Karaoke Forums

just my opinion;
It has been ruled in court, that any music(especially the melody) isn't original, and that using the limited number of musical tones, the great masters arrainged them in every possible combination and order. But, when words are added to the music, a unique song is possible. In order to receive a judgement, the plaintiff must show, he/she had monetary or character damage, and in most cases the songs had to be in the same gendre. It also is a matter of how similair the judge or jury determines the songs are.
Now many karaoke manus decided they didn't need permission from the artists(or couldn't get it), so they used the "change a few lyrics trick", "change the key method"...etc.....
Now throw in the fact, that a person can usually find a lawyer to take their case, whether the complaint has merit or not, and most cases are settled without going to court....wallaaaahh......you see why we are in Legal Karaoke Limbo.........
ps.....almost forgot, manus going out of business, and not knowing who legally owns previously made karaoke tracks.
....just trying to make conversations, and sorry for any bad spelling(my poorest subject, and I didn't do well in any the others either... ).....you people are awesome, have a great day.......jr

If you're going to make such statements, perhaps you should back them up with reference to the relevant court decision.

This court decision would appear to contradict your statements. A flute riff contains no words/lyrics...

Australian Federal Court Judge Peter Jacobson concluded that Men at Work copied the flute riff in "Down Under" from teacher Marion Sinclair's song, "Kookaburra Sits in the Old
Gum Tree."
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/jud ... id=9753045

I wasn't going to reply to this, but there is very little in the original post that reflects the actual state of the law, or indeed how copyright works in general, although it does repeat a number of common misconceptions.

I started out, this was My opinion(formed over the years), since you so kindly left that out of my quote.
Various news reports over the years, one being Michael Jackson vs Wierd Al ....I've heard this kind of a finding, a few times over the years, but once again.....my opinion, my opinion, my opinion.......
I believe some things I mentioned in my post are true.....I believe, I believe, I believe.......

Unfortunately belief doesn't always mean true. In the case of Michael and Al it was a matter of the rules regarding parody.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

It's also just an opinion.....not presented as true at all....my right to believe, and say I believe so.....
An Aussie judge?..... ......judgements contradict other judgements all the time, every case starts out unique/ends up with a unique judgement(there are no rules, just interpretations.....lets see what the damages amount to.....that's what counts.
Take for instance, the US Supreme Court, suppose to be the sharpest US law minds in the country. How could they possibly rule 5 to 4 almost all the time.....sharpest legal minds in the country, but see rulings, and laws in complete contrast of one another........should be 9 zip every time.....could be because......there're lawyers........was it Aristotle, or Socrates(soh crates...... ) that said........?

Is Murray your paralegal, and you had to wait for him?....... ......you say "very little", so there's actually a teeny weeny bit of my opinion that's true?
By the way Murray....Greg, Jeff, Anthony, and Sam, want to know if Men at Work had added their own words to that flute part, would they still have lost?......

_________________
"Just Say NO, To Justin Bieber & His Beatle Haircut"

Your belief in your aforementioned opinions should provide the answer to your question without further speculation on my part.

However, the following quote gleaned from the text of the article at the URL provided by 'Wall Of Sound' in the above posting, should help you to come to your own conclusion...

"the judge found that while there may have been modest alterations to accommodate different words with a different number of syllables, the essential musical piece was not changed significantly."

I can assure you I have no affiliations/association with HarringtonLaw beyond the communications appearing within the confines of this website.

[I can assure you I have no affiliations/association with HarringtonLaw beyond the communications appearing within the confines of this website.[/quote]

I was kidding.....this site used to be fun, now most people just want serious b.s........and it's(the site) is dying. Hardly anyone goes in the lounge(I know you do Murray), but it seems too cordial for some on here. Like I said, I began with "just my opinion" wanting to stir up some conversation, but It was pretty much a dud.
I'm familiar with the MSL case, though not as informed as the article Wall submitted. I do know, that there is a 'finite" number of arrangements of notes on a staff, but by adding length of note(whole, half, quarter..etc), tempo, and various melody changing staff symbols, a unique melody is possible. But the order of notes placed on a staff is never unique, not my opinion, just math, so a great deal of everyone's creation is lifted from the masters....."I'd say" the core of the composition is lifted.
The msl vs hsf case shows judges can come up with unjust judgements, and that it can cost more to go after somebody, than the compensation you receive if you win. One thing for sure, Lawyers will always make money on it ......this could explain why so many songs sound alike, but artists rarely pursue such legal action.
I wonder what pecentage of people polled would say hsf and msl were so similiar, that 3/4 of the monetary success of msl was attributed to hsf.... ...me suspects some payola somewhere.......

I feel your pain johnny. However, "Karaoke Legalities, Piracy and more..." should not be taken lightly. Karaoke piracy is a very serious problem.

_________________
"Just Say NO, To Justin Bieber & His Beatle Haircut"

I went to youtube and listened to both songs.......my sweet lord and he's so fine........I guess you'd say they were very similar, if you didn't know your butt from a hole in the ground.....jr might be off the money, but saying sweet lord was copied from the he's so fine is really reaching.....
Looks like money, lawers and judges really got the world messed up.
Does that make George Harrison a Pirate?
just my 2 cents

Well it was close enough for George Harrison to lose one of the first music plagerism suits.
Here is a better perspective of the song with a mash up of both together.

_________________
LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!

Even Riker, Picard, & Data are in time with the mashup Lonnie!

_________________
"Just Say NO, To Justin Bieber & His Beatle Haircut"

From the 50's and 60's there are hundreds of songs that sound that close........

http://cip.law.ucla.edu/cases/Pages/default.aspx

informative......

It would have been nicer if they had listed the winner.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

Hey, how about the Barney(purple dinosuar) theme song, and "This Old Man"?...... that old man should be pizzed....

Each case had a link to the results, at least the ones that I clicked on said whether it was won, dismissed or defaulted.

_________________
LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!

Thanks Lonnie, that's what I get when multitasking and being tired.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger