# Joe Satriani sues Coldplay for Copyright!



## JT3_Jon (Dec 5, 2008)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7766683.stm

Do you think he has a case? Do you think he will win?

Coldplay's song: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44xirQ55IgA
Satriani's song: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMcjXo8ZuqE


----------



## Hal (Dec 5, 2008)

didnt feel it was close in the begining because the huge difference in arrangement and performance but after listening 2 times i beleive the cold play "verse" is very close to satrianis "chorus"


----------



## TheoKrueger (Dec 5, 2008)

Not sure.....

Here's a mix of the two songs on youtube, they sound very similar....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ofFw9DK ... re=related

Maybe they could collaborate ---> (o)


----------



## Hal (Dec 5, 2008)

even more interesting


----------



## lux (Dec 5, 2008)

well, on the chorus seems there's definitely a case, expecially because the arrangement sense is not that different and the overall tempo feels are quite close.

It should be said though that the progression IV-V-I-VIm is likely to result close things. As a simple listener though i had some feeling on the chorus.

It could be that the guy who wrote the song is a guitarist and perhaps a fan of Joe (eh...how comes that one is supposed to not be Joe's fan?) and just pulled off something without intention. I think this happens to all of us so many times.


----------



## Waywyn (Dec 5, 2008)

Oh boy, if it always wouldn't be about money 

This chord structure is a simple and common pop structure and those three notes in the beginning is done by soo many artist ... 

Of course it is very similar, but I don't wanna know how many other millions of songs are similar ...

I would say since "everyone" is able to do music (computer, sequencer, internet) it is just a matter of luck until you hit someone others chordal structure and hookline ... and the more famous one becomes, the harder it will be.

My guess would be in ten years, 10% of all pop stars would sue each other since even we have 12 notes and so many rhythms there are just a few chordal structures and "easy notes" who works best in pop ...


----------



## IvanP (Dec 5, 2008)

Waywyn @ Fri Dec 05 said:


> Oh boy, if it always wouldn't be about money
> 
> This chord structure is a simple and common pop structure and those three notes in the beginning is done by soo many artist ...
> 
> ...



Oh, and in a few years the same will happen with serial music and, why not, with aleatoric music too :mrgreen:


----------



## madbulk (Dec 5, 2008)

Ridiculous.


----------



## Thonex (Dec 5, 2008)

I doubt it will ever hold up in court.


----------



## JohnG (Dec 5, 2008)

Does anybody know what the legal standards really are?

I've heard:

1. chord progression

2. melody (pitches, direction).

So if those criteria are the main standard, there are some similarities, but I wonder whether it has enough to reach the legal standard of infringement.

Anybody an expert?


----------



## Thonex (Dec 5, 2008)

JohnG @ Fri Dec 05 said:


> Does anybody know what the legal standards really are?
> 
> I've heard:
> 
> ...



Chord progressions are not copyright-able. That leaves the melody. There are similarities, but IMO there is not enough to prove copyright infringement. And I think it would be even harder to prove intent (that they heard the tune and copied it) since Satriani' piece is not well known.

But I guess Satriani has nothing to lose.


----------



## JohnG (Dec 5, 2008)

I also have heard that chord progressions, by themselves, are not copyrightable, but that having the same chord progression is helpful to the plaintiff in suing over copyright.

I just guessed we'd have a reformed lawyer somewhere in-house here at v.i.


----------



## José Herring (Dec 5, 2008)

The lead melody is a dead rip off. I'm sure Coldplay will settle out of court on this one.

I know a rock star who successfully sued Janet Jackson for this same type thing. Even though he won he said that it's often the case that the person doing the plagiarism doesn't know that they are doing it. In his case he felt that the song writer for Janet may have heard his song on the radio then when going to write an "original" tune the song just heard then pops up. It's more subconscious than deliberate.

But he still won the case and it was a lot less of a direct quote than this Coldplay one. 

But I doubt that Satriani will get all he's asking for. It's not like they copied the whole tune. Only just that lead melody.


----------



## madbulk (Dec 5, 2008)

Can you give away the Janet tune at least?

And has anybody here heard that "Songs I Didn't Write" tune on youtube? It starts out just with a bald vocal, but the melody isn't close enough to make you think twice.
If you believe their story though, and Chris Martin was in fact in the audience, I have an easy time hearing how their tune would've informed Vida. I only listened once, but as they show you more and more of their tune, the whole arc is in there.


