Victory Records V. Victory Record

No. 11-cv-7594 The plaintiffs, A Day to Remember, entered into a recording contract, which will be recognized as the “Deal Memo”, with the defendants, Victory Records Inc. on July 17, 2006. Under the “Deal Memo”, A Day to Remember was to produce at least five albums through Victory Records Inc. A Day to Remember is seeking to end their business relationship with the defendant as they claim they have fulfilled their contractual obligations and released at least thirteen albums through Victory Records Inc. A Day to Remember also alleges that Victory Records Inc. has attempted to copyright certain band compositions, neglected to pay certain royalties and has held certain fund from the band. Victory denies these allegations and counterclaims that A Day to Remember breached terms of their agreement. A Day to Remember intends to self-release their newest album titled Common Courtesy on Tuesday, October 8, 2013. Victory Records objects to A Day to Remember’s intentions and asks the court to issue a preliminary injunction to keep the band from releasing …show more content…
then claimed that difficulty determining lost profits due to the release of Common Courtesy would cause them to suffer irreparable harm. As a record label, Victory Records claims they would have participated in the marketing, producing and distribution of Common Courtesy. Because they had not been involved, it would be near impossible to determine monetary damages. According to Victory Records Inc., the sales and profits from Common Courtesy, upon its release, would be higher had they played a role in its production and distribution. The argument put forth by Victory Records is invalid, assumptive and unpersuasive because the three releases by A Day to Remember that Victory defines as albums were all financially successful. Using previous financial records, it would be incredibly simple to determine the approximate sales and profits of Common Courtesy had Victory been involved in the