The tunes aren’t actually that identical, to my ears - it’s more that Satriani’s solo works over the Coldplay part. The thing is, that it’s incredibly easy for a solo to sound ‘right’, even if there’s no plagiarism involved whatsoever, as long as the tempo and key are the same. I’ve mucked around with friends, playing the chords to ‘Hey Joe’, while they’ve soloed, and they’ve come up with things that sound nothing like Hey Joe - doesn’t mean that if they used that in a song it would be a rip off.
I also wonder if there is a prior art issue. (Note, IANAL, just a guitarist) My thinking is this: Joe is suing Cold Play for basically a six note melody. If Cold Play can show that someone else has previously used those six notes in a melody at roughly the same tempo, which shouldn’t be too hard, then Joe is either equally guilty of plagiarism or Cold Play could have been inspired by (read ripped off*) the previous creator. In that case Joe wouldn’t have standing and the originator could sue Joe.
Of course, I am a computer geek and not a lawyer. I could be so incredibly wrong that lawyers, upon reading this, will want to beat me silly.
Slee
*Just kidding. I think it is probably an accident.
“Prior art” is pertinent for patents, not copyrights.
ETA: Prior art.
The Coldplay sample on the YouTube link has had the pitch increased to make it sound more similar. Compare the Coldplay portion to this.
Satriani ain’t even the only one:
Amusing, just saw a bit of an interview with the lead guy, “joking” that they rip off as much stuff as they can, and hope no one notices. Timbaland does the same thing. Wouldn’t be surprised if most of them do, even if subconciously.
Led Zeppelin was notorious for stealing shamelessly from blues muscians, and openly admitted it. The thing is, a lot of what they were borrowing from had been in turn borrowed from a store of traditional riff and lyrical ideas in a genre where putting new spins on old motifs was commonplace. Page always made everything his own in the long run (and he’s been ripped off as much as anybody by subsequent musicians).
It could be argued that hardly anything in terms of basic melodic and structural ideas is really original.
I wish I could sue them for “Suck”.
So … was Hulk mad?
I advise you to settle…this could get ugly.
There was a One Hit Wonder about fifteen years ago called Four Non Blondes. The only reason I remember them is: remove the vocals from their One Hit, and insert “Don’t Worry Be Happy.” Perfect fit!
Not mad, angry. And you wouldn’t like him when he’s angry.
Something about smashing.
I was thinking the same thing, but now I’m curious about the legalities.
They’re basically the same song. But they’re simple, and in a world where a zillion songs are produced every year that’s one I wouldn’t not think a huge surprise would be inadvertently copied. As you point out, once you start walking down a chord progression or melody you begin to limit yourself to a given set of logical melodic continuances. And yes, the song is consistent with Coldplay’s established sound.
So do courts tend to disregard intent in these matters? Or is Coldplay boned?
See, I could see an argument towards saying they’re boned because otherwise a defense against this would always be “We didn’t know someone had written it before,” short of the ridiculous (Stairway to Heaven? What’s that? What, my Led Zeppelin T-shirt? Uhh, I didn’t know they had a song called that!)
So will a court say, “Yeah, maybe it was unintentional, but you still have to pay him”?
I think they’d still be liable even if it was unintentional, which is why (as Wordman said), a lot of bands are inclined to just settle if enough similarities are there.
ETA, they settlements often do not include any admission of theft, though.
I was listening to an old Kraftwerk album a couple years ago and heard the song “Computer Love,” which has the exact same hook and chorus as Coldplay’s “Talk.” I thought I had uncovered the crime of the century until I checked the liner notes and found Coldplay had credited them as co-writers of the song. I like Kraftwerk, but “Talk” is probably a better song.
I have to admit that I’m the musical equivalent of a guy who only reads Tom Clancy and John Grisham books, but can someone explain the near-universal elite disdain for Coldplay? It is just a general disdain for soft rock, or is their sound too poppy or something?
I think the answer is there in your question: elitism. In the real sense, not the Obama sense. Coldplay *was *adored by the Elite, then they got popular with “Clocks” - in a bunch of commercials and promo pieces, no less. Recipe for disaster and no one with any Indie cred will deign to like them anymore.
If you listen to Viva la Vida you’ll hear that it’s pretty much the one simple refrain, repeated over and over. Listen to If I could fly and you can hear Satriani play a lot of riffs based on that little refrain, at great speed and chock full of notes. A lot of the dislike for Coldplay in this thread seems to be coming from a group I’ll affectionately call “guitar nerds,” who tend to look down on music that could be played by someone with a few months of guitar lessons. Combine this with Chris Martin’s constant “Look at me, I’m sensitive and pretty” posing and you’ll get a lot of contempt.
Of course if you talked to my Dad, he’d tell you anything after Brahms is tedious simplistic drivel.
FTR I don’t mind Coldplay, but there’s not much to them.
Coldplay is basically too musically safe and simplistic to justify their pretensions to artistry. Elitism has nothing to do with it. They think they’re important when they’re really very commercial and formulaic. To put it more simply, they themselves too seriously. They remind me of Dana Carvey’s famous “Chopping Broccoli” sketch on SNL. It’s fluff posing as art.
I get the very commercial and formulaic bit–though those labels can be equally applied to many bands who do not receive the same scorn as Coldplay. But where does the allegation of “pretensions to artistry” come from? (I ask that as a sincere question as someone not at all familiar with the music industry.)