----------



## José Herring (Dec 5, 2008)

This was years ago. I really don't remember the name of either song. But, the Rock band was America. The lead singer has a swimming pool in his backyard that he calls the "Janet Jackson memorial pool" because he paid for it from the court case winnings.

best,

Jose


----------



## madbulk (Dec 5, 2008)

Awesome, I love America. Now I have to go listen to Janet Jackson tunes to figure out what we're talking about.


----------



## madbulk (Dec 5, 2008)

That was easy. One of her tunes, "Someone to Call My Lover" has an America hit sampled in it. Couldn't be clearer. I can't believe Jam and Lewis wouldn't have cleared this ahead of time. Are talking about something else??


----------



## José Herring (Dec 5, 2008)

It was something else. Gerry Beckley distinctly told me that it was something that was written not something that was sampled.

You like America eh? I use to work with them a lot. I should give them a call.


----------



## madbulk (Dec 5, 2008)

Maybe they cleared the Ventura Highway sample as part of the payback. Seems like a helluva coincidence.


----------



## Synesthesia (Dec 5, 2008)

I agree with Jose.

This is a clear one. I was expecting some kind of bluesy generic 251 from some of the comments so far - but having listened, its a developed melody! A clear (even if unintentional) rip.

Theres no question Satch would win this case.

Certainly here in the UK the first test is the 'man in the street' test, beyond which, you get into very complex territory. At the farthest end, you have cases where its not that close, but even if the plaintiff can show 'intent to copy' you are f**ked.

Its a hairy business!

I actually set up my company in order to give me some protection in case I accidentally plaigarised something, but now in the UK there is no real protection for company directors like there used to be.

At least Satch has only asked for profits. I think its a bit unfair to imply he is money grabbing. If he was after 10 million dollars then you'd have a point!

Its his tune, and Coldplay have copied it for a giant hit record. Its not like he's some two bit unheard of geezer in a pub band (not that that would change my opinion) - he's sold millions of records. Most guitarists would know who he was.

Cheers!

Paul


----------



## Stephen Baysted (Dec 5, 2008)

Synesthesia @ Fri Dec 05 said:


> I agree with Jose.
> 
> This is a clear one. I was expecting some kind of bluesy generic 251 from some of the comments so far - but having listened, its a developed melody! A clear (even if unintentional) rip.
> 
> ...



I'd have to agree with you 100% Paul. Seems clear cut to me. And you know exactly what it's like when we're asked to do soundalikes for ads ... very tricky business indeed.


----------



## madbulk (Dec 5, 2008)

You guys are all nuts.


----------



## Stephen Baysted (Dec 5, 2008)

madbulk @ Fri Dec 05 said:


> You guys are all nuts.



You've only just realised? :mrgreen:


----------



## lux (Dec 5, 2008)

here comes the truth


----------



## tobyond (Dec 5, 2008)

Can you even sue for copyright these days? Pretty much everything I hear on the radio these days sounds like something else. This is close, but geez, simple progression, simple melody, dime a dozen.


----------



## CFDG (Dec 5, 2008)

© system will go funny only after this polymelodyne thing will be out.


----------



## Justus (Dec 5, 2008)

madbulk @ Fri Dec 05 said:


> That was easy. One of her tunes, "Someone to Call My Lover" has an America hit sampled in it. Couldn't be clearer. I can't believe Jam and Lewis wouldn't have cleared this ahead of time. Are talking about something else??




But that isn't all. Erik Satie's Gymnopedie is in the Chorus as well (which is legal in this case).


----------



## José Herring (Dec 5, 2008)

madbulk @ Fri Dec 05 said:


> Maybe they cleared the Ventura Highway sample as part of the payback. Seems like a helluva coincidence.



Found this:


_* Janet Jackson's 2001 hit "Someone To Call My Lover" was focused around the guitar riff from "Ventura Highway". The riff itself was re-recorded for the sample to reduce royalty fees. One of her earlier hits, "Let's Wait A While", was supposedly inspired by "Daisy Jane" and has often been compared to it._

Somehow Daisy Jane sounds like it might be it.


----------



## JT3_Jon (Dec 5, 2008)

Brian Ralston @ Fri Dec 05 said:


> JT3_Jon @ Fri Dec 05 said:
> 
> 
> > This sounds like a good thing to do. How many people here form some sort of LLC to avoid getting all their assets taken if you indeed found inspiration that turned out to already have been materialized?  I'm just starting my career and dont have the funds to do so, but I wonder if its worth doing?
> ...



This sounds very interesting! I dont yet make $800 a year writing my own music, so its a little out of the question right now, but I'd love to learn more about this type of thing as I hopefully will need this sooner rather than later. How did you learn about this? Are there any good "music business" resources out there? I took a music business course in college so I understand how most things work in theory, but real world application advice/resources would be very helpful.

