You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
- Mikkamakka
- Rep: 217
Re: GNR Sued For Copying Songs
The real sad bit about this is that it's so insignificant to the song.
Like now i have to read headlines like "GNR STEALS SONG" and that's kind of overstating how the sample is being used here.
If that even shits me off as a long term fan of the band, imagine how it must feel to Axl and co who will feel a slight to their professional reputation as artists and creators.
I know that Axl is frustrated and angry for sure, cause he was always the one who nixed any idea if he felt it was 'similar' to some other song (yet Immigrant Song sound-alike Rhiad made its way to the album). But professionals just don't copy and paste a 20 second intro to a song, right before the release, just becase the 56th engineer said it was from a legit source.
Re: GNR Sued For Copying Songs
If this happened, the absurdity is just beyond this universe.
The man had over 10 years, solid, to do this album, if not more, and this shit might've happened at the 11th hour.
The dictionary should just put a picture of the album cover under the word "Clusterfuck".
Re: GNR Sued For Copying Songs
Why on EARTH did Pitman/Reed/Costamza (whatever his name is) do this? The sound serves NO purpose but yet they simply copied and pasted it from some German techno guy?? They risked being sued...for what??
Just saw..."member of the production team".
He found the sound, didn't check it, and put it on the album. Clever.
Re: GNR Sued For Copying Songs
faldor wrote:Well, Rolling Stone spelled it out pretty well. From the official reports I've read so far, they've been more than fair. So if people are JUST reading the headline, yes they'll get the wrong impression. But if they actually read the article they'll see that's it's not Satriani/Coldplay revisited.
The people on these forums are freaking out and being nastier than the media who has picked up on the story.
I forgot,RS are the only magazine in the world.:rolleyes:
I didn't say that, just used them as an example. ALL articles that I've read about this situation have been fair and balanced and have all mentioned that "ambient sounds" were sampled for 45 seconds. That doesn't scream "Axl can't write his own music and it takes him 15 years to steal other peoples music" to me. Yet some people ON THESE BOARDS are taking that stance.
Someone clarify GNR's "vigorous denial" to me. Are they pretty much saying they did use the samples but they went through the appropriate channels to obtain and use them?
Re: GNR Sued For Copying Songs
50 percent of people don't bother to read the rest.
now they will be like "Axl can't even write a song without Slash and Co without stealing from someone else.
we know its complete bullshit, but most people won't search for the facts.
and you could take that one step further and say people are hearing the band's name and thinking that they are relevant. forgetting about the actual headline within minutes.
Re: GNR Sued For Copying Songs
and you could take that one step further and say people are hearing the band's name and thinking that they are relevant. forgetting about the actual headline within minutes.
With some reservations, I actually agree.
"didn't clear a sample" is a different level of credibility to "copied songs" - most chart music these days uses samples and stuff, it's something people are really familiar with now (not like say the early 90s etc).
If it was that piece by that guy, they didn't "copy" it anyway, as in try to pass off his creative insoiration as their own, they just used it. Small diff but quite important when it comes to most people hearing the story, and imagining as has been said Axl etc unable to write their own stuff.
Re: GNR Sued For Copying Songs
well, what -d- was saying is that people have short attention spans these days and won't take the time to actually read the article to see that gnr didn't steal a song or music, but a small tiny sample, and then carry on through their day assuming that they did.
what i'm saying is take his idea one step further - people won't take time to read the article AND won't remember or pay much mind to the headline cause, unless they are already gnr fans, don't really care about this and then carry on through their day with the notion that gnr is relevant and worthy of being sued for 1 million dollars over one song.
in other words, the fact that gnr isn't very relevant these days means they have nothing to lose from a little free press.
Re: GNR Sued For Copying Songs
From wost of what I've read most of the media has been having a good laugh at GNR, I'm not making it up cause I'm on a forum and want to be negitive, all I have to do is type guns n roses into google news and have a look.
Anyway...
The math on Guns N' Roses' long-awaited Chinese Democracy is not promising: no tour, no videos, no interviews and now, one lawsuit.
Five days after news broke that two independent record labels filed suit against Axl Rose's band and the Universal Music Group on Friday over claims that a Democracy track illegally sampled two songs from the German electronic artist Ulrich Schnauss, the Guns camp came out blazing with a denial.
"The band vigorously contests these claims and intends to respond accordingly," manager Irving Azoff said in a statement released on Tuesday. "The band believed when the record came out and still believes that there are no unauthorized samples on the track."
According to Azoff, the snippets of ambient noise that open the song "Riad N' the Bedouins" — which the $1 million lawsuit claims are taken without permission from Schnauss' compositions "Wherever You Are" and "A Strangely Isolated Place" — were "provided by a member of the album's production team who has assured us that these few seconds of sound were obtained legitimately."
The Schnauss songs came out in 2001 and 2003, respectively,while the Guns album was in the works for more than 17 years beginning in the mid-1990s. Unless the case goes to trial, it might remain unclear which song, or songs, came first.
After years of delays and endless tweaking, Democracy was released in November and has sold just under 600,000 copies to date in the U.S. In the statement, Azoff appeared to be shifting the blame, if there is any, to the unknown member of the production team, adding, "Artists these days can't read the minds of those they collaborate with and therefore are unfortunately vulnerable to claims like this one. While the band resents the implication that they would ever use another artist's work improperly and are assessing possible counterclaims, they are confident this situation will be satisfactorily resolved."
Azoff promised that the band's legal and production team would formally respond to the complaint soon.
http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/162329 … oses.jhtml
600,000 US sales....
