Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Bad Dog Cafe' started by micpoc, Apr 13, 2016.
I have heard both songs they kinda aound the same but its not even close, every song sounds the same
I'd say it's more than just a progression. Many songs use the same chord progression, but in this case they are nearly the same arpeggios, same employment of a 12 - string or octave intervals, and a very similar tempo, feel and atmospherics.
I don't think it's a stretch, but I'm an American and people can get sued for trademark infringement for similar scented flatulence in this country.
It's a line cliche. The same basic move (in Gm) can be heard in the B section of "God Bless the Child" by Billie Holiday from 1941.
Can't hear Taurus very well at all on my phone but sounds like the Zeppelin figure more prominently features contrary motion. And the fourth chord for Led Zeppelin is D/F#; Spirit's sounds like Am6(9)/F# (or D13/F#).
The fact that both songs feature the arpeggiated chords on guitars at similar tempos makes the correlations obvious, but it is nonetheless two different versions of a line cliche. I suspect that what might be making this more controversial for some is that both tracks go to the F chord after the line cliche.
Waylon "stole" it from him
George Gershwins estate could sue Spirit for clipping those riffs from "Summertime".
And Irving Berlin's for "Blue Skies".
The "Blurred Lines" lawsuit has changed the landscape. The exact chords and melody don't seem to matter. It seems that the important thing now is the feel or groove of the song. If a song has a similar feel, it can be argued that it is "stolen."
If the Money is good enough, yes.
I need to start ringing some numbers and banging on some front doors then. Time to go retroactively seek some writing credits and mailbox money.
We really do want to have it both ways, it would appear. Arrangement and groove/vibe aren't (as stipulated legally anyway) considered for writing credits and royalties when there are no conflicts, but squeaky wheel gets the grease when there's a question after the fact?
Double standard from hell.
Santo should have sued John Barry over "Born Free".
But the biscuit for most opportunistic musical plagiarism suit has to go to Down Under. There's no denying it's there, a cheeky little quotation of a song that Australian kids had been singing for generations. But it's such a tiny little borrowing, just a pattern of beats, not even the same melody, and not in any way essential to the song. Larrikin Music was awarded 50% of the total royalties - 50%! For a fragment of the flute motif!
And there's a bigger question - how can a musical form develop, how can it even survive, if writers can't take inspiration from each other?
That flute part is playing the exact melody from the kookaburra song. Every Australian recognized it immediately. If someone still owns the rights to that song, Men at Work should have sought permission to use it.
"Happy Birthday" has been sung for generations as well, but movies and TV shows have to pay to use it because the rights are still owned by the estate of the women who wrote it.
Dammit. I keep hitting "Reply" instead of "Edit."
Happy Birthday is now royalty free.
Having been involved in a few IP lawsuits, as an expert for plaintiffs, I can say that a whole lot will depend on the judge who hears the case. I've been shocked at a few decisions that seemed obvious.
Isn't "Imitation is the most sincere form of flattery!"? I was the one who told everyone about Metallica suing, some other "new" Heavy Metal band (Disturbed??) ABOUT PLAYING E AND F! like Lars, James and the boys OWNED THE NOTES. L-u-d-i-c-r-o-u-s to the ad nauseum, vanity, music-N*** level. It must be in the courts now, or a judge threw them, bodily, out of the courtroom! (I can wish!)
So, Zeps' attorneys have to find a song that came out before Spirits' that uses the same progression, and claim Spirit stole it.
Perhaps Tele players should be sued for using the same guitar.
row your boat is a js bach fugue