A new thread would descend into that too...

 

You're probably right. I recognize that now.

 

I am absolutely obsessed with this case. These message boards are unhealthy.

 

arf...thank you for the definition. But even with that definition, how do you get to the heart of intent? In other words, Satriani will argue that the similarities are intentional, Coldplay will argue that they are not (coincidence). But it will be a jury of 12 that will help establish a "legal" definition if this thing goes all the way. If anybody has some legal insight, I am truly interested in understanding the case law.

 

I am now realizing what some of you have been saying: it is not a PRO-COLDPLAY world out there. Like I said, I am looking everywhere to get opinions and, by and large, Coldplay are just getting blasted. I just shake my head in disbelief.

At the same time, I really don't think EMI's lawyers would have let it get this far if they weren't confident that they would win.

 

Thank you. I always forget about that. But Satriani's lawyers, at least the ones who took this case, obviously believe he can win. I don't know what to think.

 

And as much as we have heard about this, I still think it is the calm before the storm. I think if this thing goes to trial, it will be a defining moment. I really hope that other artists speak out on this issue. I am very curious to hear their thoughts.

Gregg Gillis/Girl Talk Interview

 

Have you heard about this whole Coldplay, Joe Satriani controversy? (Joe Satriani is suing Coldplay for lifting a melody from his song "If I Could Fly" and using it in "Viva La Vida")

 

Yeah, yeah, I just saw the Youtube where they, like, compare the two and then overlap them. I thought it sounded great, I was actually just jamming that melody in my head. The combination, I thought too, sounded hilarious and awesome.

 

 

What do you think? Do you think Coldplay is screwed?

 

Um, I don't know, ya know, I don't know what their defense is going to be. I believe that ... [pause] ... I think if they were really smart they could probably go through the history of music and find various examples of that exact chord progression and variations of it, just like any music, ya know, the rhythm and- Any music you're going to be able to find something similar. Rhythmically it sounds so on point, ya know what I mean? It sounds so similar, but I think you can always make the argument that you can take an element of someone else's music and then build upon that and make something new that's not really creating competition for the source material. It's kind of doing something new with it. And especially with guitar-based music and doing pop, again, I think if their lawyers are on top of it, they would just go through the history of music and they could probably find something with a very similar chord progression. That's where music progress, you know? I don't really believe in the idea of someone really biting or ripping someone off. I think you can just do something new with it, ya know, like an extension of sampling.

 

http://www.collegian.psu.edu/venues/2008/12/11/gregg_gillisgirl_talk_intervie.aspx

It seems to me that most people find it hard to believe that this is a coincidence, most people think they probably sampled it. What gets me is that they all reference the youtube video which does make it seem like Coldplay outright stole the melody, really wish people would do their research and listen to each song individualy.

nice avatar jimmyarts, I have it on good authority, that Wall-E listens to coldplay!

hahahaha

 

that was just awesome!!!

and very clever

lol :D

Great job on the youtube editorial. Love it.

One word- BRILLIANT

nice avatar jimmyarts, I have it on good authority, that Wall-E listens to coldplay!

 

 

"Look at the stars"

 

"And you'll be lost!"

Hahaha that last photo.. Very subtile:laugh3:

http://weblogs.sun-sentinel.com/features/arts/music/blog/2008/12/coldplay_v_satriani_similar_fe.html

 

Interesting commentary there. Some good points.

 

I am absolutely obsessed with this case. These message boards are unhealthy.

 

:laugh3: Sounds like you need to take a breather, dude. Why not head on down to the world of music? I'm currently compiling an albums of the year list there- the more lists the merrier. Or how about the lounge to talk about something random and silly? Just get your mind off it all. There are good people around here- I haven't been hanging around the last 3 1/2 years for no reason. But it always helps to keep some perspective if you're going to be spending time on a board. Remember, nothing we do or say can change the outcome of this case. It's in the hands of the legal system now. ;)

"Look at the stars"

 

"And you'll be lost!"

