|
Post by Helmut83 on May 21, 2021 7:45:17 GMT
I don't agree. I disagree with the opinion that songwriting is pretty much reformulating what you take from others. Just because here and there there's a 2-second long bit with a ressemblance to another? No. They are oversizing the importance of what they took from others and downsizing what they created which even with all these examples I still think is 99% original.
|
|
|
Post by StrangeMagic on May 22, 2021 23:37:54 GMT
I don't agree. I disagree with the opinion that songwriting is pretty much reformulating what you take from others. Just because here and there there's a 2-second long bit with a ressemblance to another? No. They are oversizing the importance of what they took from others and downsizing what they created which even with all these examples I still think is 99% original. What has your experience in songwriting been like?
|
|
|
Post by Helmut83 on May 23, 2021 6:37:25 GMT
What has your experience in songwriting been like? I have shared my songs with many people -many people from this forum included- and they haven't told me "this melody is pretty much the same as...", so I tend to believe a big majority of what I write -if not all- is original (whether you find it good or not is a different matter). Only once Uno found a certain similarity of one of my songs with a REM song, which was based more on the fact that the chords were the same than on the melody itself which was different. A few times my brain came up with melodies that sounded familiar to me and after some time I realized I had taken it from a song I already knew. In such cases of course I discarded the idea immediately, I didn't try to build on from there because I don't like the idea of copying. I haven't spent 1% of the time the Beatles spent writing songs, plus I don't have 1% of their talent, so if I can do it, the Beatles of course could.
|
|
|
Post by Timeblue on May 23, 2021 6:49:20 GMT
How does the law stand if for instance, you write a song Helmut83 and you hear an almost identical version a few months later by a world famous star (Rihanna as an example) who in all probability never heard your song initially, isnt that just coincidence? and does coincidence play a big part in these situations rather than outright copying?
|
|
|
Post by pelo on May 24, 2021 15:24:52 GMT
I don't agree. I disagree with the opinion that songwriting is pretty much reformulating what you take from others. Just because here and there there's a 2-second long bit with a ressemblance to another? No. They are oversizing the importance of what they took from others and downsizing what they created which even with all these examples I still think is 99% original. It can't be denied that eclecticism is the most typical approach of pop music, and the Beatles and ELO were no exception. But as I pointed out, you have to make a distinction between blatant rip-offs and borrowing elements from other songs to synthesize them into sth new - it's NOT reformulating, as you put it! There is no such thing as 100 % originality.
|
|
|
Post by Helmut83 on May 25, 2021 4:51:29 GMT
How does the law stand if for instance, you write a song Helmut83 and you hear an almost identical version a few months later by a world famous star (Rihanna as an example) who in all probability never heard your song initially, isnt that just coincidence? and does coincidence play a big part in these situations rather than outright copying? I couldn't tell for sure at international level. The situation in Argentina is that in the last 10 years or so there's has been consistent jurisprudence saying that intellectual property -particularly music, because the cases have been mostly about music- should be protected as long as you can prove that you wrote the song before the person who is supposed to have plagiarized you. Traditionally, if you hadn't registered/copyrighted the song, you were screwed, you could do nothing as it was not supposed to belong to you. But this jurisprudence has said that it belongs to you since the moment you created it, and the trend nowadays goes in that direction. So if you can prove that you created it before (typically by demo recordings or partitures... you need a computer expert to intervene in the trial and examine your drives to determine whether the file you are showing as proof is authentic), you can win even without having registered the song. There is also an objective criterion of musical similarity that had been set to determine whether a sue for plagiarism was admissible, I think it was a determined amount of equal notes and chords within two bars (I'm going to try to find out and share it). If your lawsuit doesn't comply with this then it is very likely to be rejected without further explanation. As for coincidence, I don't think two almost identical songs are possible by sheer coincidence (except in the world of 12-bar-3-chord blues, where there are thousands of songs that sound all the same -"Before you accuse me", "Sweet home Chicago", etc...- and all seems to be alright); and no, I haven't seen cases of sheer coincidence. When it happens there always seems to be copying going on, though accused people usually do try to shield themselves in coincidence. Whether the copying is conscious or unconscious is another matter, but usually it is what has happened.
