Modular owner Steve Pavlovic sued by UMA
As BMG’s case against Modular Recordings owner Stephen Pavlovic and Universal heats up over royalties owed to Tame Impala, Universal Music Australia is undergoing its own legal battle with Pavlovic on home soil.
At a Supreme Court proceeding in Sydney this morning solicitors for both parties set out arguments regarding the termination of Pavlovic's employment.
Alleged emails between UMA solicitors and Pavlovic’s solicitor were at the heart of the submissions. At one pointJustice Sackar said:"Your client was a thorn in Universal's side."
One email in question, sent on December 24, included the final of four settlement deeds sent from UMA to Pavlovic and followed months of negotiations over his employment and the then co-owned sub-licensed label Modular (which signed Tame Impala andThe Presets).
However, the deed was not signed and Pavlovic continued to attend industry events as a manager of Modular. JusticeSackar called this a “filibusteringperiod”.
The Justice heard that on February 23 this year a termination of Pavlovic’s employment contract was alleged to occur when he “breached accrued annual leave payment”.
Supporting this, Pavlovic’s application to trademark Modular, via his company Pavlovic Investments, was opposed by UMA and Modular Recordings in October; its current status shows it in in a ‘cooling off period’ until October this year.
The judgement has been reserved until a later date, and Justice Sackardidn’t indicate what his findings would be at today's hearing.
While it’s not known which Modular acts still record under UMA, Tame Impala released its first two LPs via Modular and will release third albumCurrentsvia UMA on July 17.
Interestingly, on Monday (July 1), Pavlovic submitted a request to change company details for Pavlovic Investments, he also applied to amend the registered address and the principal place of business.
Aspreviously reported, BMG filed its lawsuit against Stephen Pavlovic’s independent label Modular Recordings, Universal Music Group and 12 other defendants on May 8. BMG is suing over withheld international royalties of up to US$450,000 (approx AU$590,000) and for ignoring a cease and desist letter which requested the defendants stop selling Tame Impala’s back catalogue.
Modular and UMA have defended their position in the BMG suit. In a statement emailed toTMN, the major said both labels shouldn’t have been listed among the defendants in the case. “Universal Music Australia and Modular Recordings totally reject the claim made by BMG that they are in any way liable for unpaid mechanical royalties relating to the band Tame Impala.
“Universal Music Australia and Modular Recordings were not involved in contracting with BMG over mechanicals for sales of Tame Impala recordings in the United States.”
In a statement posted to its website, Pavlovic’s law firm Levitt Robinson makes it clear that although Pavlovic did hold the mechanical licence for Tame Impala’s music, it was only until January 2014, when it was assumed by Universal Music Group. The statement also said it isn’t currently clear “whether BMG is claiming any unpaid royalties relating to the period in which Mr Pavlovic's company was distributing Tame Impala records.”
Read the full statement below:
Ben Butler and Christine Lacy reported in the Australian on 2 June 2015 that Levitt Robinson client Stephen Pavlovic is being sued in New York by music publishing company BMG, in relation to mechanical royalties for the distribution of Tame Impala records which are allegedly unpaid. BMG have also brought proceedings against record label Modular Recordings, and various companies within the Universal Music Group of companies, including Universal Music Australia.
An America-based company owned by Mr Pavlovic was responsible for the distribution of Tame Impala records in America until about January 2014, at which point the distribution–and the liability to pay the mechanical royalties– was assumed by a Universal Music Group entity. Mr Pavlovic accepts that his American company was responsible for the payment of royalties for the period that his company was distributing the Tame Impala works in the USA, but not for the period since Universal Music Group began distributing those works. It is not clear at this stage whether BMG is claiming any unpaid royalties relating to the period in which Mr Pavlovic’s company was distributing Tame Impala records.
BMG have advised Mr Pavlovic that no Tame Impala royalties have been paid at all since the time that Tame Impala sold their mechanical licenses to BMG—including for the period during which Universal Music Group has been distributing the records. Mr Pavlovic has no financial interest in Universal Music Group and does not accept liability for any failure by Universal Music Group or its subsidiaries to make royalty payments to BMG.
Mr Pavlovic is currently in confidential discussions with BMG in order to resolve the dispute.