# Katy Perry, Dr. Luke, Max Martin (et al.) = plagiarists **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [July 30, 2019, 3:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/katy-perry-dr-luke-max-martin-et-al-plagiarists/837854 "2019-07-30T03:19:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Yookeroo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yookeroo/32/323_2.png) [@Yookeroo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yookeroo)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2019, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/katy-perry-dr-luke-max-martin-et-al-plagiarists/837854/141 "2019-08-08T03:27:08Z")
> [@Go\_Arachnid\_Laser](#): > > I don’t think that the laws themselves changed. All the samples the Dust Brothers used were legally cleared. What has changed are the industry rates. Whatever has changed, it’s hampering creativity. This is not a good thing. And these types of rulings are awful. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2019, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/katy-perry-dr-luke-max-martin-et-al-plagiarists/837854/142 "2019-08-08T03:37:16Z")
> [@Yookeroo](#): > > Whatever has changed, it’s hampering creativity. This is not a good thing. And these types of rulings are awful. No, it isn’t and no, they aren’t. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2019, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/katy-perry-dr-luke-max-martin-et-al-plagiarists/837854/143 "2019-08-08T03:40:13Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Says the man who thinks copyright infringement is theft. Because it is theft. The unauthorized use of someone else’s protected intellectual property is a type of theft, just like the unauthorized use of someone else’s real property would be theft. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2019, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/katy-perry-dr-luke-max-martin-et-al-plagiarists/837854/144 "2019-08-08T04:14:58Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > Because it is theft. The unauthorized use of someone else’s protected intellectual property is a type of theft, just like the unauthorized use of someone else’s real property would be theft. False. Your statement is wrong legally, morally and linguistically. Your use of the phrase “real property” explains exactly why. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2019, 12:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/katy-perry-dr-luke-max-martin-et-al-plagiarists/837854/145 "2019-08-08T12:20:23Z")
Regardless of whether copyright infringement is or is not wrong, it’s certainly not the same wrong as theft. If someone steals my wallet, then I don’t have a wallet any more. If someone infringes my copyright on a work of art, I do still have my work of art. ---
**Author:** ![Gorsnak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gorsnak/32/7587_2.png) [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2022, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/katy-perry-dr-luke-max-martin-et-al-plagiarists/837854/146 "2022-03-11T17:07:03Z")
Update: > **[Katy Perry wins in Dark Horse copyright appeal](https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-60705977)** > > Perry will no longer have to pay the rapper Flame $2.8m after an appeals court ruled in her favour. "A jury agreed and awarded him the $2.8m payout, but a judge later overturned that verdict, saying the melody was not “particularly unique or rare”. Upholding that decision, an appeals court said the original verdict could have suffocated musical creativity. … Allowing a copyright over this material would essentially amount to allowing an improper monopoly over two-note pitch sequences or even the minor scale itself…" Perhaps the beginning of the end of the ridiculousness that has ensued from the _Blurred Lines_ case? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/katy-perry-dr-luke-max-martin-et-al-plagiarists/837854.md?page=7)