|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 26, 2015 10:13:22 GMT -6
Remember when you thought that Sam Smith's "Stay With Me" sounded an awful lot like Tom Petty's "I Won't Back Down"? Well, you're not alone. According to The Sun, a court ruled this past October that the two songs are so much alike that Smith will start paying Petty (and fellow songwriter Jeff Lynne) royalties on the track — specifically, a 12.5 percent credit. Now every time you support Sam Smith, you're also supporting Tom Petty, and that's pretty cool. Hear the two songs below.
|
|
|
|
Post by yotonic on Jan 26, 2015 17:59:26 GMT -6
I refuse to use Spotify
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 26, 2015 19:10:17 GMT -6
Oh - I didn't even notice that linked to spotify links...fuck that...here's You tube...yeah, that's much better {eyeroll emoji]
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 26, 2015 19:11:37 GMT -6
While I DO think they sound alike...man, I don't know...I've heard worse. I think it's the fact that the phrasing is the same throughout the entire chorus. I guess it's all about the top line melody. Hell, as a songwriter, I've been rooked harder than that.
|
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Jan 26, 2015 20:12:46 GMT -6
While I DO think they sound alike...man, I don't know...I've heard worse. I think it's the fact that the phrasing is the same throughout the entire chorus. I guess it's all about the top line melody. Hell, as a songwriter, I've been rooked harder than that. I agree. Sure, they're alike, but I didn't think it was close enough to sue. How about this tune? Can Petty sue this guy too? |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 26, 2015 20:22:03 GMT -6
I just heard a snippet... (watching tv and wife yelled at me) - does it sound like a Petty tune?
|
|
|
|
Post by yotonic on Jan 26, 2015 20:24:23 GMT -6
Yes Petty can sue this guy for being a total douche bag
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Jan 26, 2015 22:11:05 GMT -6
this IS the generation of "i me mine", the phrasing and form are only different in one or two spots, it's a blatant rip imv. gettem TP!
|
|
|
|
Post by ben on Jan 27, 2015 1:25:18 GMT -6
They talked about these songs (My Sweet Lord and He's So Fine) in my copyrights class in law school. The musicians in the class were a bit concerned that the courts were caught up in a comparison of basic chord progressions, rather than the work as a whole. The two songs have totally different feels and meanings. After all, how many songs are based on the blues scale, yet nobody really "owns" the blues scale.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Jan 27, 2015 2:48:19 GMT -6
They talked about these songs (My Sweet Lord and He's So Fine) in my copyrights class in law school. The musicians in the class were a bit concerned that the courts were caught up in a comparison of basic chord progressions, rather than the work as a whole. The two songs have totally different feels and meanings. After all, how many songs are based on the blues scale, yet nobody really "owns" the blues scale. i'm not hearing anything even close to the same thing, the melodic phasing and mostly the form on the other tunes are virtually identical, and the latter summons the original TP song immediately, these 2 songs you put up do nothing to remind me of one another, it sounds annoying like two different songs playing at the same time to me lol |
|
|
|
Post by ben on Jan 27, 2015 3:00:03 GMT -6
They talked about these songs (My Sweet Lord and He's So Fine) in my copyrights class in law school. The musicians in the class were a bit concerned that the courts were caught up in a comparison of basic chord progressions, rather than the work as a whole. The two songs have totally different feels and meanings. After all, how many songs are based on the blues scale, yet nobody really "owns" the blues scale. i'm not hearing anything even close to the same thing, the melodic phasing and mostly the form on the other tunes are virtually identical, and the latter summons the original TP song immediately, these 2 songs you put up do nothing to remind me of one another, it sounds annoying like two different songs playing at the same time to me lol Well, the Chiffons won the lawsuit. lol. |
|
|
|
Post by sopwith on Jan 27, 2015 4:06:29 GMT -6
Good, Won't Back Down was a big hit and I'm sure any number of parties involved in the writing and production of the Sam Smith tune noticed the similarity before it was released. Although Id like to give the songwriters the benefit of the doubt, if nothing else it's unintentional infringement like the Coldplay/Satriani case. They probably thought, 'eh, if we get served, we'll deal with it then'
The real crime here is that Sam Smith's team is only giving him songs with a single line repeated as nauseam ('stay with me', 'I'm not the only one', etc). Soul music is supposed to have great verses!
