Beastie Boys Want $2M From Monster For Copyright Infringement, Unauthorized Use Of Band’s Coolness

Listen, when someone’s got their own cool, it’s very bad manners to try to use some of that cool without asking permission first. Because clearly, we all own our personal coolness. Or at least we should, and that’s part of the reason the Beastie Boys are asking for $2 million from Monster for trying to benefit from that without permission.

The Beasties have been in court since last week claiming that Monster’s use of their music in its promotional materials constitutes copyright infringement, which they’ve now put a price tag on, reports Reuters. The band filed its lawsuit against Monster back in 2012.

The band’s lawyer said in closing arguments yesterday that the unauthorized use of the music in the 2012 video was “absolutely egregious,” and that Monster had hoped to benefit from how “cool” the band had become without their permission.

“They didn’t care if their employees were stealing from the Beastie Boys,” he said.

Monster has admitted infringement, but has claimed that it was all a big mistake, because an employee thought the company had permission to use the music. Ah, the old “It wasn’t me” defense.

despite that, Monster says the $2 million in damages and the argument that Monster made it seem like the Beastie Boys endorsed its drink were “contrary to common sense.”

“The plaintiffs try to take the undisputed evidence and spin some tale of an insidious corporate conspiracy,” Monster’s lawyer said, asking for jurors to hand down no more than $125,000 in damages.

This “theft of coolness” idea is surely going to set some kind of legal precedent, right? Because I’ve got some people on my list. You know who you are.

Beastie Boys seek $2 million from Monster for copyright infringement [Reuters]

Read Comments2

Edit Your Comment

  1. oomingmak says:

    The RIAA-endorsed penalty for an individual merely downloading a song is $250,000 per infraction. Surely a big corporation using a song illegally for promotion purposes should be a much bigger penalty.