6 ms·

They're similar in terms of tempo, chord progression, chord rhythm, and chord voicing - despite that the second chord is actually subtly different between the t

They're similar in terms of tempo, chord progression, chord rhythm, and chord voicing - despite that the second chord is actually subtly different between the two. When you transpose one, you can hear the similarities. But that shouldn't even be close to enough to be infringement. I'm one to think they got Satriani/Coldplay wrong as well, though. There are just too many examples of songs that make really good mash-ups. 4 Non Blondes What's Going On and Bobby McFerrin's Don't Worry Be Happy, for instance. I'd say those are more similar that Sheeran/Gaye.

clouddrover 3y ago
> 4 Non Blondes What's Going On and Bobby McFerrin's Don't Worry Be Happy, for instance. The examples I've found of that sound absolutely awful. The mash up of Destiny's Child and Nirvana is far superior: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXGSBpMHcpA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXGSBpMHcpA It's so good the original Bootylicious sounds dull and lifeless in comparison.
jboy55 3y ago
What I love about the Satriani/Coldplay lawsuit was there was a third band, Creaky Boards, who first accused Coldplay of stealing their song a year before Satriani. You can still see posts on r/music as of less than a year ago talking about this. However, wouldn't this mean Creaky Boards actually stole the song from Satriani?
masklinn 3y ago
> There are just too many examples of songs that make really good mash-ups. A few years ago Pomplamoose was really into mashups, and sometimes I had to remind myself these were two different songs. I just checked their channel, and their two most popular pieces are mashups (Sweet Dreams + Seven Nation Army, and Stayin’ Alive + Virtual Insanity)
djur 3y ago
Right. I don't think copyright should apply to similar songs, even intentionally similar songs. Musical traditions worldwide rely on imitation, elaboration, recontextualization of known works.
- interestica 3y ago
  But that would be so...human. I really believe that Jamaica saw such a musical explosion (and continued cultural dominance) because of the "human" view of music creation. So much was about borrowing or reusing or repurposing. Lyrics subtly changed from other songs. Reusing melodies from other songs. Purposely having multiple artists do their take on "riddims" to make the song their own. It let anyone contribute and it increased the amount of creative production, not reduced it. And, what do we get out of subtle modifications and copying of previous tunes? A genre.

clouddrover 3y ago

> 4 Non Blondes What's Going On and Bobby McFerrin's Don't Worry Be Happy, for instance. The examples I've found of that sound absolutely awful. The mash up of Destiny's Child and Nirvana is far superior: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXGSBpMHcpA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXGSBpMHcpA It's so good the original Bootylicious sounds dull and lifeless in comparison.

jboy55 3y ago

What I love about the Satriani/Coldplay lawsuit was there was a third band, Creaky Boards, who first accused Coldplay of stealing their song a year before Satriani. You can still see posts on r/music as of less than a year ago talking about this. However, wouldn't this mean Creaky Boards actually stole the song from Satriani?

masklinn 3y ago

> There are just too many examples of songs that make really good mash-ups. A few years ago Pomplamoose was really into mashups, and sometimes I had to remind myself these were two different songs. I just checked their channel, and their two most popular pieces are mashups (Sweet Dreams + Seven Nation Army, and Stayin’ Alive + Virtual Insanity)

djur 3y ago

Right. I don't think copyright should apply to similar songs, even intentionally similar songs. Musical traditions worldwide rely on imitation, elaboration, recontextualization of known works.

interestica 3y ago
But that would be so...human. I really believe that Jamaica saw such a musical explosion (and continued cultural dominance) because of the "human" view of music creation. So much was about borrowing or reusing or repurposing. Lyrics subtly changed from other songs. Reusing melodies from other songs. Purposely having multiple artists do their take on "riddims" to make the song their own. It let anyone contribute and it increased the amount of creative production, not reduced it. And, what do we get out of subtle modifications and copying of previous tunes? A genre.