Putting up originals on here that are not copyrighted?

Johnny Don't! said:
Are you saying that it sounds like she's just complaining about nothing? If so, you are part of the problem. Also, put yerself in her shoes and think about how you'd feel: first yer song gets blatantly ripped off; then you lose yer court battle because the judge is basically an idiot; and then you get sued for filing a completely legitimate lawsuit in the first place. You think that's sour grapes?? I highly question your ability to comprehend the situation and the precedent this case has established. It's bad for ALL of us who create intellectual property, but especially for songwriters.

I'm willing to bet you've never made a single dime from any of your musical endeavors, which is why you fail to not only comprehend the seriousness of this situation but also explains yer complete lack of empathy for Rebecca F.
Click to expand...

Lol. You need to calm the fuck down.
 
Johnny Don't! said:
Just as a further example of how lucrative songwriting royalties (both mechanical & performance) can be, the original version of "Every Breath You Take" was such a huge hit (and still is...it's played thousands of times every single day on various radio stations worldwide, even 30 years after its initial release) that even the most conservative estimates place Sting's income from just this one tune at about $30 million over the past 31 years. It is estimated that he currently makes around $2000 every single day from "Every Breath" royalties, which is a little over $700k/year. Crazy. Just nutso.
Click to expand...

Just goes to show you.....one really good hit, and you can retire to some sandy beach, sipping umbrella drinks. ;)

Gaga, just like her music, is a fabricated ho'....but what's your personal connection to Rebecca that you're taking her side 100%...?

Seems to me, she should sue her dick boyfriend for fucking her over by taking her PT sessions...which also goes to show you....always take all your studio work when it's done, though with digital audio, it's too easy to make copies.
I mean, that's what everyone does for every session...make a lot of copies just for saftey's sake.
 
Stoner said:
everytime i press record i make a golden hit. thats why i dont post shit. im like a rainbow in the dark. im just waiting to be discovered....a mf'n shooting star.
Click to expand...

If you don't post anything how are you going to be discovered?
 
Stubby03 said:
Yeah, think I will just hold off. Wait till we are done, copyright , then put some mixes on here. I put a mix of one of our songs on here, and have learned a lot from peoples input from it. I will feel better about doing it that way.
Click to expand...
Waiting because it's cheaper to copy write a batch of songs at once? (I don't know if it is or not
You're not copy writing mixes.
 
Oy.

If you're in the United States, your works are protected by copyright as soon as they are "fixed in a tangible medium," which means putting them in some form of digital file. Registration is a pre-requisite for litigation and entitlement to statutory damages, but not to protection.
 
dobro said:
That's an interesting story. I'd like to be able to listen to both songs, but she doesn't have her version on the site? Know where I might hear it?
Click to expand...
It's an interesting story, but she got the law all wrong. I have no idea why she was sued (and, apparently, neither does she), but her descriptions of the legal standards and procedures are completely wrong.
 
Well, the law's a tar baby. I'd just like to compare the two tunes. Two sides to a story, two tunes.
 
Nothing in her blog indicates she actually copyrighted her song, although chances are the more-expensive lawyers win every time.
 
dobro said:
Well, the law's a tar baby. I'd just like to compare the two tunes. Two sides to a story, two tunes.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what you mean about the law. The test for copyright infringement is objective and subjective similarity -- the former involves expert testimony, the latter is, more less, what you're saying.
 
mjbphotos said:
Nothing in her blog indicates she actually copyrighted her song, although chances are the more-expensive lawyers win every time.
Click to expand...
I am usually the less-expensive lawyer and I've never lost a trial.

dobro said:
Which is interesting in the context of a thread that's telling people that officially registering your copyrights isn't all that critical.
Click to expand...
No one has said that. What I said is that your work is protected by copyright as soon as it is fixed in a tangible medium. However, registration confers a number of advantages, not the least is a legal presumption of ownership and validity.
 
PTravel said:
I'm not sure what you mean about the law. The test for copyright infringement is objective and subjective similarity -- the former involves expert testimony, the latter is, more less, what you're saying.
Click to expand...

I meant I didn't want to get bogged down in a discussion about the law. I just want to hear both songs and decide for myself if she was ripped off.
 
Just Google "Juda rebecca f" dobro and you'll find some stuff.... I haven't listened but there seem to be some comparison you tubes there...
 
NME link has a bit of Juda and the whole Judas.... they don't sound much alike, but Lady Gaga has definitely heard Juda, I'd say...

They're both ripping off a chord sequence I invented way back about 3000 BC... :laughings:

I can see why the judge went the way he did.
 
Yeah, it sounds like she's borrowing the name and delivery of same, but aside from that, I don't hear a lot of similarity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top