General Music Chat

btw guys, it's...


CopyRIGHT


As in holding the... "rights to copy"

"Copyright law, really was well thought out, to be fair and as reasonable as possible"

I have to wonder about that in a lot of instances. It was Priscilla Presley who got that passed, for the most part to keep money that she didn't earn herself flowing into her family's pockets. And most of the songs Elvis did in the beginning were ripped off from musicians that Elvis heard in clubs. But a lot of that was going on back then. At least that is how I heard it. I wonder how reasonable life +70 years really is. It seems to me that buying and selling copyrights has become just another commodity. People with money and no musical interest grabbing up everything to make a fast buck. But whatever.

I guess reasonable is in the eye of the beholder. Suits holding the rights to copyrights doesn't seem reasonable to me. Musicians holding the copyrights to the way they interpret and perform a song does.

But for the most part, to me it is simply lawyers screwing up every possible endeavor people get involved in on this planet. As long as two people want something, two lawyers have a job. And they will do anything they can to get the big share of the take. I don't like 'em.

Ah but you can. "My Sweet Lord" and "He's So Fine" come to mind.

again, and assuming you were responding to me (I'm so narcasitic? spelling?), I stand by what I said. You CANNOT copyright a chord progression(successfully).

furthermore, they don't investigate every(any) copyright request... they will give you a copyright if you want to copyright air... but that doesn't indicate it will protect you in court. If they give you a copyright and a previous copyright exists that contradicts yours... guess who wins.

even after you copyright your chords + melody... it's no slam dunk. They will compare the two and if enough differences exist...

This is why there are judges Mike. The judge in this case listened to both sides and decided that Harrison's song was substantially similar to "He's So Fine". This does not mean they were identical, just similar enough that copyright infringement had occurred. Even though this happens all the time, you only hear about the major cases where lots of money is involved.

No, I agree with the judge in this case.

first off, I don't believe he granted the chiffons the win based on f#mi to bma.

remember... all I'm still saying is: you cannot copyright a chord progression!

In this case, the hook and the chorus are a match, the melody, the chords, the meter, and the specific rythm of the melody are all 85% matches. There is little more than a tempo change separating them.
They are, at the very least, more similar than dissimilar.


I/you could probably name at least a cpl other songs with a I - IV minor progression against a dorian melody that are in no danger of being sued.


I think we probably disagree more about how similar these two songs are than whether or not one can copyright a chord progression...

Check out ripremix.com
A documentary regarding this whole issue of copyright & intellectual property in music. A must see for any musician in dealing with this sad reality.