• 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.

Uptown Funk Lawsuit

#61
The Blurred Lines case really effed this stuff up. 10 years ago this would be clearly not be copyright infringement. These days, who knows?? By the way, I haven't seen his name uttered on this thread, but I think we should be talking about Mark Ronson - it was on his album, he played guitar and produced it. I am sure Mars had a good deal to do with it, but I would bet Ronson played a very significant role in writing this tune.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zontar
#63
You guys are giving a lot of credit to Bruno Mars.

Don't forget:
Writers:
Producers:
"the song has earned $2.7 million in publishing royalties (excluding TV and film synchronization revenue), $1.9 million of which went to the writers based on their respective publishing deals."
 
#64
corndog said:
I think it is very similar as well. Not sure if there is merit to a lawsuit, but the songs are similar. I am old enough to remember the original. When I first heard the Bruno Mars tune, I immediately thought he was sampling the 80's version.
Click to expand...

Yeah I agree a lawsuit is pretty ridiculous considering how much pop sounds alike but its hard to deny a strong similarity I would say.
 
#65
So now anyone using the standard funk elements of clean rhythmic octave guitar, analog synth heavy on the trem wheel, and horns, is a plagiarist? I had no idea you could copyright such things.

"Similarity" is the new standard? What happened to recognizable elements or phrases in the main melody and chord progression being the standard?

That is pure insanity. And calling the similarity between the two songs in question "strong" is pure exaggeration. If I strummed out those two songs on an acoustic guitar, no one in their right mind would think they were similar at all.

Jimmy Fallon: Thank you, "Blurred Lines" verdict. Now I can sue everyone who ever uses a cowbell for stealing my song featuring cowbell.

If Bruno Mars and his producers lose this one, they'll get life in prison for "24K Magic." The families of Zapp and Roger alone will have them living in cardboard boxes.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: FilterFunk
#66
electracoyote said:
So now anyone using the standard funk elements of clean rhythmic octave guitar, analog synth heavy on the trem wheel, and horns, is a plagiarist? I had no idea you could copyright such things.

"Similarity" is the new standard? What happened to recognizable elements or phrases in the main melody and chord progression being the standard?

That is pure insanity. And calling the similarity between the two songs in question "strong" is pure exaggeration. If I strummed out those two songs on an acoustic guitar, no one in their right mind would think they were similar at all.

Jimmy Fallon: Thank you, "Blurred Lines" verdict. Now I can sue everyone who ever uses a cowbell for plagiarizing my song featuring cowbell.

If Bruno Mars and his producers lose this one, they'll get life in prison for "24K Magic." The families of Zapp and Roger alone will have them living in cardboard boxes.

Click to expand...


He is probably safe but not sure about the people that write his music.
 
#67
These lawsuits are silly but I see them as part of a backlash that has been slowly coming to a boil for the past couple of decades or so. The reliance on sampling/copying and the ultra-formulaic approach of so much pop music in the past twenty or so years was bound to catch up with the industry one way or another. As with a lot of backlashes, the initial swing perhaps needs to be extreme for a balance to be reached.
 
#70
the yeti said:
blurred lines lawsuit happened. it ain't right but it's what happened.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Many of us went off in the "Blurred Lines" thread awhile back and predicted this. Didn't take long.

I feel so bad for modern artists influenced by common old school production techniques, grooves, and instrumentation. Those elements are not songs, they are not intellectual property any more than the letters of the alphabet, and they do not qualify for copyright protection under a sane, reasonable legal system. The courts have lost their damn minds.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jhengsman, FilterFunk, TyBo and 1 other person
#72
Every time I see a thread regarding this BS I get heated, annoyed and aggravated! I feel sorry for those who lose in these cases save for those who blatantly steal. It's a shame that those who worked hard on something will have to share the wealth with folks who did absolutely nothing. If Marvin Gaye were alive, I bet he wouldn't even think twice about BL yet his greedy @$$ kids saw an opening. If the song was a dud, would they have sued?? NO! Only the hits! The Bruno Mars Uptown Funk thing.........I understand that they willingly gave Charlie Wilson a writers credit. He never sued them. Why? I guess Bruno has so much money, he didn't care.

At this point, I'll never share my songs. I'm influenced all the time but nothing I've ever written sounds like someone else song but I'm not taking that chance! This has ruined it for me! I'll stick to being a cover band bass player!
 
  • Like
Reactions: L Anthony, FilterFunk and grrg63
#73
The problem is, what is intellectual property?

The rest is just lawyers fighting over that for compensation for their practice.

The concept of Intellectual property is what needs to be discussed, and it's effect on society.

IMHO, it's pretty much in the realm of political correctness.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pbass2
#74
One doesn't recall Marvin Gaye ever suing Donny Hathaway for "Love, Love, Love" (same groove, rhythm as "What's Going On"!)

In modern times......

The R Kelly joints.....
The vamp in "Wake Up Everybody" = Same vamp in Shalamar's "For The Lover In You"
Feeling Single = Different rhythm (more four on the floor), but same chord changes as Bill Withers's "Lovely Day"
 
#75
electracoyote said:
So now anyone using the standard funk elements of clean rhythmic octave guitar, analog synth heavy on the trem wheel, and horns, is a plagiarist? I had no idea you could copyright such things.
Click to expand...
Just yesterday, I was thinking the same thing, almost verbatim!

Beyond this, I was thinking: What if we get all of the bands and artists who ever did anything remotely similar to "Uptown Funk" and feel ripped-off to come together for a big ol' class-action lawsuit? Of course, they're probably so greedy that they wouldn't think of sharing the wealth, but they might get so wrapped up in fighting and suing each other ("I came up with that funky staccato horn line before you!! Never mind that Earth, Wind & Fire and Tower of Power did it long before any of us!!") that they won't have time to sue their originally intended target. Maybe they'll unwittingly cancel each other out. Or maybe they'll finally understand the folly of their litigation.


I can dream, can't I?:D
 
  • Like
Reactions: Richland123 and electracoyote
#77
I would think it would take more than "similarities". Satriani's lawsuit vs Coldplay for their Viva La Vida was thrown out. If you layer the 2 songs' music, they are virtually identical, and Chris Martin's singing matches Satriani's leads to the point that it sounds like Satch released his song as an instrumental cover, even though it was released several years prior.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back