|
|
|
Post by fernandoamado on May 27, 2021 0:18:28 GMT
Hi and welcome back, mi amigo del subdesarrollo! Pelo said the Beatles drew heavily from other songs, could you please name which songs by the Beatles draw heavily from which songs by those artists you mentioned? Being similar in style in no way means borrowing; for that to happen, considerable parts of the melodies have to be similar. Hello my old friend! To draw or not to draw. I'd say those songs drew heavily. I'm not saying they are cases of plagiarism. Of course there's not a Beach Boys' melody that is identical note by note with Back in the U.S.S.R.'s second section, but everyone agrees on it being a Beach Boys' style bit. I thought of it before reading about it on Wikipedia, and I'm one huge BB fan. Once again, maybe we have different definitions of "drawing heavily". But then again, if you want an example of melodies that "have to be similar", look no further than All You Need is Love... or Revolution 9, but that one's a world of its own. Come Together was sued by Chuck Berry, right? There are a couple more examples, I'm sure.
|
|
|
Post by lawrev on May 27, 2021 0:59:25 GMT
Now this thread would be a perfect one for Jeff to address in an interview, if he would ever quit talking about the Wilburys, Orbison, Harrison, etc. One can only dream that Jeff would sit down for a comprehensive, no topic is off the table, interview.
|
|
|
Post by Helmut83 on May 27, 2021 5:52:01 GMT
Now this thread would be a perfect one for Jeff to address in an interview, if he would ever quit talking about the Wilburys, Orbison, Harrison, etc. One can only dream that Jeff would sit down for a comprehensive, no topic is off the table, interview. The way all the interviews he has given in the last 10 years went, I'm pretty sure it's no coincidence we hear him talking over and over about the same stuff: his management has to be agreeing beforehand a list of allowed questions with the "interviewer".
|
|
|
Post by Timeblue on May 27, 2021 6:07:48 GMT
... and you can guarantee that any questions about past members will be off the table.
|
|
|
Post by Helmut83 on May 27, 2021 6:21:00 GMT
Absolutely.
|
|
|
Post by ShardEnder on May 27, 2021 20:08:15 GMT
Now this thread would be a perfect one for Jeff to address in an interview, if he would ever quit talking about the Wilburys, Orbison, Harrison, etc. One can only dream that Jeff would sit down for a comprehensive, no topic is off the table, interview. The way all the interviews he has given in the last 10 years went, I'm pretty sure it's no coincidence we hear him talking over and over about the same stuff: his management has to be agreeing beforehand a list of allowed questions with the "interviewer". I was offered the opportunity to shoot a few questions Jeff's way for my upcoming book, but it came with more strings attached than the orchestra you hear on some of his albums! Without going into details (because part of the agreement is that I'm not at liberty to discuss exactly what this involves), there is a "menu" of sorts. First, after sending the initial correspondence to my publisher's legal team, they concluded that I would only be able to proceed if it meant giving up certain rights. I'll try and list the conditions without hopefully getting myself in too much hot water, so to speak... 1. By responding positively that I wish to continue interacting with Jeff's team, I'd be allowing his manager or personal assistant the freedom to both screen my questions and have full control over how the answers I receive are presented, including editorial input that would extend to the rest of my project - a degree of artistic license I was encouraged not to give up. 2. Like all journalists granted either direct or indirect access to their client, I could only ask about a limited range of topics: A. How did you write Mr. Blue Sky? B. How did the Traveling Wilburys form? C. What was it like producing The Beatles? D. What are you currently promoting? (If you see these subjects constantly pop up in any interviews since around 2011, it's not by coincidence. I was expected to operate under the same strict conditions as anyone else.) 3. Jeff and/or any of his representatives can withdraw contact during any stage of communication, which would require me to not only delete any messages previously received, but not disclose the specifics of what had been asked of me. Since I've already decided that it's just not worth compromising my integrity for such an opportunity, I guess my book will have to remain one of those carrying a disclaimer that emphasises in advance that it isn't supported, endorsed or created with the help of Jeff himself, though other band members and insiders have contributed - I've shared the intended scope of my work with them, and if any felt my intentions were anything less than honourable, I'm sure they would have pointed this out to me at some stage over the last six years. Also, I have the backing of a publisher that has checked my work on a regular basis, though I've only been asked to modify or outright remove two relatively small pieces of information they feel could result in potential legal action being taken against me or themselves. For the sake of a few tiny modifications, I'll sleep much more soundly at night knowing this is going out as an almost entirely accurate yet unofficial product rather than one whitewashed into something I no longer feel comfortable associating my name and reputation with. Sorry, Jeff. I still respect you immensely, and should you ever want to talk strictly off the record over a pint or two then I'd be happy to clear an afternoon in my schedule, though I must agree to disagree on a strictly business level. Such unrealistic demands might explain why the last fully licensed book* on ELO was over 40 years ago, providing we don't count Patterns In The Chaos by Dave Morgan or Bev's upcoming second release, now pencilled in for launch next year to coincide with Jeff's own 50th anniversary campaign! *No, I don't consider Wembley Or Bust to be any better - it's a glorified tour programme centred around a single performance then expanded out to coffee table format through photographs, full pages of artwork and an amount of text barely more substantial than what could be found in Jeff's track-by-track commentaries and liner notes from the 2001-7 remasters, including Flashback. I get that he's a man of few words who'd rather let his music do the talking, but this characteristic isn't one we all share. To a certain portion of his fanbase, I'm hoping the end result of all this hard work is something that will find its own gap in a market that wants to dig below the surface without simply hitting dirt, because that is absolutely not my goal with this project. Call it an honest love letter to someone who inspired me to put in so much effort in the first place. P.S. Between massively broadening the scope of my research and having a new editor, could I get this on shelves by 2022? Perhaps it might have even grown to span what is soon to become six decades of history, providing I was to go back and cover the roots that converged into the formation of ELO? Only in time will it be told.
