Jump to content

HunterSThompson

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    1,863

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by HunterSThompson

  2. Posted

    I'm confused as to which question I'm answering @@reputation since all I see are quotes above and Terrence Loves Me didn't really ask a question or answer one.... BUT I'll answer the adultery question (that's a good one, reputation!)

     

    No, I don't believe that adultery should be illegal. That's an invasion of privacy by the government that serves no justifiable means. Again, good question!

     

    Do you agree that you don't need religion in order to be a moral person?

    0

  5. Posted

    So I listened to the whole record and I am slightly disappointed but it's still really good! Seeing him live in February!! Thoughts:

     

    Man and We Don't Care are really good alt-rock bops

    Iceberg is super interesting

    Tension deserves to be a full track

    Blue Madonna > God Save Our Young Blood though the latter is still really good

    Supernatural is one of my favorites

    Second Night Of Summer is good but not great. The strings are cool though

     

    Overall, this record feels very 80s inspired. Not obsessed with it like I hoped I would be, but still good nonetheless

     

     anigif_enhanced-1283-1412041806-9.gif

    1

  8. Posted

    My My My! is really good but it feels like a Calvin Harris or Chainsmokers song that he's featured on.... if that makes sense? It just sounds like a song that a group of people wrote in some record label conference room to get good radio play....I guess it's just good pop? Whatever. A bop is a bop  :flutter:

     

    I hope he's a little more experimental with this album. I have pretty high expectations and he rarely disappoints <3 

     

    edit: overall I think I'm just slightly disappointed that this song has no substance. It's just very.... typical pop 

    1

  10. Posted

    Second Night Of Summer, Iceberg, Tension, Supernatural and Blue Madonna sound kind of interesting from the snippets

     

    We Don't Care reminds me of Grease or Hairspray  :toofunny:

     

    Man sounds kind of cute, I guess and Bye-bye Darling sounds like it's going to have the same production elements as Beautiful People Beautiful Problems 

    0

  13. Posted

    Does anyone know which jurisdiction is applying to this case? I know it's a matter of Private International Law and choice but I was just wondering if anyone is aware.

     

    If we are looking at this from a UK perspective, Creep is absolutely eligible for protection. Work doesn't necessarily have to be "original" in the way that we understand it. The test established in both statutory and common law considers skill, labour and judgment. 

     

    So, Radioqueef have a case. Now, within the UK jurisdiction, Courts tend to look at two aspects in order to determine if an infringement has occurred: similarities and how much is actually copied.

     

    1) Looking at similarities is straightforward. If the similarities are significant enough to infer that copying has occurred, they will go onto the next step. Get Free does appear to have some similarities, we all acknowledge this to an extent. What most get confused about is the quantity question.

     

    2) In terms of quantity, the Court will consider if copying has occurred in relation to a whole or substantial part of the original work. In regards to "substantial part"​, quantity isn't as important as quality (this can get confusing). Lana could copy as much as she wants as long as it is not an important part of the "original work". Important is determined by recognisability and etc (think of this as an iconic part of a song, like the riff from Black Sabbath's Iron Man).

     

    I do believe Radiosdjkfshdfk have a strong case. I'm just not sure about the remedy. It will be very difficult for Lana's team to prove Get Free was created independently. But anyway, once again, I have only studied Law from a UK and European perspective. So if anyone has studied Intellectual Property Law in the US feel free to add to this so we can compare tests - I think US Law will most likely apply here.  :glasses:

     

     

     

    Disclaimer: this is a juvenile description, if anyone wants more detail I can go into it but I prefer Human Rights Law so I kinda don't care much for Intellectual Property 

    From what I know, foreign jurisdictions can't force their copyright laws on another foreign territory, but artists do have international copyrights through the Berne convention. Also, Get Free was produced and created in the U.S. so I believe U.S. law controls this case. I'm not entirely sure though, only a practiced attorney or legal scholar would know. Copyright laws are super tricky and always changing

    1

  15. Posted

    Thanks for making this thread! We play Fleetwood Mac all the time at my house. I've only been into them for like 2 years now so I'm still relatively new to them. 

     

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeW0KzCxywI

     

    This (the video above) cover was the first time I really fell in love with Fleetwood Mac... after I heard Florence's AMAZING cover of Silver Springs I checked them out and fell in love. 

    3

  23. Posted

    Okay so as some of you know, I'm studying to be a lawyer and this is what I know:

     

    1. Chord progressions are not protected under the law because they are generally universal products and easy to copy -- it's like if Hershey or Toblerone said that they were the only manufacturers allowed to make chocolate. Radiohead can't sue based on chord progressions. Musical theorists have a saying that "everything is a remix." It's impossible to make a song that has no echo of a past song.
    2. The legal standard for copyright infringement is "substantial similarity" which is a relatively hard test to prove. Radiohead's attorneys need to prove that the songs are substantially similar in order to win, if they are going for copyright infringement, which is a lot harder than just proving that the songs are "similar." "Substantial" is the key word.
    3. Wasn't Radiohead sued by The Hollies for this song? And they lost? If so, this gives them very unsteady legal ground to stand on.

    I'll update as I think of more.

     

    Update: also, intent doesn't matter much in the context of copyright infringement; whether Lana/Nowels etc. intended (meant) to copy Creep is irrelevant. If the court finds that she did, in fact, copy the song then it won't matter if it was a mistake or not.

    34
×
×
  • Create New...