Link
What does Era think? You can easily tell that the beat at the beginning sounds similar, but to call it a copy seems ridiculous.
Jury finds Katy Perry's 'Dark Horse' copied Christian Rap song
- Thread starter Androidsleeps
- Start date
What does Era think? You can easily tell that the beat at the beginning sounds similar, but to call it a copy seems ridiculous.
This is so ridiculous. Although I don't care for Dr. Luke, both him and Max Martin are pretty amazing producers. To think they tried to copy some no name Christian rap song is so fucking funny.
I wonder how hard it would be for someone like me to write an original music beat that hasn't been done before, or at least done before in a similar manner. Seems daunting to someone like me. There's just so much music.
I'll be honest, it's sounds too much the same in parts to be coincidence... they start with the same lyrics for fuck's sake.
I assumed this was going to be about Art of Noise when I saw the headline, but even that would have been a stretch. This is a weird decision.
Is there a video or anything demonstrating how similar they are?
NM there's much more in the article
NM there's much more in the article
Haha, I guess I'm not the only one that heard "Moments in Love" as well.
Wait don't you guys have judges or something? In America, random groups of people can just make legal sentences?
It's the jury system, where you have the privilege of being judged by your fellow
If an American jury sided with Black rappers over Katy Perry and megalabels then the biting must have happened.
Lmao
Dark Horse just slows down the Christian rapper's beat.
Jury of your "peers" setting massive precedent is totally wack when we start touching on the complexities of musical notation
Christ
Christ
I thought Dark Horse sampled Moments in Love. Did that not?
To me this is absurd, unless it's a literal 1:1 copy you should not be able to sue.
Though I also think that sampling should be completely legal (provided you aren't sampling a huge part of the song).
I mean I listen to something like this and even then I don't hear it either:
(this led not only to a loss of money, but supposedly was one of the reasons the sax player committed suicide later on because he thought people would see him as a fraud).
Though I also think that sampling should be completely legal (provided you aren't sampling a huge part of the song).
I mean I listen to something like this and even then I don't hear it either:
(this led not only to a loss of money, but supposedly was one of the reasons the sax player committed suicide later on because he thought people would see him as a fraud).
Musical copywrite stuff like this is such bullshit IMO. Just some lawyer trying to make some money for a client, never has anything to do with how significantly "similar" or not something is, which is honestly kind of a ridiculous concept in music in general IMO. Even if a song contained literally the exact same notes or chords as another in the exact same sequence, it could still sound completely different due to a thousand other artistic choices. But I digress.
the songs are extremely different. I guess the thing is the trap 'beep' that goes in the background for all of the Flame song and the verse parts in the Perry song, and they are similar, but also extremely simple. Basically go to a piano, play one note four times, play the note one step down three times, then play the note two steps down from that once and you got it. Repeat. That's the Flame version. The Perry version is slightly different at the end. If you were trying to make a trap beat it's probably one of the most obvious things you could write lol. And everything else about the songs are completely different. Also not in the same key.
if you took out 'you know what it is' at the start and had Dark Horse start with the chorus instead no one would think they had anything in common
and that flame song is super corny
if you took out 'you know what it is' at the start and had Dark Horse start with the chorus instead no one would think they had anything in common
and that flame song is super corny
That's a stretch if I've seen one. The beeping is similar but it's such a basic that it's absurd to call it a copy. Looking forward to a judge fining all the drum and bass scene because the BPM and beats are the same in most songs.
Was the jury judge somehow introduced to music for the first time? It's a very, very simple beat with a very prominent modern aesthetic applied to it and a lot of the song doesn't sound the same. This is just asinine. And it's not the first ridiculous ruling for music copyright.
Only like 1% of civil cases are decided by a jury. Most have bench judges. California allows you to request a jury under some circumstances.
It's impossible for jury to set precedent. Precedent is a matter of law. Juries are only finders of fact.
Twist: they rounded up the jury at a Taylor Swift fan gathering.
Yeah it does sound similar, but it's also mostly a bassline. If copying a bassline becomes plagiarism then hoo boy is the music industry in trouble. I feel like there should be precedent for this?
Anyway yeah not something you should let determined by a jury.
Yeah it does sound similar, but it's also mostly a bassline. If copying a bassline becomes plagiarism then hoo boy is the music industry in trouble. I feel like there should be precedent for this?
Anyway yeah not something you should let determined by a jury.
This is absurd, the musical equivalent of patent trolling. Jury ridiculousness aside, this sets a bad precedent for these kinds of nonsense suits - even if it doesn't have a legal aftereffect, it'll definitely encourage more artists to sue for similarities.
Everyday people compose more and more songs. As more music is composed, there will be more that sound similar to eachother. Music copyright needs to get its shit together before musicians are more known for their lawyer quality than music quality.
Came to post this. I hadn't even heard of this lawsuit until Rick's video. Out of all the recent lawsuits lately, this one has to be the least founded one.
I'm no music theory expert but I am constantly hearing familiar melodies in songs and scrambling trying to figure out why its familiar. I feel like I am more keen to noticing this kind of thing compared to the average person.
Aren't these lawsuits etc common? Im assuming one benefit of signing with labels is they have their own lawyers and funds to give pay outs for situations like this. Idk if artist themselves are part of the payout and all this was fabricated by the labels to get extra cash
I'm not hearing the similarities but.. I can't be the only person to be kinda shocked at how terribly shite that KP song was.. am I?
Hearing it for the first time and oof
Hearing it for the first time and oof