|
|
|
Post by Timeblue on May 27, 2021 20:17:47 GMT
The way all the interviews he has given in the last 10 years went, I'm pretty sure it's no coincidence we hear him talking over and over about the same stuff: his management has to be agreeing beforehand a list of allowed questions with the "interviewer". I was offered the opportunity to shoot a few questions Jeff's way for my upcoming book, but it came with more strings attached than the orchestra you hear on some of his albums! Without going into details (because part of the agreement is that I'm not at liberty to discuss exactly what this involves), there is a "menu" of sorts. First, after sending the initial correspondence to my publisher's legal team, they concluded that I would only be able to proceed if it meant giving up certain rights. I'll try and list the conditions without hopefully getting myself in too much hot water, so to speak... 1. By responding positively that I wish to continue interacting with Jeff's team, I'd be allowing his manager or personal assistant the freedom to both screen my questions and have full control over how the answers I receive are presented, including editorial input that would extend to the rest of my project - a degree of artistic license I was encouraged not to give up. 2. Like all journalists granted either direct or indirect access to their client, I could only ask about a limited range of topics: A. How did you write Mr. Blue Sky? B. How did the Traveling Wilburys form? C. What was it like producing The Beatles? D. What are you currently promoting? (If you see these subjects constantly pop up in any interviews since around 2011, it's not by coincidence. I was expected to operate under the same strict conditions as anyone else.) 3. Jeff and/or any of his representatives can withdraw contact during any stage of communication, which would require me to not only delete any messages previously received, but not disclose the specifics of what had been asked of me. Since I've already decided that it's just not worth compromising my integrity for such an opportunity, I guess my book will have to remain one of those carrying a disclaimer that emphasises in advance that it isn't supported, endorsed or created with the help of Jeff himself, though other band members and insiders have contributed - I've shared the intended scope of my work with them, and if any felt my intentions were anything less than honourable, I'm sure they would have pointed this out to me at some stage over the last six years. Also, I have the backing of a publisher that has checked my work on a regular basis, though I've only been asked to modify or outright remove two relatively small pieces of information they feel could result in potential legal action being taken against me or themselves. For the sake of a few tiny modifications, I'll sleep much more soundly at night knowing this is going out as an almost entirely accurate yet unofficial product rather than one whitewashed into something I no longer feel comfortable associating my name and reputation with. Sorry, Jeff. I still respect you immensely, and should you ever want to talk strictly off the record over a pint or two then I'd be happy to clear an afternoon in my schedule, though I must agree to disagree on a strictly business level. Such unrealistic demands might explain why the last fully licensed book* on ELO was over 40 years ago, providing we don't count Patterns In The Chaos by Dave Morgan or Bev's upcoming second release, now pencilled in for launch next year to coincide with Jeff's own 50th anniversary campaign!
