tauzero Posted December 10, 2021 Share Posted December 10, 2021 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-59606655 Taylor Swift is going to be sued for copyright infringement because she used the words "haters gonna hate" in a song. Just how bloody stupid is that? It'll have songwriters from many years back trying to work out if they were the first to put "I love you" in a song and seeing how many other songwriters they can sue as a result. And Jon Anderson will be having a field day, as he's used just about every combination of words possible. Oh well, tossers gonna toss. 1 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grahambythesea Posted December 10, 2021 Share Posted December 10, 2021 How can you copyright such expressions, it’s stupid. I appreciate copyright on tunes, but even they can be a bit subjective, there’s only so many notes 🎶 (whoops there’s another infringement! ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skybone Posted December 10, 2021 Share Posted December 10, 2021 Well, player's are going to play aren't they? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve-bbb Posted December 10, 2021 Share Posted December 10, 2021 1 hour ago, tauzero said: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-59606655 Taylor Swift is going to be sued for copyright infringement because she used the words "haters gonna hate" in a song. Just how bloody stupid is that? It'll have songwriters from many years back trying to work out if they were the first to put "I love you" in a song and seeing how many other songwriters they can sue as a result. And Jon Anderson will be having a field day, as he's used just about every combination of words possible. Oh well, tossers gonna toss. maybe she got bored with writing stinky poo songs about crap boyfriends and decided on a completely different grift Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor J Posted December 10, 2021 Share Posted December 10, 2021 Clichès gunna clee? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lozz196 Posted December 10, 2021 Share Posted December 10, 2021 Maybe someone should write a song with “Tailors gonna sew” but sing it “Taylor’s gonna sue” just to get her foaming at the mouth. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tauzero Posted December 11, 2021 Author Share Posted December 11, 2021 I'm not quite sure that everybody replying to this has quite grasped it - Ms Swift is the suee, not the suer (sewer?). 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Downunderwonder Posted December 11, 2021 Share Posted December 11, 2021 It's going to be a jury trial. I'd like to think any jury would love to send some hate down on the lawyers trying to cash in here, but I've been disappointed before with 'groove' 'infringement' decisions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zbd1960 Posted December 11, 2021 Share Posted December 11, 2021 I read a piece on the BBC News web site about this yesterday. The original case was dismissed by a judge saying the words were too generic. This was appealed which is the position it's now in... My view is that that 'copyrighting' words is nonsense. I'm unconvinced about tunes as well... In earlier times, it was common for composers to 'borrow' from other composers. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Downunderwonder Posted December 11, 2021 Share Posted December 11, 2021 It's nothing to do with the musical composition. It's all about a few words being in a common order and ignoring the rest. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tegs07 Posted December 11, 2021 Share Posted December 11, 2021 I watched Echo in the Canyon last night. More innocent times when creative people borrowed from each other’s work to push the boundaries forward. The Beatles nicked bits from The Byrds who borrowed heavily from the folk scene and inspired The Beach Boys who pushed the boundaries that pushed The Beatles forward and so on. No Lawyer involved. Just creativity and mutual respect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SH73 Posted December 11, 2021 Share Posted December 11, 2021 Wonder how many metal bands will sued for using words, death, devil, god, nightmare, war,evil, rage.... Love and hate, wish you were here. Hang on , there are songs too! Ozzy Osbourne- Shot in the Dark John Mayer- Shot in the Dark AC DC- Shot in the Dark Within Temptation- Shot in the Dark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassfinger Posted December 11, 2021 Share Posted December 11, 2021 Lawyers, estate agents, insurers, they're all Golgafrinchans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hellzero Posted December 11, 2021 Share Posted December 11, 2021 (edited) I've just copyrighted this : I'm now going to sue everyone and become very rich. 😈 😈 😈 😈 😈 😈 😈 😈 Edited December 11, 2021 by Hellzero Word 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodinblack Posted December 11, 2021 Share Posted December 11, 2021 Not sure how this could have caused damages to the complainant anyway. I am not sure that Ms Swift actually stopped the other song being successful, and maybe, just maybe, the words are fairly unimportant to the song, which was a more catchy song. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor J Posted December 11, 2021 Share Posted December 11, 2021 The damages are the royalties they did not accrue when they were not credited as songwriters. A similar tactic was used by Marvin Gaye, recently, when he rose from the grave to sue some contemporary bods, whose names I cannot remember, and won, I think. It was possibly the song which has since been identified as part of rape culture, though I could be mixing two stories up. Blurred Lines? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodinblack Posted December 11, 2021 Share Posted December 11, 2021 1 minute ago, Doctor J said: The damages are the royalties they did not accrue when they were not credited as songwriters. A similar tactic was used by Marvin Gaye, recently, when he rose from the grave to sue some contemporary bods, whose names I cannot remember, and won, I think. It was possibly the song which has since been identified as part of rape culture, though I could be mixing two stories up. Blurred Lines? Yes, although that was the music which was pretty similar, not the words. This one has already been to trial with the original judge saying the words were too generic to copy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor J Posted December 11, 2021 Share Posted December 11, 2021 Randy California's ghost wouldn't give up, either, and lost his estate a lot of money chasing a payoff. I suspect these ladies will end up having to dig very deep to pay off their, no doubt, highly-motivational legal team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Dare Posted December 11, 2021 Share Posted December 11, 2021 Sue for ownership of an everyday phrase? Good luck with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nail Soup Posted December 11, 2021 Share Posted December 11, 2021 The worst thing about the whole thing is that “haters gonna hate” is an established phrase in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacDaddy Posted December 11, 2021 Share Posted December 11, 2021 12 hours ago, SH73 said: Wonder how many metal bands will sued for using words, death, devil, god, nightmare, war,evil, rage.... Love and hate, wish you were here. Hang on , there are songs too! Ozzy Osbourne- Shot in the Dark John Mayer- Shot in the Dark AC DC- Shot in the Dark Within Temptation- Shot in the Dark The Power of Love - Frankie Goes to Hollywood The Power of Love - Huey Lewis and the News The Power of Love - Jennifer Rush The Power of Love - Gabrielle Alpin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tauzero Posted December 11, 2021 Author Share Posted December 11, 2021 5 hours ago, Nail Soup said: The worst thing about the whole thing is that “haters gonna hate” is an established phrase in the first place. It appears that the first known use was in the song written by the ones doing the suing. However, after its first use, I'm sure there would have been quite a few uses before Taylor Swift used it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nail Soup Posted December 11, 2021 Share Posted December 11, 2021 8 minutes ago, tauzero said: It appears that the first known use was in the song written by the ones doing the suing. However, after its first use, I'm sure there would have been quite a few uses before Taylor Swift used it. Thanks - I didn't realise that... but it fits with my experience: seems like only the last few years that I heard the phrase - not as many as 14 or whatever years ago Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nail Soup Posted December 11, 2021 Share Posted December 11, 2021 12 hours ago, Hellzero said: I'm now going to sue everyone and become very rich. aha, gotcha: I'd recently copywrited the bass and treble clefs 😈 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamg67 Posted December 11, 2021 Share Posted December 11, 2021 13 hours ago, Bassfinger said: Lawyers, estate agents, insurers, they're all Golgafrinchans. B-arkers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.