KCOOLMUZIQ said:

Bruno barely has three albums out & is already embroiled in several copyright infringements.

Please that is just nonsense and so is this claim by Angie Stone. This sort of thing has gotten ridiculous-folks going ofter big hit songs just looking for a payday. If Uptown Funk wasnt the massive hit it was, I doubt she would even care.

It's just too bad so many people nowadays cant distinquish the difference between ripping off/stealing and paying a homage

hardwork said:

Jesus, when the fuck is Skyy going to sue these talentless motherfuckers?

So, uh, should Angie Stone & the Sequence being sueing Skyy as well?

[Edited 2/29/16 9:24am]

NaughtyKitty said:

KCOOLMUZIQ said:

Bruno barely has three albums out & is already embroiled in several copyright infringements.

Please that is just nonsense and so is this claim by Angie Stone. This sort of thing has gotten ridiculous-folks going ofter big hit songs just looking for a payday. If Uptown Funk wasnt the massive hit it was, I doubt she would even care.

It's just too bad so many people nowadays cant distinquish the difference between ripping off/stealing and paying a homage

It's NOT ridiculous! Mark should have NEVER named checked Sequence in the Rolling Stone interview. But then omit them from writers credit. But include everyone else.Eventually they're going to have to pay up. The line "Funk U Up"is repeatedly used in "Uptown Funk". Which also uses 's title from his classic mAsTeRpIeCe "Uptown"..

[Edited 2/29/16 9:36am]

KCOOLMUZIQ said:

NaughtyKitty said:

Please that is just nonsense and so is this claim by Angie Stone. This sort of thing has gotten ridiculous-folks going ofter big hit songs just looking for a payday. If Uptown Funk wasnt the massive hit it was, I doubt she would even care.

It's just too bad so many people nowadays cant distinquish the difference between ripping off/stealing and paying a homage

It's NOT ridiculous! Mark should have NEVER named checked Sequence in the Rolling Stone interview. But then omit them from writers credit. But include everyone else.Eventually they're going to have to pay up. The line "Funk U Up"is repeatedly used in "Uptown Funk". Which also uses 's title from his classic mAsTeRpIeCe "Uptown"..

[Edited 2/29/16 9:36am]

But seriously Angie n them and Mark Ronson/Bruno cant be the only folks in the history of music to use the phrase "Funk You Up" other people have used it too. Is the phrase Funk You Up copywrited? Could a lawyer argue that it's not the same thing because Bruno sings UPTOWN Funk You Up and not merely Funk You Up? I dont think they have a case at all.

NaughtyKitty said:

KCOOLMUZIQ said:

It's NOT ridiculous! Mark should have NEVER named checked Sequence in the Rolling Stone interview. But then omit them from writers credit. But include everyone else.Eventually they're going to have to pay up. The line "Funk U Up"is repeatedly used in "Uptown Funk". Which also uses 's title from his classic mAsTeRpIeCe "Uptown"..

[Edited 2/29/16 9:36am]

But seriously Angie n them and Mark Ronson/Bruno cant be the only folks in the history of music to use the phrase "Funk You Up" other people have used it too. Is the phrase Funk You Up copywrited? Could a lawyer argue that it's not the same thing because Bruno sings UPTOWN Funk You Up and not merely Funk You Up? I dont think they have a case at all.

They do have a case! Because they were mentioned in the Rolling Stone article as being influenced by Sequence. It's the same with the "Blurred Lines" case. Robin blabbered in almost EVERY interview he gave(drugged up or not) that he was heavily influenced by Marvin Gaye while recording that song. It came back to haunt him & Pharrell later in their bank accounts.

Some artist just don't know how to keep their mouth closed.

when the "Blurred Lines" case was going on,I predicted that this would happen: anyone who does a song that's intended to be an old school "tribute" would suddenly face lawsuits like these...and that sucks because it means that artists will now stop doing songs like these.

jaawwnn said:

hardwork said:

Jesus, when the fuck is Skyy going to sue these talentless motherfuckers?

So, uh, should Angie Stone & the Sequence being sueing Skyy as well?

see how ridiculous this can get? Everyone basically "borrows" from others.The song "Thriller" borrows the bassline from Rick James' "Give It To Me Baby",but I didn't see Rick making a big deal about it.

nd33 said:

hardwork said:

The entire FEEL of that Skyy guitar lick is in the song - and it must be because Bruno Mars and Ronson have no feel of their own to offer. If the person with my first and last name tried to use the fact that we have the same name to insist they get to deposit my paycheck in their bank account, eat food out of my refrigerator, watch my TV and fuck my woman whenever they want to, then there's a problem, because they'd be passing themselves off AS me. And that's JUST what these weak cats are doing - passing themselves off as something they are not. They are doing that which George Clinton warned the world against - faking the funk. They ARE Sir Nose D'Voidoffunk. They are deliberately watering down the funk to gain mass appeal, presenting the SHELL of the funk as a fucking gimmick without presenting to the listener ANY of the INTERIOR ESSENCE of it - which is the thing that actually allows one to dance underwater and not get wet.

