The Audiencia Provincial de Madrid (Madrid Provincial High Court) has decided to proceed with an action by Weblisten, S.A. versus AIE, AGEDI and the major record labels which had been stayed by the Court of First Instance

Spanish portal pioneering mp3 music downloads on the Internet, Weblisten.com, which was forced to cease its business under a court ruling dated May 2005, could restart its mp3 download business as a result of an Order by the Madrid Provincial High Court to pursue the proceedings initiated by Weblisten against AIE (Artists and Performers), AGEDI (Association of phonographic producers) and the main record companies (Sony, Universal, BMG and EMI, inter alia).

A member of the AMI, Weblisten has always stated that its agreement with the AIE allowed it to legally conduct its Internet music download business, even if the Courts have decided otherwise based on the statements made by AIE before various Courts where the record companies had initiated actions against the music download portal. According to such AIE statements, the agreement had been terminated.

Subsequently, the Spanish company brought legal action seeking to achieve that the Courts declared the above Agreement in full force and effect and obtain enforcement by AIE of all the terms of the Agreement, including those referring to the proceeds received by AIE from Weblisten, which must be shared with the record labels through its Management Institution AGEDI.

This action was stayed by the Court of First Instance. The order to stay was appealed by Weblisten before the Madrid Provincial High Court, which has now raised the order by allowing the appeal.

The agreement between AIE and Weblisten is effective until December 31, 2008 and
in accordance with its terms, the proceeds refer not only to the part corresponding to the artists, but also to that corresponding to the record labels, in agreement with the applicable Intellectual Property Law in Spain.

In accordance with the Order issued by the Madrid Provincial High Court, “...it is reasonable to determine firstly whether the agreement is effective and against whom it may be enforced....” and, as for the record producers, it adds that “... the producers may enforce their rights in these proceedings and make any pleadings as they deem appropriate to defend their interests.. notwithstanding whether previous court decisions consider or not that the producers’ intellectual property right has been violated by the claimant –Weblisten-” . In addition, the Order resolves that the proceedings must be seen through retrospectively from the time and instance where it was stayed.