Pink Floyd win EMI court battle over online sales

Pink Floyd have won a High Court battle to stop their record label EMI selling individual songs online.

Pink Floyd tracks have been available on download stores like iTunes

The rock legends, signed to EMI since 1967, said their contract meant their albums could not be split up without their permission.

A judge agreed, saying the contract contained a clause to "preserve the artistic integrity of the albums".

EMI has been ordered to pay £40,000 ($60,000) in costs, with a further fine to be decided.

The group, whose latest contract was signed before download stores like iTunes appeared, also disputed the way royalties for digital sales were calculated.

In court, Chancellor Sir Andrew Morritt declared that the contract means EMI is not entitled to exploit recordings by online distribution or by any other means other than the complete original album without Pink Floyd's consent.

The band largely avoided releasing singles during their career, instead preferring fans to listen to entire albums such as Dark Side of the Moon, which has sold more than 35 million copies around the world.

Earlier this week, Robert Howe QC, appearing for the group, said the the band's deal with EMI stipulated that their "seamless" albums should not be split up and that they "wanted to retain artistic control".

He said it would have been "a very odd result" if band members were able to control exactly how their music was sold as a physical product but there was "a free-for-all with no limitation on online distribution".

Elizabeth Jones QC, appearing for EMI, disagreed and said the word "record" in the band's contract "plainly applies to the physical thing - there is nothing to suggest it applies to online distribution".

The band were not present to hear the judgment at the High Court in London.

The issue of selling individual tracks online has been a thorny one for many artists, who want their albums to be seen as complete works. Bands also receive less money if fans pick and choose tracks instead of buying a full suite of songs.

It is believed to be one reason why The Beatles - whose catalogue is also owned by EMI - have not appeared in download stores like iTunes.

Garth Brooks and AC/DC are among the others who have objected to their albums being split up.

Personally I think this is an own goal by the group. For example there are only two tracks from the album 'Meddle' which I would ever want to listen to repeatedly. If I can't download them legally then I would simply copy them illegally from the CD version I've alread paid for.