Lose Yoursuit

How did I miss this? Obnoxious rapper Eminem has sued Apple for using his composition "Lose Yourself" in a commercial for iPod. In the Apple commercial, a ten year old boy performs the song. So I hear this and I am thinking, what's the problem? Covers of original musical compositions are legal under a compulsory license. [Errorem- someone helpfully explained to me that you have the license to cover a record to sell records for other people to play, but that the license doesn't give you the right to use the underlying composition for commercial purposes]. Eminem is entitled to royalties for use of his song, if it is not de minimus. But reading more carefully, his claim is not only for infringement, but for unfair competition under the Lanham Act, under the theory that consumers will think Eminem is endorsing the iPod. This is mind-bogglingly stupid. If Eminem were endorsing the iPod, why would a kid be singing the song? Isn't that a strange way to endorse a product? What's next, will what's left of The Clash sue Pepsi for using a cover of "I Fought The Law" to promote its iTunes "free downloads" tie in during the SuperBowl? (Trick question- The Clash version is also a cover. Who did the original recording? Here's the answer) If Eminem is right, how can anyone license musical recordings for any commercial purpose without the original artist's endorsement? It sucks to hear the tunes of your misspent youth bastardized into jingles for consumer goods and services -- my god, Meat Loaf's "Paradise By the Dashboard Light" -- for a some car maker's 24 hour test drive???? but this theory doesn't even make sense. (inflamed comments deleted by author 6-3-04).