Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Dua Lipa "Levitating" infringement lawsuit
- Thread starter friskinator
- Start date
And that is exactly how the Blurred Lines case was decided. A jury of non musicians. Someone asked Stevie Wonder was it the same song and he said no. Extremely credible.
I totally disagree with Blake and I'm disappointed. His ear is much better than this. Malicious me thinks that maybe he's in talks about producing Dua Lipa...
Dude. She's a vocalist. She knows her lane and seems to stay in it. She hires teams to write and give her the canvas to apply her craft to.
Not every amazing singer is a song writer.
I really think someone in her team is to blame and hopefully they own up and don't screw her over more than they already have.
I know way more amazing singers that have never written a single song than those that have. There are also amazing song writers that can't sing. Singing and song writing are two very different skills.
I know, all I'm saying is Blake's tweets made no sense to me unless he's trying to defend her for other reasons. I was being malicious on purpose.
As Rick Beato said, maybe one of the several writers of the song plagiarized the other one and the rest of the team were none the wiser until the lawsuit.
I have no problem with singers being singers, it's always been the norm.
It's "easy" when you're a wealthy musician, backed by a major record label, and the plaintiff is a small-time band with few resources.
Sorry, but you don't get to decide that. It really doesn't help that from the way you're talking, no one could ever sue anyone for any musical copyright infringement, even if they copied a famous song note-for-note and claimed authorship.
Again, if you actually listen to the recordings, the choruses are nearly identical. Same key. Same chords. Same rhythm. Same vocal melody. C'mon.
And again: There are far more than 12 melodies that can exist, which is one of many reasons why these types of lawsuits are rare.
Heck, human beings are constructed entirely out of just four proteins. There's an enormous number of melodies you can make out of 12 notes.
Meaning what, that Lipa and her producers and record labels are knights in shining armor, fighting for the Little Guy? Guess again.
They call re-recording and inserting a snippet from another song “Interpolation”.
Yes. And if I had the data, I could calculate it myself, no extra expense needed. The point is not about who has the resources to calculate it, the point is that it can be done - it can be proven, objectively instead of subjectively.
I have actually listened. I am not arguing against the similarity of two songs. I am asserting that this type of similarity is common and probable. And... "similar" does not equal "identical". At this point it becomes subjective.
If I wanted to argue against the similarities, I would highlight that the progressions are different. Dua's song is: 1, 5, 4, and back to 1. Atrikal's progression is 1, 5, 4, 4. I would highlight that the lyrics are different. I would highlight that the notes of the melody are different. I would highlight that the tempo of Dua's song is faster. I would argue that, just as there are similarities, there are also differences, and again, it is subjective. I could also highlight that Atrikal's claim is only true if the writer of Dua's song, Dua herself, or anyone who worked on the song, actually heard Atrikal's song prior to writing this one - which cannot be proven.
.
Yes, four proteins. And yet, most humans have eyes, skin, a liver, toes, a brain, a spine ... all made up of those four proteins. Those proteins are assembled in very common and similar ways, and then use over and over.
Last edited:
Rick Beatto played both choruses at the same time, and they are virtually identical.
Doesn't sound right. The Dua Lipa song resolves on the 1. The other tune doesn't. So how is that virtually identical? Are you guys NOT hearing that?
Actually Rick mentioned that part as well. Of course there is a bit of hyperbole and we all do that. Copyright infringement cases have been won or settled when there were less similarities than between those 2 songs. And it's more than obvious that the songs are very much alike. Have you seen Rick's video?
If you follow my comment history in this thread (not that you want to), I am not necessarily arguing against the similarities. My point is that the similarities are very common. If I wanted to argue against the similarities, I would highlight all the differences, because there are as many differences as there are similarities.
I agree with you that copyright cases are won/settled in situations with less similarity. This is an assumption, but would guess the reason for that is the people who make the final decision - a jury or judge - do not have the musical knowledge required to understand how often chords, rhythms, melodies etc. are repeated. If they understood that a 1, 4, 5 progression is one of the most common, and there are only 12 notes to choose as the root key signature, and that major and minor scales are the most common, etc., if they were presented with data showing this, they might rule differently.
Do I think the songs are very similar? Yes. My point is that if artists resort to litigation every time two songs are similar, we would need a separate legal system to handle the case load. And the artists themselves (Artikal for example) would be hypocritical to overlook the similarities between their songs and others that came before. Rihanna released a song in 2008 called "Life Your Life". Should she sue Artikal for ripping off the title? Where do we draw the line between "influence" and "plagiarism" with something so subjective as music?
You may be undercounted the 10s of thousands of proteins that comprise the human body. Proteins themselves are made of dozens of amino acids. Best I can guess is you meant nucleic acids of which DNA is made of 4, but humans are made up of 5 nucleic acids.
I personally find it preposterous when these suits essentially state that one band owns a key. Especially when the chord progression is as simple as possible.
Also, proteins are written in a "musical staff" using "4 notes", but don't have to worry about copyright infringement. Most of the greatest hits of human proteins are ripoffs from other species.
Regardless of what happens with the lawyers, this is not a good look for her or her team. Ultimately, most of the criticism will fall on her, since the average fan doesn’t know or care who wrote the song.
Okay then. Please point out the dozens of songs that use the same chord progression and rhythm and melody as these songs.
And yet, even though the law did not change two days ago, we don't see an avalanche of lawsuits against every big hit. Why is that?
The current standard is that the similarities need to be expressible in standard notation, and there is no relevant prior art. Contrary to your earlier claims, chord progressions can be copyrighted, if they are sufficiently unique. If it goes to court, then it is the jury that draw the line.
You keep harping on the song title "live your life," but that's too generic to copyright. However, if a song title is sufficiently unique -- e.g. "Tymps (The Sick in the Head Song)" -- and someone uses that title for a different song, they may very well get a nastygram from Fiona Apple's lawyers.
No one can be sued solely because they used blues progression. That doesn't mean you can "write" a song that uses the exact same chord changes and melody and rhythm and guitar fills as Robert Cray's "Smoking Gun" and claim that copyright doesn't apply, because "it's a blues tune!"