 

Jajajjajaja :lol:

 

That's brilliant!!!!!!!!!!!! :D

 

 

 

Awwwww........ i love Wall-e :heart:

Excellent! :laugh3: Just goes to show how totally ridiculous the whole thing is!

Interesting report here

 

Satriani vs Coldplay: what do lawyers say?

What could happen if case went to court?

Michael Leonard and Joe Bosso, Thu 11 Dec 2008, 4:46 pm UTC

 

Joe Satriani's suing of Coldplay has become one of the hot topics of late 2008. And it doesn't look like it's going away soon.

 

The latest addition to the onlin debate is a fine article on the Idolator website where their 'Idolawyer' (clever, yes?) muses on how the case might pan out in court.

 

You'll have to put aside any prejudice of whose music is 'better' to appreciate this case, but the potential scenarios are interesting.

 

Idolator's lawyer writes:

"Assuming that Joe and his publisher legitimately own the copyright to If I Could Fly, assuming the song meets the minimal criteria for originality (a given), and further assuming that he has no direct evidence of infringement, the court will apply the following two-step inquiry:

 

1. Whether the defendant had access to the plaintiff's song prior to creation of Viva La Vida.

2. Whether the work of the alleged infringer is substantially similar to If I Could Fly."

 

Given that Satriani's Is There Love In Space? album was released worldwide by Sony Music, Satriani's team should have no problem on point 1. As for point 2, a court case could result in an audience test, where a jury will decide if the songs are "substantially similar".

 

Idolator's lawyer continues:

"The audience test is comparable to the "reasonable person" test in tort law - it relies on the spontaneous and visceral reaction of the typical audience for the works at issue. If the audience detects similarity without suggestion, then the works are likely substantially similar.

 

"The audience test has been criticized, and the various circuits have unique formulations of the test. Courts also often allow consideration of expert testimony such as analysis by musical experts. The substantial similarity analysis often includes a value judgment, which is a determination of whether the value of the original work is harmed or the labors of the original author are appropriate by the infringer."

 

And then, the court will have to identify an "intended audience".

 

Now, will those be people who know something about music theory? Or people who, in fact, know nothing about theory or even Joe Satriani or Coldplay? (Which could be hard, given the latter's fame.)

 

"This is really about publishers"

MusicRadar spoke with renowned business attorney Ronald S Bienstock, who has represented Joe Satriani in the past on other matters.

 

Bienstock says, "Americans are absolutely fascinated on the concept of copyright infringement. I take calls every day from people claiming that major stars have stolen their songs.

 

"This is really about publishers, not so much about Joe Satriani and Chris Martin having a day in court where they can wag their fingers at each other. It doesn't work that way.

 

"In Federal Court, only three percent of cases go to trial. After you have filed your complaint, fielded your answer, field your various motions, conducted discovery, two to three years have gone by. At which point, lawyers begin to talk to each other about how to settle the case.

 

"Were this to go to trial, it would be a very expensive and time-consuming process. Experts, such as musicologists, would have to be brought in to compare the two pieces of music. That part alone could drag on for weeks.

 

Overlap between audiences

"As far as intended audience, both acts are in the pop music field, and they could very well have the same fans and get played on the same radio stations. I'd not saying they are exactly the same, but we're not talking about a metal band vs a polka group. There is some overlap. It might be small, but it's there.

 

"I would say it's unlikely this will go to trial. I believe Coldplay will settle. Joe's attorney for the publisher will say we want to have a percentage of the song going forward and the back royalties, and Coldplay's attorney will negotiate a figure.

 

"Unless, of course, everybody digs their heels in, and then it could drag on. I don't see that happening, however. This might take one or two years, but it'll get resolved."

 

Two years?! And you thought it was getting complicated already...

 

Satriani has been quoted as saying he heard his song in Coldplay's hit single in an instant.

 

Is it theft, borrowing, unconscious plagiarism or sheer coincidence? The multimillion album selling rock band Coldplay is being taken to court over allegations it pinched a tune by US guitarist Joe Satriani.

 

Satriani claims British band Coldplay's song Viva la Vida is a direct rip-off of his melody If I Could Fly and he wants any and all profits from the Coldplay hit.