*No, I don't consider Wembley Or Bust to be any better - it's a glorified tour programme centred around a single performance then expanded out to coffee table format through photographs, full pages of artwork and an amount of text barely more substantial than what could be found in Jeff's track-by-track commentaries and liner notes from the 2001-7 remasters, including Flashback. I get that he's a man of few words who'd rather let his music do the talking, but this characteristic isn't one we all share. To a certain portion of his fanbase, I'm hoping the end result of all this hard work is something that will find its own gap in a market that wants to dig below the surface without simply hitting dirt, because that is absolutely not my goal with this project. Call it an honest love letter to someone who inspired me to put in so much effort in the first place. P.S. Between massively broadening the scope of my research and having a new editor, could I get this on shelves by 2022? Perhaps it might have even grown to span what is soon to become six decades of history, providing I was to go back and cover the roots that converged into the formation of ELO? Only in time will it be told. Do you think this is coincidental or put out to annoy Jeff?
|
|
|
Post by Helmut83 on May 27, 2021 22:34:34 GMT
If you see these subjects constantly pop up in any interviews since around 2011, it's not by coincidence. I think anyone with a little bit of sense of smell could guess that it wasn't by coincidence or by the fact that everyone who interviewed him suddenly became a terrible interviewer. I said it in a comment previous to yours and I'm sure many others here had already guessed that by themselves as well. Still, your testimony gives us a 100% certainty that it's like that. Let me show my respects to you and the choice you made of trying to tell the ELO story as closely to the truth as possible instead of negotiating with Jeff's "official truth" just for the sake of having his authenticity seal -which, paradoxically enough, would have made your work far less authentic-.
|
|
|
Post by ShardEnder on May 27, 2021 23:51:49 GMT
Do you think this is coincidental or put out to annoy Jeff? I first suspected something was a bit off when Bev launched that YouTube series with the promise of a new video every month, with each episode including an extract from his upcoming book. From what I've been told behind the scenes, this is something he's been trying to get published for years. Originally, it was going to be about some of his favourite drummers, then it evolved into a more obvious way of tiptoeing around certain limitations (still in place as an outcome of him selling his 50% share in the ELO name to Jeff back in November 1999) that was due to cover stories from his being so heavily involved with the wider Brum Beat scene, this change occurring around the time he also co-hosted that short documentary series with Des Tong. Most recently, he's talked about this now being more of a direct continuation of his 1980 book, though presumably either completely ignoring the subsequent decade or whitewashing a large part of that period even more than we saw him do with certain topics in The ELO Story. Fast forward to the most recent upload, and despite it looking very much like his book was a finished project ready to be previewed, now we have Bev suddenly hinting at a release next year. With the 50th anniversary something the official band's social media team is already promoting, now would surely be the best time to have this published, so either he's stuck like the rest of us having to wait for his work to receive approval - which is extremely unlikely considering his present relationship with Jeff - or there has been a decision made to delay this so it can more directly coincide with whatever the celebration campaign ends up bringing us. By the way, I've also been asked to keep a close eye on certain authors already known to the wider ELO fan community. There's almost definitely going to be something of a race to see who can get the definitive book out in time for what promises to end up being a very special year, and the biggest mystery for now is whether select figures previously more on the journalistic side of things will finally use this opportunity to jump on board with Jeff or deliver what could easily become an honest yet still positive look back on ELO's lengthy history, minor imperfections and all. At least one I can think of has already been credited on a few releases, but would they end up crossing over and trying to make their voice one with Jeff's own, or would this be seen as cutting into potential sales for the hardback edition of Wembley Or Bust too much for him to have two technically competing books on the market around the same period? If there's one winner from all this activity, fans will at least be spoiled for choice, with many different levels of information soon to be readily available. On top of that, I'm very much interested to see what incredible tales fiction writers could deliver for this once-in-a-lifetime milestone. We've seen a very high watermark set, but Jeff gave us a wide canvas over which to let our imaginations flow. Whether it's The Lost Planet, Eldorado, Time, Secret Messages, the somewhat autobiographical Alone In The Universe or even Earthrise, there are so many jumping off points. I knew that Jeff was going to ask for the community that's grown around his music to help, but 2022 is a chance to give something back. A love letter of sorts to someone who has done far more than simply inspire creativity. If he ever gets to somehow read this, I hope Jeff knows that he's established a musical bond that transcends audiences in a stadium or participants on a forum such as this one. I'll avoid the cliché by ending with this: Jeff Lynne may not be regarded in the long run as up there with the classical giants, but he's certainly worth acknowledging as a bandleader on the same level as Glenn Miller or Benny Goodman, only with even more of a contemporary approach to his craft. Where some continue to argue whether ELO was a faceless band, a group of equal musicians or something in-between, I've found peace in thinking of what Jeff does as the last chain in a link that owes a lot to the light orchestras that inspired its name. The leader is destined to become one they'll speak of for generations to come, though it certainly doesn't detract from those standout players who've joined him along the way. Finally, if it seems like I'm suddenly writing a lot more than usual, it's only because I've heard something new to rekindle a fire under me.
|
|