Thanks for another great informational post Brian! You have inspired me yet again!


----------



## cc64 (Dec 5, 2008)

Brian Ralston @ Fri Dec 05 said:


> It creates a separate legal entity between you and your work and you just hire and pay yourself as an employee.



Hi Brian,

true but if you get sued for copyright infringement how does it work? I don't think the writer's share may be assigned to your LLC, the publishing yes... 

So maybe if you get sued, you file for personal bankrupcy but still have money in your LLC to pay your salary as long as your company isn't the publisher?

Ouch my brain hurts from legalitis.

Best,

CC64


----------



## rgames (Dec 5, 2008)

There are definitely a couple things to remember when starting an LLC - I looked into it a while back when I was putting together a studio orchestra.

First, remember that it's a "limited" liability company, not a "zero" liability company. So if you run in to legal troubles, your personal assets might still get snagged, though the legal structure should provide some protection. This was a concern for me because I wanted indemnity from contracts signed w/ musicians in case the production backed out and I was stuck with an orchestra showing me their signed contracts...

Second, if the LLC generates net income, you pay taxes on it even if it sits in the company's bank account. So if you're growing the business by throwing the NI back into the company or holding it for cash reserves, you (as in YOU, personally) have to pay the taxes out of other sources of income. Or distribute some portion of the NI to cover the members' share of taxes.

Third, the LLC members are taxed at their individual rates - the LLC's net income is treated as taxable income to them in the amount commensurate with their ownership in the LLC. *So here's the trick*: find a REALLY good friend or family member with a REALLY low income and make him/her the majority owner in the LLC. Then you'll pay taxes at that person's personal tax rate. (Which, under Obama, should be next to nothing for low earners, right?). My wife's a teacher and I was going to set it up under her for this reason.

Fourth, LLC fees and requirements vary widely by state. Arizona is really cheap - it's less than $200 to get set up here. Brian - you should set up house back here in Tucson! I think Delaware is really cheap, too, maybe just for corporations...

Finally, I'm a neophyte in these matters, so it's entirely possible that my comments are not worth the pixels they're written on  But I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night...


edit: re: writer's vs. publisher's share. That's a good question - my guess is that you could assign the writer's share to the LLC and treat your involvement as a work for hire to the LLC. That would put all income generation in the LLC; all the legal liabilities should follow the income, I would think...

rgames


----------



## poseur (Dec 5, 2008)

cc64 @ Fri Dec 05 said:


> true but if you get sued for copyright infringement how does it work? I don't think the writer's share may be assigned to your LLC, the publishing yes...


yes.
authors are individuals, in any case.
of course, as regards copyright law.....
..... anything can be argued, given the time & money to do so.
d


----------



## Thonex (Dec 6, 2008)

cc64 @ Fri Dec 05 said:


> true but if you get sued for copyright infringement how does it work? I don't think the writer's share may be assigned to your LLC, the publishing yes...



My "writer's share" BMI checks are assigned to my corporation... and I (the employee) only get a salary+bonus.

Who knows... but there is such a thing as "piercing the corporate veil" which can basically mean that anyone (depending on circumstances) can be financially exposed no matter what kind of corporation they have.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piercing_t ... orate_veil


----------



## Brian Ralston (Dec 6, 2008)

I am tired after a night of writing and I am not saying really what I set out to say. So I will just copy and paste a bit about S-Corp.


> S Corp vs C Corp
> 
> Wages greatly in excess of reasonable salaries may be challenged by the IRS, who may view the wages as dividends in disguise. Salary is subject to about a 15% self employment, but you do get more future Social Security benefit by paying more in employment tax. And, many retirement plan maximums are also based upon salary level. This somewhat offsets the negative of paying higher employment taxes. Many individuals choose S corp over LLCs, C corps, Sole-Proprietorship, and partnerships to minimize employment taxes on wages. For many individuals. If you plan to remove large amounts of cash from a profitable company and you feel the amounts are larger than a reasonable wage, consider the S Corp.


----------



## synthetic (Dec 6, 2008)

Janet Jackson didn't have clearance for that Ventura Highway lick? Ahh hahah ahah haha! 

Even considering that pop melodies are all fairly simple, the Coldplay tune sounds pretty close to Satch. They sounded cool layered on top of each other. Plus Coldplay wrote that song around the Kraftwerk song, though they credited those guys. Someone needs some composition lessons so they don't keep getting sued, you're supposed to change at least a few intervals dude.


----------