Hey, I don't like the song anymore than you, but if "feel" was cause for a lawsuit, music wouldn't happen, period.

Do you see the first band to do disco music suing everyone else that played a song approximately 135bpm with every second 8th note being an open hihat?

CORRECTION: The average tempo of a disco track is 120 BPM, not 135.

TonyVanDam said:

nd33 said:

Hey, I don't like the song anymore than you, but if "feel" was cause for a lawsuit, music wouldn't happen, period.

Do you see the first band to do disco music suing everyone else that played a song approximately 135bpm with every second 8th note being an open hihat?

CORRECTION: The average tempo of a disco track is 120 BPM, not 135.

Thank you, Tony!

here's a prime example of a a baseline hook that sounds very similar to a major r&b hit of the late 70s....

a guy who's video has over a half a billion views, the music he's sampling will not get its just due

this my first time hearing this but my gut feeling is telling me he sampled Shalamar's classic "A Night to Remember".......

what's unfair about the overabundance of sampling, the people who are sampling are benefiting 100 times more than what the original makers of the music did.

It should be the other way around

Scorp said:

what's unfair about the overabundance of sampling, the people who are sampling are benefiting 100 times more than what the original makers of the music did.

It's not like every song that samples becomes a popular hit. So how are the non-hits benefiting 100 times more? Samples have to be cleared and the original writers generally get paid, unlike Led Zeppelin copying blues songs and claiming they wrote them. Some songs that are sampled are out of print or obscure, so the original act wasn't getting a benefit anyway, and sampling might be helping them out financially.

.

There's many soundalike songs before samplers was invented. Several Bar-Kays songs sound like other songs and they weren't sued. Entire genres have many songs that sound the same like house, techno, New Jack Swing, reggaeton, and drums & bass. The soundalikes often don't credit the original, but it's the law to credit samples.

MickyDolenz said:

Scorp said:

what's unfair about the overabundance of sampling, the people who are sampling are benefiting 100 times more than what the original makers of the music did.

It's not like every song that samples becomes a popular hit. So how are the non-hits benefiting 100 times more? Samples have to be cleared and the original writers generally get paid, unlike Led Zeppelin copying blues songs and claiming they wrote them. Some songs that are sampled are out of print or obscure, so the original act wasn't getting a benefit anyway, and sampling might be helping them out financially.

.

There's many soundalike songs before samplers was invented. Several Bar-Kays songs sound like other songs and they weren't sued. Entire genres have many songs that sound the same like house, techno, New Jack Swing, reggaeton, and drums & bass. The soundalikes often don't credit the original, but it's the law to credit samples.

sampling is the easy way travel and there's no way every person who's music has been sampled has received proper credit for it, especially w/all the samples out there today and over the past quarter century

for these up and coming artists, they should be encouraged to develop whatever ability they have in coming up w/their own distinct style, and if they stuck to it, they would find it, and they would gain a feeling they never had, and they wouldn't feel the need to rely on music of the past and we wouldn't have to keep talkin about the music of the past and support what's being done in the present w/out any controversy

it would be much more of demanding to embrace that challenge, but in the end it would be worth it

if past generations could do that, then so can today's generation

Scorp said:

sampling is the easy way travel and there's no way every person who's music has been sampled has received proper credit for it, especially w/all the samples out there today and over the past quarter century

Yeah, back in the 1980s before laws were created. Today, maybe self-released underground stuff might not credit, but they're not on an official label, which is not really that different than the 'white label' remix singles from the 1980s

.

for these up and coming artists, they should be encouraged to develop whatever ability they have in coming up w/their own distinct style, and if they stuck to it, they would find it, and they would gain a feeling they never had

.

if past generations could do that, then so can today's generation

Past generations made soundalike songs, and some even duplicated the singing and/or musical style of another act, like these acts

Here's a song that sounds like Got To Give It Up and it was released around the same time as Marvin's song

MickyDolenz said:

Scorp said:

sampling is the easy way travel and there's no way every person who's music has been sampled has received proper credit for it, especially w/all the samples out there today and over the past quarter century

Yeah, back in the 1980s before laws were created. Today, maybe self-released underground stuff might not credit, but they're not on an official label, which is not really that different than the 'white label' remix singles from the 1980s

.

for these up and coming artists, they should be encouraged to develop whatever ability they have in coming up w/their own distinct style, and if they stuck to it, they would find it, and they would gain a feeling they never had

.

if past generations could do that, then so can today's generation

Past generations made soundalike songs, and some even duplicated the singing and/or musical style of another act, like these acts

Here's a song that sounds like Got To Give It Up and it was released around the same time as Marvin's song

and none of those people except for Bunny Sigler above went down in history as luminaries of music. Sigler was vital in helping shaping the Philadelphia Sound with Gamble and Huff

but the luminaries became luminaries because they spent countless hours and years working on their craft and developing their sound

everyone is influenced by soembody.....but eventually you have to stand on your own merit