Christopher Cross/Michael Ormartian's 'Words of Wisdom' sized against 'Purple Rain', puts this, and even the Huey Lewis-Ray Parker Jr, litigation to complete shame, without the need for a draconian Italian justice system.

.

imprimis said:

Christopher Cross/Michael Ormartian's 'Words of Wisdom' sized against 'Purple Rain', puts this, and even the Huey Lewis-Ray Parker Jr, litigation to complete shame, without the need for a draconian Italian justice system.

.

This is either because he has a bit of integrity and realizes he can just write another song instead of whinging about this one similarity, OR, it's because it's a lot harder to sue over a chord sequence than it is a melody topline.

Kares said:

darkroman said:

It's odd it's Warner's causing the trouble and just for a tiny amount of money.
So Warners should pay the money because then Warners can release the Gold Experience.

Doesn't make sense!

.

The case is between 2 parties who own the publishing rights to the 2 songs in question. It has nothing to do with Warners.

Incorrect, "Takin' Me to Paradise" was indeed published by Warner Chappell Italy, but Warner Chappell Italy has no affiliation with Warner Bros. Entertainment.

[Edited 10/2/19 2:35am]

WhisperingDandelions said:

Kares said:

.

The case is between 2 parties who own the publishing rights to the 2 songs in question. It has nothing to do with Warners.

Incorrect, "Takin' Me to Paradise" was indeed published by Warner Chappell Italy, but Warner Chappell Italy has no affiliation with Warner Bros. Entertainment.

[Edited 10/2/19 2:35am]

.

99% of the times people mention 'Warners' on this forum they mean the record company, not Warner Chappell. The record company is not involved in the case, of course, and even Warner Chappell is only indirectly involved, as they don't own the publishing, they only represent the owners.

Kares said:

WhisperingDandelions said:

Incorrect, "Takin' Me to Paradise" was indeed published by Warner Chappell Italy, but Warner Chappell Italy has no affiliation with Warner Bros. Entertainment.

[Edited 10/2/19 2:35am]

.

99% of the times people mention 'Warners' on this forum they mean the record company, not Warner Chappell. The record company is not involved in the case, of course, and even Warner Chappell is only indirectly involved, as they don't own the publishing, they only represent the owners.

I hear you, I was just trying to piece together where the confusion might have emanated.

[Edited 10/2/19 3:04am]

ChickenMcNuggets said:

AaronReturn2005 said:

I think this might be reason the official upload of the video was removed in June 2018, and had 2 million views at the times. Way to go VEVO, not!

I'm surprised there was ever an official YouTube upload of the video at all, given that this case has been rumbling along since 1995 as far as I'm aware.

Ah well. I'm starting now to save up for the big Gold Experience reissue of 2037 when this saga finally gets sorted. I wonder what'll be resolved first, this or Brexit...

I am Italian and saw how long the lawsuits in Italy last, I point to Brexit

Do not understand why the Estate would for a song like that? Prince had many other great songs that he sung. What makes this song worth suing for?

42Kristen said:

Do not understand why the Estate would for a song like that? Prince had many other great songs that he sung. What makes this song worth suing for?

Actually, Prince has made better songs, personally I find it pretty fast but this I find that there are other better songs in that album.If instead you are referring to the reason why they sued him .... and as I know, I have always maintained that they didn't look alike ... but I'm not a music expert

42Kristen said: