25 years after the death of Lucio Battisti, total genius of Italian music, who died on September 9, 1998, the legal controversy that broke out around his heritage does not subside, with masterpieces that have made the history of songwriting. After the long litigation with Mogol, it is now the Court of Appeal in Milan to write a new chapter in the battle between the artist's heirs and Sony Music: the judges confirmed the sentence of first instance, which had already rejected the request for maxi-compensation of 8.5 million advanced by the major record company, condemning it to pay legal costs. The facts date back to 2017, when Sony filed yet another lawsuit against the heirs of Battisti (his wife Grazia Letizia Veronese and son Luca). The accusation is the same move against them years before by Mogol, historical author, linked to the artist by a long and fruitful association: having opposed a right of veto to any form of economic exploitation of Battisti's musical works. In particular, the Heirs were accused by Sony of having revoked the mandate to the SIAE for the online use of Battisti's works (thus preventing them from being disseminated on the main digital platforms, Spotify above all) and of having hindered their use for synchronizations (thus blocking the possibility of using phonographic recordings of songs in advertisements for well-known brands, Fiat and Barilla above all). The decision of the Milan court "is significant for at least three reasons", explains Simone Veneziano, lawyer of Battisti's heirs. First of all because it clarifies, for the first time, that the contracts stipulated by Battisti over fifty years ago with phonographic producers do not allow, "without the consent" of the Eredi or his publishers, the online use or in commercial advertising of "phonographic recordings incorporating the interpretations performed at the time by Battisti". Secondly because, Veneziano points out, if Sony's thesis had been accepted, the "subversive principle according to which the economic use of a musical work, rather than by the author (or by the music publisher), would be governed by the phonographic producer" would have been affirmed. In short, "to 'command' on musical works would no longer be the authors (or music publishers), but the record companies. Anyone knows perfectly well that those who want to use, for example in an advertisement, any song must request it, separately, both to the owner of the phonographic recording, and to the author (or music publisher)" and that "each of these subjects is absolutely free to decide whether, to whom and for what consideration to grant the license". Third, because the Heirs were acquitted of the charge of breaching "the duty of care towards Sony Music". The controversy is not over: Sony has announced the appeal to the Supreme Court, the Heirs make it known that "they will await this decision with serenity". For years, Battisti's assets - estimated at 16 million euros - have also been the subject of a diatribe involving the shareholders of Acqua Azzurra, the company created by Battisti and Mogol in 1969 to collect money from the exploitation rights (managed by Siae) of the entire discography of the couple, who would then divorce professionally in the 80s: the Aquilone company of the singer's wife and son, the record companyto Universal and Mogol himself. After Battisti's death, Mogol recently went to court, claiming that the artist's wife and son, majority shareholders of Acqua Azzurra, hindered the commercial exploitation of the catalogue. Mogol claimed compensation of EUR 8 million and received EUR 2.6 million. In 2019, however, Battisti's most famous works landed on the main streaming platforms. An advantage especially for the very young, who can listen to the voice of Un'avventura on Spotify, get passionate about Emotions, propose the artist's covers in talent, sing La canzone del sole, just like their parents, on the beach in front of a bonfire.
All rights reserved © Copyright ANSA