Musical plagiarism(?)

Status
Not open for further replies.

verreauxi

Player Valuation: €864
Many famous cases have come up regarding one artist claiming another artist copied their song. It seems very difficult to prove. The latest, that I'm sure you've read about, is Ed Sheeran involving his song:


And a lawsuit brought against him by the estate of Marvin Gaye, involving this song:


I can see similarities in both, but also find them sufficiently different to find the Gaye case without merit (at least in this case). I always find this interesting from a legal standpoint...how much similarity/difference in chord structure, lyrics, musical style is required to be guilty/not guilty? WIth lyrics it seems a bit more cut-n-dry, but with chord progressions, especially widely-used ones (e.g., I IV V; II V VII, etc.) it seems hard to pin down true originality, from similar but still original-ish derivatives, from conscious copying.

What say you?
 

Gayes estate are claiming $100m in "damages", which seems a bit daft. If part of a song is totally lifted, like The Verve did, then thats a no go, without permission. But like you say, natural chord progressions are, well, natural. That is what got Page/Zep off for Stairway to Heaven.
 

Well, the four-chord progression is there in both songs, but you cannot 'copyright' a four-chord progression, otherwise the writers of all those 'doo-wop' songs and chart songs of the 1950s and early-'60s would still be stuffing their pockets today. Also, you cannot copyright a tempo to a song. I'm with you when you say the 'Gaye case is without merit'...
 
I think it's a load of bollocks TBH - 7 chords to go around and occasionally songs sound similar - Get on with it

Seems like Marvin Gaye's family might be ghoulish vultures seeing as they sued Robin Thicke over Blurred Lines as well
 
Many famous cases have come up regarding one artist claiming another artist copied their song. It seems very difficult to prove. The latest, that I'm sure you've read about, is Ed Sheeran involving his song:


And a lawsuit brought against him by the estate of Marvin Gaye, involving this song:


I can see similarities in both, but also find them sufficiently different to find the Gaye case without merit (at least in this case). I always find this interesting from a legal standpoint...how much similarity/difference in chord structure, lyrics, musical style is required to be guilty/not guilty? WIth lyrics it seems a bit more cut-n-dry, but with chord progressions, especially widely-used ones (e.g., I IV V; II V VII, etc.) it seems hard to pin down true originality, from similar but still original-ish derivatives, from conscious copying.

What say you?

Mr V, big fan here, can you please attack someone from the forum and tag them in to truly get this thread started please and thank you.
 
Well, the four-chord progression is there in both songs, but you cannot 'copyright' a four-chord progression, otherwise the writers of all those 'doo-wop' songs and chart songs of the 1950s and early-'60s would still be sutffing their pockets today. Also, you cannot copyright a tempo to a song. I'm with you when you say the 'Gaye case is without merit'...

It would be like copywriting "Once upon a time" in literature.
 
That is what got Page/Zep off for Stairway to Heaven.
Still don't know how Page/Plant got off with that one, roydo. A bit like the Eagles 'Hotel California' and the earlier Jethro Tull song 'We used to know', although on that one it was only the complete verse chord progression.
 

Still don't know how Page/Plant got off with that one, roydo. A bit like the Eagles 'Hotel California' and the earlier Jethro Tull song 'We used to know', although on that one it was only the complete verse chord progression.

Me neither if I am honest. Esp given Page's rep as a musical magpie. Whole Lotta Love was a song performed by another band (Small Faces? Sommet like that) that he nicked, and Dazed and Confused wasnt even written by him. He produced both very differently, but the bare bones of both were not written by him.

That said, Ozzy Osbourne has admitted that Sabbath "wrote" Paranoid while listening to Communication Breakdown!
 
Still don't know how Page/Plant got off with that one, roydo. A bit like the Eagles 'Hotel California' and the earlier Jethro Tull song 'We used to know', although on that one it was only the complete verse chord progression.

I read about the Page/Plant case, but I still need to give those songs a listen.
 
Me neither if I am honest. Esp given Page's rep as a musical magpie. Whole Lotta Love was a song performed by another band (Small Faces? Sommet like that) that he nicked, and Dazed and Confused wasnt even written by him. He produced both very differently, but the bare bones of both were not written by him.

That said, Ozzy Osbourne has admitted that Sabbath "wrote" Paranoid while listening to Communication Breakdown!
Whole lotta love was ripped from a Muddy Waters song.

They put a whole verse of 'The Hunter' (recorded by Albert King) that was written by Booker-T and the MGs, and claimed the complete song it was in as their own. They nicked whole lot of other songs as well. There are Youtube vids itemising them all - bloody hilarious!
 
I read about the Page/Plant case, but I still need to give those songs a listen.

The opening chords are almost identical. But then all sorts happens with Stairway that led the judge to agree with Zep that the chord progressions are natural, and the similarities ended after about a minute. Kinda. (That and Zep had expensive lawyers I guess).
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Shop

Back
Top