ycombinator.com