You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
- jimmythegent
- Rep: 30
Re: GNR Sued For Copying Songs
Mikkamakka wrote:I think they (or Pitman) didn't necesserly 'stole' it. Some unknown, but good enough synth parts appear in various 'loops and samples' databases. I hope I worded it right.
The bigger problem is that they felt (probably in the last minute) that they needed some intro and didn't create one, but used a 'ready' loop.That was my thought months ago when this first emerged, but this guy is a bit of an electronic whizz, could be he created them from scratch because his versions are part of a much larger melody.
let's not forget that Axl allegedly micro-managed every aspect of CD.
So you'd think he would have been on top of this one?
Re: GNR Sued For Copying Songs
Well we know from the state of that booklet they published, not everything was examined with a fine toothcomb. As a matter of fact, quite a lot regarding the release was overlooked, shame really 
There still is the possibily it is software samples cleared for use by anyone, I hope it is and this guy gets laughed out of court. Could well just be a ruse to generate publicity to his music on a global scale.
- Mikkamakka
- Rep: 217
Re: GNR Sued For Copying Songs
Mikkamakka wrote:I think they (or Pitman) didn't necesserly 'stole' it. Some unknown, but good enough synth parts appear in various 'loops and samples' databases. I hope I worded it right.
The bigger problem is that they felt (probably in the last minute) that they needed some intro and didn't create one, but used a 'ready' loop.That was my thought months ago when this first emerged, but this guy Ulrich is a bit of an electronic whizz, could be he created them from scratch because his versions are part of a much larger melody.
Yeah, I meant that probably Ulrich created it, but since he's not that known, part of his song got used as a loop in a database people can buy. It's possible that the people who created the database simply stole his music and he didn't know about it - but Pitman bought it, used it and possibly secured right for using that sample. But Ulruch only knows about the song, or GN'R is easier to milk than a small pirate company. Or Ulrich sold it as a loop, but GN'R forgot to do the legal work and Ulrich sees it as a good opportunity to get money. Or Pitman really simply stole it. Or something else. 
Re: GNR Sued For Copying Songs
Ahhh, thats possible as well. I've used sampling software before and its stated quite clear that all the samples have been cleared and are legal for you to make your own music out of, it would be suprising that a slightly illegal one found its way into GNRs illustrious studios. If it has, all they have to do is produce the source they sampled it from.
Buts its even more suprising if this was directly lifted from Ulrichs song and GNR thought noone would ever notice, its quite a puzzler.
I hope GNR make a public responce, but I'm not holding my breath.
Re: GNR Sued For Copying Songs
http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2009/ … ngeme.html
Welcome to the jungle - of the courtroom.
Rock band Guns N' Roses is in legal hot water after being accused of stealing material from a German electronic music producer.
A copyright infringement lawsuit filed in Manhattan Federal Court claims the song "Riad N' the Bedouins," from the group's latest album, "Chinese Democracy," used two of Ulrich Schnauss' recordings.
The suit names Geffen Records, group frontman Axl Rose and nine others who collaborated on the much-anticipated, long-delayed album that was released November 2008, 15 years after the band's last studio production.
Domino Recording Co. claims in the suit it advised Geffen on Feb. 26 that the Guns N' Roses song steals from Schnauss' tracks "Wherever You Are" and "A Strangely Isolated Place."
The opening portion of the song contains samples of both recordings, said Brian Caplan, a lawyer for Domino.
In responding to the February letter, Geffen "attempted to explain it away," Caplan said. "They tried to justify it."
Litigation was a last resort, he added. In the requested jury trial, a music expert would have to show that the samples were "electronically copied verbatim without authorization," Caplan said.
Calls to Geffen were not returned.
The suit asks for a halt to all sales and distribution of the platinium-selling "Chinese Democracy," which sold over 3.2 million copies worldwide.
It also demands at least $1 million in compensation.
The suit is the latest chapter in the troubled history of the album, which took nearly two decades and millions of dollars to complete
Re: GNR Sued For Copying Songs
Before 1991, sampling in certain genres of music was accepted practice and such copyright considerations as these were viewed as largely irrelevant. The strict decision against rapper Biz Markie's appropriation of a Gilbert O'Sullivan song in the case Grand Upright Music, Ltd. v. Warner Bros. Records, Inc. changed practices and opinions overnight. Samples now had to be licensed, as long as they rose "to a level of legally cognizable appropriation." In other words, de minimis sampling was still considered fair and free because, traditionally, "the law does not care about trifles." The recent Sixth Circuit Court decision in the appeal to Bridgeport Music has reversed this standing, eliminating the de minimis defense for samples of recorded music, but stating that the decision did not apply to fair use.
De minimis is a Latin expression meaning about minimal things, normally in the locutions de minimis non curat praetor ("the praetor (government official) does not concern himself with trifles") or de minimis non curat lex ("the law does not concern itself with trifles").
In risk assessment it refers to a level of risk that is too small to be concerned with. Some refer to this as a "virtually safe" level.
Examples of application of the de minimis rule
Courts will occasionally not uphold a copyright on modified public domain material if the changes are deemed to be "de minimis". Similarly, courts have dismissed copyright infringement cases on the grounds that the alleged infringer's use of the copyrighted work (such as sampling) was so insignificant as to be "de minimis". However, this ruling, in Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films, was overturned on appeal and the appeals court explicitly declined to recognize a de minimis standard for sampling.
but hey...axl is on the cutting edge right? sampling classical songs into rock music
Re: GNR Sued For Copying Songs
James Lofton wrote:misterID wrote:It doesn't mean anyone copied anyone else.
Oh please. It was directly lifted from another track.
Are you Vanilla Ice?
Please what? The first part is a simple synth note. If that's ripping someone off someone needs to tip off Yanni about this prick ripping him off. The second is much closer and could be the same thing, but again, that's also a simple effect I've even heard in rides at Disney World. I still don't see the big deal.
If this guy is stealing from Yanni and Disney, then yes they should be filing lawsuits. If other artists have to credit other musicians when they use samples, why should it be any different for GNR?
It isn't a big deal. It'll be settled out of court and probably removed from future pressings. If anything, its comical. People are acting like it wasn't directly lifted from this when we all knew it had been a year ago when someone first spotted it.
If this keeps making the media rounds, this song may crack the Itunes singles chart. Crazier shit has happened on that chart.
Re: GNR Sued For Copying Songs
It isn't a big deal. It'll be settled out of court and probably removed from future pressings.
like one in a million and look at your game girl? 
i agree it'll likely be settled out of court, gnr prolly figured it would never be caught or that this german dude wouldnt care...or it got overlooked with all the other shit that happened during the course of this album
to me it sounds that its the same sample but does it really have any impact on the song itself? not really, is it a major part of this composer dudes tracks? not really this guy is obviously looking for a quick buck and axl just handed it to him...of course axl may feel its de minimis and will take this guy to court to get it thrown out so he has to pay legal fees in the process
