25 years after the death of Lucio Battisti, the genius of Italian music, who died on September 9, 1998, the legal controversy surrounding his fortune has not subsided, producing masterpieces that have written the history of songwriting. After the long dispute with Mogol, it is now the appeal court in Milan that is writing a new chapter in the fight between the artist’s heirs and Sony Music: The judges confirmed the first instance ruling, which had already rejected the request for maximum prices. The record company paid compensation of 8.5 million and ordered him to pay legal fees. The facts date back to 2017, when Sony filed another lawsuit against Battisti’s heirs (his wife Grazia Letizia Veronese and his son Luca). The accusation is the same that Mogol, a historical author with whom the artist has a long and profitable partnership, had made against her years earlier: he rejected a right of veto over any form of commercial exploitation of Battisti’s musical works. In particular, the heirs were accused by Sony of having withdrawn Siae’s mandate for the online use of Battisti’s works (thus preventing their distribution on the main digital platforms, especially Spotify) and of hindering their use for synchronizations (and thus their would have prevented spread). Blocking the possibility of using recorded songs in advertising for well-known brands, especially Fiat and Barilla). The Milan court’s decision is “significant for at least three reasons,” explains Simone Veneziano, lawyer for the Battistis heirs. Firstly, because it makes clear for the first time that the contracts concluded by Battisti over fifty years ago with the phonograph manufacturers do not allow the use on the Internet or in commercial advertising of the “phonograph recordings which the “include interpretations made by Battisti at that time”. Secondly, because Veneziano further underlines that if Sony’s thesis had been accepted, “the subversive principle according to which the economic use of a musical work would have been confirmed, and not by the author (or music publisher), would be determined by the phonograph manufacturer” In short: “The ‘control’ over musical works would no longer be the authors (or music publishers), but the record companies.” But everyone knows exactly that anyone who wants to use any song, for example in a commercial, must do so both apply separately to the owner of the sound recording and to the author (or music publisher)” and that “each of these subjects is absolutely free to decide whether, to whom and in return for what consideration the license is granted”. Thirdly, because the heirs are protected from the breach of “duties of care to Sony Music”. The controversy is not over yet: Sony has announced that it will appeal to the Court of Cassation, and the heirs say that they will “look forward to this decision with calm”. For years, Battisti’s assets – with an estimated value of 16 million euros – have also been the subject of a dispute between the shareholders of Acqua Azzurra, the company founded in 1969 by Battisti and Mogol to collect the money from the exploitation rights (managed by Siae) of the entire discography of the couple, who later divorced professionally in the 1980s: the Aquilone company of the singer’s wife and son, the Universal record company and Mogol himself. Following Battisti’s death, Mogol has recently taken legal action and claimed , that the artist’s wife and son, majority shareholders of Acqua Azzurra, had hindered the commercial exploitation of the catalog. Mogol demanded compensation of 8 million euros and received 2.6 million. However, in 2019, Battisti’s most famous works landed on major streaming platforms. An advantage especially for the very little ones, who can hear the voice of Un’avventura on Spotify, get excited about emotions, propose the artist’s covers in talent shows and sing the song of the sun just like their parents on the beach in front of a campfire.
Reproduction reserved ©