Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The ‘Blurred Lines’ case scared songwriters, but its time may be up

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 124 posts

Re: The ‘Blurred Lines’ case scared songwriters, but its time may be up

#71

Post by emanuensis »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #16
nogabebop23 wrote: post #12

All of these NYT stories bring up a blocking modal dialog requiring me to log in or create an account (I guess this is a slight improvement from making me pay). Is this the same for everyone else? Why do other sites that show a dismissable overlay get raked over the coals as if they are criminals? What value is there in posting a link on HN if it's behind a pay (or temporarily free) wall? This goes double for the WSJ…

There is no rule against pay walled content, and most NYT stories have numerous people complaining about it. The NYT and WSJ posts still get votes because they're large enough that many people are subscribers, and their paywalls are trivial to bypass.

The workarounds for WSJ do not work anymore for me, eg the redirect from FarceBorg will still get the "subscribe" page. Also FT. They appear to have removed workarounds. Are they STILL valid HN submissions ... even when there is NO workaround?

Or maybe there is one and i haven't twigged to it yet:-)>

Re: The ‘Blurred Lines’ case scared songwriters, but its time may be up

#72

Post by acomjean »

slothtrop wrote: post #26
empath75 wrote: post #5

Zeppelin have long been known to be notorious plagiarists: https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/led-zeppelins-...

They outright covered songs in those early albums, but refused to pay royalties. I don't remember what their argument was.

Actually listening to a Robert Johnson album, I was surprised to discover a some Zeppelin rifs were taken from him. Its not the same though (Robert Johnson is a hard listen.). Blues is slightly harder as the chord progression is similar across songs, similar scales. Its seams that sometimes they gave writing credit to the original song writer, sometimes not.

(Songwriters get paid per radio play, which mattered a lot before streaming..)

Wikipedia has a list of Zepplin song "inspired by others": with a list of listed song writing credits.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Led_Zeppelin_songs_wri...

The Beatles covered a lot of songs in the early days. (I think they must have paid royalties). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_songs_covered_by_the_B...

Re: The ‘Blurred Lines’ case scared songwriters, but its time may be up

#73

Post by BurningFrog »

ThomPete wrote: post #45

What really interesting about Blurred Lines is that it was more the feeling of the music than the actual note for note, which was the center of the discussion. If you don't understand music and what it entails you could be convinced that it was the same. Such an interesting case.

Yeah, it was getting close to copyrighting a genre.

Very dangerous stuff.

Re: The ‘Blurred Lines’ case scared songwriters, but its time may be up

#75

Post by UncleMeat »

WalterBright wrote: post #74

A reasonable thing would be to consider "fair use" as any clip less than, say, 10 seconds.

Would it? Could a movie include a 10 second clip from Star Wars without trouble? Even something iconic like the title card?

Re: The ‘Blurred Lines’ case scared songwriters, but its time may be up

#76

Post by wahern »

nicholassmith wrote: post #59
sushisource wrote: post #54

This might be one of the stupidest arguments I've ever heard: “Thin copyright might apply to a doll or a painting because, for example, there are just so many ways to paint a tomato,” Busch said. “Creative choices are limited. It has never applied to music because there are literally an infinite number of creative choices in creating a song.” ... So you're saying there aren't infinite ways to paint a tomato?

That's a terrible argument isn't it? There's a finite number of musical notes, a finite structure to them and a finite number of effects. We're guaranteed to end up with doppelgänger choruses and melodies sooner rather than later.

> We're guaranteed to end up with doppelgänger choruses and melodies sooner rather than later.

Technically that's fine. Copyright only protects originality, not novelty as with patents. Coincidentally creating the same melody as someone else doesn't violate their copyright. If they sued they'd have to prove that it wasn't coincidental with evidence that you heard the original melody, a prerequisite for proving that your melody was derivative.

That's the theory. In practice the first person to publish the melody often wins, especially if their version was popular--e.g. a radio hit, which by itself provides circumstantial evidence that you had heard it.

Re: The ‘Blurred Lines’ case scared songwriters, but its time may be up

#77

Post by rock_hard »

alasdair_ wrote: post #68
rock_hard wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I need to tell you this: in the 2000s we worked off the strategy and tactics outlined in The Manual and had a string of global chart topping successes I can only assume others did the same...do u know the bigger story?

Scooter did that too. And there was "Bring Me Edelweiss" but that was a single hit.

Yep, also Chumbawamba

Re: The ‘Blurred Lines’ case scared songwriters, but its time may be up

#78

Post by oh_sigh »

Balanceinfinity wrote: post #18

Shocked the story didn't mention the Fogerty suit - the strangest copyright -music case of all https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/27501/time-john-fogerty-...

That page put about 1000 entries of itself in my history

Re: The ‘Blurred Lines’ case scared songwriters, but its time may be up

#79

Post by oh_sigh »

taormina wrote: post #38
1123581321 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Papers of record/highly reputable sources should be held to a different standard.

I'll take the bait. It's 2020, is the NYT still considered highly reputable? Or is it just a "loveable brand name" at this point?

I wonder why they had to "rededicate [them]selves to the fundamental mission of Times journalism" after Trump was elected?

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/13/us/elections/to-our-reade...

Re: The ‘Blurred Lines’ case scared songwriters, but its time may be up

#80

Post by fzzzy »

rock_hard wrote: post #36
ilamont wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've told this story before. In the early 1990s I worked for Jimmy Cauty and Bill Drummond's record label, back when they were dominating the UK and European pop charts as The KLF ( https://www.npr.org/sections/therecord/2017/07/20/537708922/... ). One day we received in the mail a cassette tape and a letter from a law firm representing a composer or publisher (I can't remember which) of a famous Broadway soundtrack…

I need to tell you this: in the 2000s we worked off the strategy and tactics outlined in The Manual and had a string of global chart topping successes I can only assume others did the same...do u know the bigger story?

Absolutely, I don't see why it wouldn't have worked.

I doubt it would work today however.

Post reply on HN