 

But Coldplay says any similarities are pure coincidence.

 

For Satriani, If I Could Fly was a love letter to his wife, a song that took him more than a decade to compose before it was finally recorded in 2004.

 

For Coldplay, Viva la Vida, released this year, has earned them a handful Grammy nominations and now legal action in a Californian court.

 

Satriani has been quoted as saying he heard his song in Coldplay's hit single in an instant.

 

"I felt like a dagger went right through my heart. It hurt so much. The second I heard it, I knew it was my own, If I Could Fly," he said.

 

"Almost immediately, from the minute their song came out, my e-mail box flooded with people going, 'Have you heard this song by Coldplay? They ripped you off man.'

 

"I mean, I couldn't tell you how many e-mails I received. Everybody noticed the similarities between the songs. It's pretty obvious."

 

The two songs have been overlayed on the video sharing website YouTube just to prove the point. Coldplay says any similarity is entirely coincidental and that Satriani did not write or have any influence on their song.

 

Regardless, Satriani's legal team claims a substantial portion of the song has been copied and they are pursuing any and all of the profits from the Coldplay chart-topper.

 

Music critic with the Sydney Morning Herald Bruce Elder says proving a copyright breach is fraught for musicians - big and small.

 

"Somebody who is a relatively small fish in the grand scheme of things is saying to a very, very big fish you have taken what rightfully belongs to me and I want some kind of recompense," he said.

 

"It is almost impossible to define what constitutes plagiarism in music, particularly in popular music, because there are so many songs that are very similar.

 

"I mean all you have to do is listen to a very old classic which is the Archies' Sugar, Sugar and I believe that the chord progression in Sugar, Sugar has been used in something like 20 or 30 other pop songs."

 

'Subconscious' copyright

 

But when it comes to other pop songs, copying is nothing new.

 

Perhaps most famously, the Beatles' George Harrison was forced to pay almost $1 million in royalties after a court found he had subconsciously copied The Chiffons's He's So Fine.

 

And eyebrows were raised at the similarities between the opening bass line bars of The Jam's song Start and the Beatles' Taxman, but in that case The Jam's Paul Weller admitted to being under the influence of the Beatles.

 

Copyright Lawyer Michael Easton from Brett Oaten Solicitors explains how damages might be assessed in the Coldplay case.

 

"[You need to assess if] there's any kind of culpability on the defendant's part. So if it's agreed that they subconsciously infringed then that might be something that reduces damages," he said.

 

"But you'd also look at things like the extent to which the market for the original work's been affected and what kind of profits the defendant made as a result of the infringement.

 

"Another aspect which is often significant in these cases is looking at the likelihood that the writer, the defendant, was exposed to the original song. So the question might come down to a case of whether [singer] Chris Martin has a Joe Satriani album in his collection."

 

And that makes composing increasingly tricky for artists, says Elder.

 

"The average musician is a fairly nerdy kind of person who is very, very interested in music and listens to a lot of it and presumably have a vast amount of music swimming around in their head," he said.

 

"And if this is the case, they can often stumble on something and say, well I don't know where I got that but it sounds pretty good and I'm going to make a song out of it.

 

"If there is some kind of huge settlement in favour of Joe Satriani, then it really does create a situation where other writers are going to be saying 'I wonder whether I'm plagiarising something. 'How am I going to prove to people that I haven't been plagiarising this?'."

 

http://www.abc.net.au

 

why is he such a drama queen? :confused:

Found this article and read what it says......

 

http://www.kbsradio.ca/news/music/87/841721

 

What his lawyer said basically means that Coldplay didn't roll over and say "okay Joe, you're right, here's a lump of money". But why should they negotiate if they completely feel that they did not copy or were not influenced by Satriani's song. They obviously feel they have a case and that they did no wrong, or they'd just have settled.

According to the Associated Press, Satriani lawyer Howard E. King responded to Coldplay's statement by saying, "We attempted to have a dialogue on this before we went public. We felt almost forced to file suit ... As far as the 'coincidence,'ultimately that's for a jury to decide."

