Think about it for awhile: which search engine happens to be your #1 music search engine? Is it SeeqPod? Well, why is that music search engine your favorite? Is it because it relies on torrents file sharing so that you get access to hordes of music files from different servers without having to worry about a silly little thing like copyright? Well, sorry kiddies, but that search engine is now in hot water because it does work like that.

SeeqPod (based in Emeryville, California) has been slapped with a copyright infringement lawsuit by one of the Big Four music labels, namely Warner Music. Warner Music alleges in its case against Seeqpod that SeeqPod targets its search efforts at music products that definitely have copyright ownership but which have been illegally placed on sites without authorization from the owner. Warner Music further says that SeeqPod will agree to look for the links to such sites for the user, then play the copyrighted music even if authorization has not been given by the real owners. Furthermore, SeeqPod will then integrate the illegally acquired music file into the playlist collection of the user, and even inform the user where he can go himself to find more illegally acquired music files of that same name. Lastly, to round out the copyright infringement transgressions of SeeqPod against Warner Music, Warner Music alleges that SeeqPod places the same link for acquiring illegal copies of music on social networking sites which is more damaging because then more people can be seduced into the copyright infringement cycle as well.

In case you think your #1 music search engine SeeqPod has been unfairly singled out among a host of copyright infringement suspects, actually the rest of the Big Four music labels had already filed similar lawsuits against other music search engines. The 2008 filing of a case against SeeqPod by Warner Music seems to be just the latest in a series of lawsuits where Big Four music labels are fighting back against copyright infringement criminals to protect their artists and themselves from loss of profits that are righteously theirs.

If you were an attorney for your #1 music search engine, how would you argue a case for SeeqPod that would relieve it from the burden of paying penalties for copyright infringement and for having to pay royalties henceforth after judgement has been rendered? One argument you might choose is that SeeqPod helps artists gain much-needed exposure for their music titles even if SeeqPod does not pay royalties for allowing users to play songs on its own website. Another argument you could select to get your #1 music search engine out of legal trouble is that even obscure songs and artists may gain exposure because of the Discover function of SeeqPod where SeeqPod users can see what titles are similar to the titles they were looking for and like. Lastly, you could backtrack to the DCMA safe harbors ruling that many search engines have sought cover behind when pursued by royalty-based music labels and legitimate artists.