Quote:
Originally Posted by Pestilence
Funny.......he hasn't been that way with me.
In fact.....I've never seen a post where he stated that just because he lived in Hollywood.....that it made him any more important than anyone here.
|
It's not a direct thing.
http://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthrea...light=satriani
It's a slightly lengthy read, but it shows how Dane was initially convinced that Satriani was guaranteed 50% of Coldplay's royalties, then was convinced that it was a tough case, then was convinced that Satriani's case was completely meritless.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dane
After actually hearing the comparison, there is no doubt in my mind that Satriani will receive a share of the royalties for this song.
The letter of the law states "Lyrics and Melody". The melodies are nearly identical throughout, as is the tempo and arrangement. That is NOT accidental.
Furthermore, while don't think this is "intentional", it did happen. Chris Martin probably heard the Satriani song in passing years ago, only to write his version years later. A lot of times, composers don't understand where the "music comes". I'm sure he wrote it not realizing that he'd heard that melody and song at some point in years past.
Regardless, I'd be shocked if the judge didn't award 50% of the royalties and copyright credit to Joe Satch.
|
Quote:
No worries, Dude.
As I stated in my first response, proving plagiarism is extremely difficult. Extremely. Joe Satriani's people will have to somehow prove that Chris Martin and/or anyone in Coldplay actually heard Joe's song.
And as I stated earlier, Chris Martin may have heard this song in passing years ago, only to unintentionally use the same melody for their song.
It's a difficult case for sure.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dane
Let me put it this way: Everyone steals from everyone. If the courts did not realize this, there would be no copyright protection.
I'm not implying that you and DJ are wrong in the strictest sense of the law but this is a highly specialized area that's practiced by very few.
And with all due respect to you and DJ, I'll take the word of my lawyer friends that deal with these issues over than those that are less familiar with them.
|
And anyone [in this case at least two people who have actually taken the effort to take law school level and CLE [continuing legal education] courses, and get IP [intellectual property] certification] who had anything else to contribute were 'clueless about the actual industry' goings and comings, because he's had conversations with real actual Hwood attorneys.
Then in passive-aggressive mode, he took the stance 'Hey I understand you know the law, but I KNOW HOLLYWOOD and the INDUSTRY. Thanks for the reasonable conversation even though you're dead wrong.' THEN he spent the next couple years starting every argument with 'is this another instance of how I totally schooled you guys on how copyright works?' This, on the basis that the Satriani case settled out of court with no terms disclosed, which could have followed from ANYONE'S take on the situation.