 

 

 

i never thought things like this were fair without proof, something shouldn't be left to personal opinion, jury or no jury.

What his lawyer said basically means that Coldplay didn't roll over and say "okay Joe, you're right, here's a lump of money". But why should they negotiate if they completely feel that they did not copy or were not influenced by Satriani's song. They obviously feel they have a case and that they did no wrong, or they'd just have settled.

 

I agree.....;

Martin: 'Lawsuit came as a surprise'

 

Chris Martin has revealed that the controversial lawsuit facing Coldplay "came as a surprise".

 

Guitarist Joe Satriani filed a copyright lawsuit against the band which claims that "substantial original portions" of the track 'Viva La Vida' were taken from his song 'If I Could Fly'.

 

"It came as quite a surprise as you can imagine... it wasn't the best of days to be honest with you," Martin told NME Radio.

 

He added that the band and their lawyers are adamant that they have done nothing wrong.

 

"We just told the truth. When these things happen it's a coincidence and we were as surprised by it as anyone else. I know exactly where the song came from - it came in the middle of the night on a piano.

 

"I just get embarrassed about having to talk about these things. I do feel a bit upset about it because I wrote the song, but these things happen and whatever will be will be."

 

source:http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/music/a138161/martin-lawsuit-came-as-a-surprise.html

 

EDIT: tired looking on NME.com but there is nothing on there.

if you listen to the Vitamin String Quartet tribute to the Viva La Vida album and listen to the instrumental of Viva La Vida, it is apparently clear that these two songs are completely different.

You're probably right. I recognize that now.

 

I am absolutely obsessed with this case. These message boards are unhealthy.

 

arf...thank you for the definition. But even with that definition, how do you get to the heart of intent? In other words, Satriani will argue that the similarities are intentional, Coldplay will argue that they are not (coincidence). But it will be a jury of 12 that will help establish a "legal" definition if this thing goes all the way. If anybody has some legal insight, I am truly interested in understanding the case law.

 

I am now realizing what some of you have been saying: it is not a PRO-COLDPLAY world out there. Like I said, I am looking everywhere to get opinions and, by and large, Coldplay are just getting blasted. I just shake my head in disbelief.

 

It completely BAFFLES me that people loathe Coldplay. is it because they sing about their feelings? Almost EVERY musician does that. Is it because he sings in falsetto? What good lead singer hasn't!? And you cannot tell me the lyrics are horrible, because I quote them on a daily basis and they are pretty deep (and just look at rap! now THAT crap is HORRIBLE!)! When someone tells you next time that Coldplay sucks, just ask them what THEY listen to, guaranteed they aren't as successful or popular as Coldplay. And if Coldplay sucks and no one likes them, then how in the WORLD were they were one of the biggest albums in a long time? The best selling iTunes album and have countless sold out shows in almost every country.

That's from the interview he gave on radio.....

 

Iz recorded it, you can download the audio here

 

http://www.megaupload.com/es/?d=DTKNAPBV

 

:nice:

You can download the whole interview on the nme site.

 

here: http://www.nme.com/radar_mp3s/nme-radio-neil-cole-chris-martin.mp3

Chris Martin has revealed that the controversial lawsuit facing Coldplay "came as a surprise".

 

Guitarist Joe Satriani filed a copyright lawsuit against the band which claims that "substantial original portions" of the track 'Viva La Vida' were taken from his song 'If I Could Fly'.

 

"It came as quite a surprise as you can imagine... it wasn't the best of days to be honest with you," Martin told NME Radio.

 

He added that the band and their lawyers are adamant that they have done nothing wrong.

 

"We just told the truth. When these things happen it's a coincidence and we were as surprised by it as anyone else. I know exactly where the song came from - it came in the middle of the night on a piano.

 

"I just get embarrassed about having to talk about these things. I do feel a bit upset about it because I wrote the song, but these things happen and whatever will be will be."

 

source:http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/music/a138161/martin-lawsuit-came-as-a-surprise.html

 

EDIT: tired looking on NME.com but there is nothing on there.

 

Poor Guy. This thing really sucks.