|
|
|
|
Post by yotonic on Jan 27, 2015 9:10:48 GMT -6
Sam's production team wasn't trying to bite Petty, trust me he was the last artist they were channeling. These guys were writing a gospel, blue eyed soul track specifically for the UK market and looking at what Adele did etc. They were trying to copy tracks of recent commercial success in the UK. And low and behold this thing hit them. You know in today's marketplace they have no money set aside to litigate with Petty's publisher EMI. I'm sure they said "shit" we have to pay this we have no other options.
Not to mention Sam's publishing company Sony ATV recently acquired Petty's EMI.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Jan 27, 2015 10:25:30 GMT -6
i'm not hearing anything even close to the same thing, the melodic phasing and mostly the form on the other tunes are virtually identical, and the latter summons the original TP song immediately, these 2 songs you put up do nothing to remind me of one another, it sounds annoying like two different songs playing at the same time to me lol Well, the Chiffons won the lawsuit. lol. Then Harrison's lawyers must be a laughing stock, the phrasing is nothing at all the same, neither is anything else. My guess is it's worked it's way out since the early 70's? Maybe not, the Petty thing is blatant IMO. Nobody cares anymore anyway, no one makes money from music smh... |
|
|
|
Post by yotonic on Jan 27, 2015 10:41:54 GMT -6
Well, the Chiffons won the lawsuit. lol. Nobody cares anymore anyway, no one makes money from music smh... LOL Truth |
|
|
|
Post by formatcyes on Jan 27, 2015 15:52:10 GMT -6
It's not the same song this is a nonsense suit. There would be million's of song's you could do this to in various section's. Lastly no one buying the Sam song would say now I own this song I won't buy the Tom song. For F#&% k sake this is rubbish. Atho if its on spotify it would be funny sending Tom Petty a cheque for $16.95. Cover your legal fee's with that Idiot.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 27, 2015 16:37:14 GMT -6
But they DO make money from court settlements.
|
|
|
|
Post by formatcyes on Jan 27, 2015 16:58:09 GMT -6
"one for the money" " won't back down" If you mess with the timing and tuning it would go close does that mean Sam was accually copying Elvis thu a portion of his chorus???
12.5 percent credit won't be much from spotify.. NO?
|
|
|
|
Post by ben on Jan 27, 2015 18:41:34 GMT -6
But they DO make money from court settlements. Its obvious that they judges are not musicians. That's why I should become a judge  |
|
|
|
Post by levon on Jan 28, 2015 1:59:20 GMT -6
But they DO make money from court settlements. Hey, that might be the new business model |
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Jan 28, 2015 13:34:31 GMT -6
Hey, can God sue Petty for "stealing" traditional gospel melodies in a 1989 pop hit? I don't think that's a suit you want to contest.
It gets ugly as the food runs low on the desert island, doesn't it? Artists suing artists with COMPLETELY different markets....knowing there was no intent to steal....wow.
|
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jan 28, 2015 17:59:28 GMT -6
But they DO make money from court settlements. Its obvious that they judges are not musicians. That's why I should become a judge The judges rely on musicologists for these decisions, and they have a grid they run everything thru and are EXTREMELY good at what they do. Can't comment because I'm not aware of the details, but I can tell you that after making music for 40+ years, I wouldn't want to go head to head with any decent musicologist on determining copyright.... |
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jan 28, 2015 18:00:26 GMT -6
.
|
|
|
|
Post by yotonic on Jan 28, 2015 20:48:43 GMT -6
They rely on musicologists? They didn't have that major when I went to music school. Is this another byproduct of our court systems, like criminologists and astrologists. Or just our universities creating more majors to have someplace to graduate all these students to they churn through at criminal tuition rates  |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 28, 2015 21:03:03 GMT -6
The thing that I noticed was when it was time/pitch matched, the top-line melody was basically identical - as well as the phrasing. But don't they have to prove access and other factors? joelhamilton, you're a lawyer, lawyer us... |
|
