Why the Ed Sheeran lawsuit makes no sense 

Trademark is different from copyright.

also purple is a secondary color

Exactly. This basic ass pop shit is all the same anyway. It’d be different if it was like Yngwie Malmsteen being sued for copying some Bach piece under a different name. But no lol

I OWN THE COLOR RED. LOL

Imma go I iii IV V in 80bpm

I'm waiting for the Bossa catalog to all collectively sue each other

Have you heard Brazilian funk by any chance? Literally the same thing everytime

But some dumbass modern piece of shit trying to make a song ripping off an old song it's a little bit different than being inspired it's just pathetic everybody's making shit music with no originality in this just defines today's music it's all bulshit

Timmy Kenny wow bro that’s crazy but have you heard any music by Black Midi, Swans, Death Grips, Yves Tumor, Mount Eerie, King Gizzard and the Lizard Wizard, Weatherday, The Voidz, Superorganism, 100 gecs, SOPHIE, Car Seat Headrest, Machine+, JPEGMAFIA, Open Mike Eagle, Xiu Xiu, Ariel Pink, Candy Claws, Beach House, Tropical F*** Storm, Pure Adult, Frank Ocean, Glass Beach, Lemon Demon, Clipping, Kero Kero Bonito, Fiona Apple, Billie Eilish, or Tyler, The Creator? I mean that’s just the start of it and these are artists of several different genres that all have albums filled with personality and originality that have come out in the past couple years. If you don’t think any modern music is good, you’re clearly not making any effort to seek any out.

@@timmykenny717 shut the fuck up boomer

That's why they should lose, and be forced to pay Ed Sheeren a lot of money. Perhaps the amount they were suing for.

What happened at the end? Has a decision been made?

You just described an attorney.

@@davidseverance9282 Imagine if attorneys couldn't base their work on the work of those who came before. That'd be fun "objection, he isn't raising an original argument".

@@corybarnes2341 True. So many lawyers refer to previous supreme court and other rulings. If that wasn't allowed, what would happen then lol?

It won’t. Corporations are heavily lobbying for stricter control and more power over creative mediums. Meanwhile there’s not really anyone fighting them at least not on a similar level. Support against the increasing control is also fragmented with corporations building narratives that they’re doing this to protect art and artists (because they totally aren’t the ones screwing artists over and only care about exploiting their works for sales).

The more of this kind of crap they pull- the less power the corporations and the state will have. creativity is the very core of human nature, they cannot take it away and the more they try- the more they will lose their power. Take punk rock for example, it was a direct response to the conformist society where it spawned- a creative outlet for the anger felt by a generation of teenagers who felt their individuality and creativity was being suppressed. If they actually make creating music illegal, people will simply ignore them. you might as well try to make it illegal to breath.

If their goal was to reduce creativity, they shouldn't be attacking Ed Sheeran of all people.

​@@youtubeuserdan4017 You got me with that one lol

Langfocus you're channel is amazing

Langfocus hey paul, could you do a vid talking about Georgian (Kartvli)?

12 bar blues and the minor Pentatonic scale have never changed lol. If you copyright it everyone, and I mean everyone, that has every made a blues song is screwed. So pretty much everyone lmao.

Langfocus Holy cow! I honestly did not expect to see you Paul. Your channel is awesome! 👍😎

Playing the blues?! Better sing those greens!

Emmy Mae Congratulations, your generic song sounds exactly like me own copyright protected generic song. I am now suing you for 2$ and a casio watch!

1. Define generic? 2. Once weve done that how do you even prove that two humans didnt just create something the same (generic or non generic) without any interaction or knowledge of the other persons creation? My point is even when something IS actually identical 99% of people will just automatically assume it was conscious plaguerism instead of the possibility that just by co incidence someone else created something that is the same as something else lol. Even if a song is "famous" there is no guarantee someone has heard it (i know people who havent heard of stevie wonder or michael jackson believe it or not)

nezkeys79 ever heard of a joke

this copyright stuff is kinda wack. copyright claims made on youtube should be sued for ripping off music copyright claimers because they are clearly stealing their thing.

The hilarious part is that this could actually work haha

If he just lived 250 years longer, he could have made tons of money on copyright lawsuit.

​@@JackTheMurderer Thankfully copyright wasn't around then. Bach basically got an church organist/choir director salary. Without the megabucks that modern celebrities think is their due - and he seemed a happy man - with 20 children! He was also modest - said anyone could write his fugues if they put the work in. He also actually quite often borrowed melodies that had been around - and sometimes developed them into fantastic fugues. Both ancient religious and folk tunes and that of his contemporaries. And his contemporaries did the same. And often they did not even attribute these melodies. And it didn't affect the quality of music. (In fact I think it is pretty safe to say music of a higher standard then - I can't imagine Sheeran or Townsend being able (or put in the work) to write anything like a fugue. Intellectual property rights have destroyed music, not improved it. And of course it has made a few people very, very, rich.

Nah - _that_ was _Slonimsky's Thesaurus of Scales and Melodic Patterns._ Every possible thing to do with four notes in the key of C and still took 256 page!

White peoples would say anything. People of color don’t go for the bullshit.

Except he was largely influenced by the Italian school and these progressions go to before Bach.

They could sing "Those magic changes" as a closing argument.

Bach

Luckily he has been dead for 268 years.

Anonymous thats why the [estate] is making alot of money.

It's a shame Guido D'Arezzo never patented musical notation

This is the greatest youtube comment of all time. You deserve every one of those 1.1k likes.

Simon Burford not even close

But...I like c major ):

Ceems like we're all in major trouble

Noo.... thats cheating

I’ll take b##

I understand that. But that was me with lil peep, I believe everyone is welcome and you can become a fan even after they're dead.

AD 2100: "Not only is this song in 4/4, but it has quarter notes in it. This is clearly an overt rip-off of my work!"

I concur.

Wonderfull idea.

badum *tss*

@Time Traveller nd he writed without thinking?!?

@Time Traveller thanku my English teacher

1990• yeah but there's just some people in life that make arguments just to get they want even if their case/s don't make any sense

No song from the 50's sounded like that

Chuck Berry and the Beach Boys for one

potato Carrot I mean most of the 50s music sounds the same Even if Its good

@@SlashManEXE Chuck Berry sued and won. They didn't sound alike, they were the same.

There are other tuning systems tho

Effort is a determined attempt that's typically failure and is uncertain to work? Antonym of fail? Why is it that you can't say attempt & why is attempt associated with fail and crimes and suicide & yet you think it means achieves its desired purpose; succeed?

our song limit is only 3,67,87,32,28,800 songs we can make and that is really sad to me because i love music and song making might come to an end in the future..

@@prabhathneni1352 What makes you say this?

SquishyMuffinz

Microtonal music will be the future

@@vibrantdragon3123 I think so too but most of the general public can’t even hear/identify microtones so we’ll have to condition the masses to the sound first somehow lol.

Chess is much simpler than music but even Alpha Zero hasnt “finished” it. It would take longer than the universe to write every possible music.

@@ericoschmitt But most of the possible melodies don't work. I agree with your mindset, but I think we can't be sure about the specific number

Nobody's really trying to write original music or rather, I'm sure people are, but 'commercial' music recycles the same four chords (with incredible streaming results - diverting ML recommendations on Spotify and other platforms away from original writing).

No problem then, make your hamburger with lettuce, tomato, pickles AND onions. This changes the functional sequence of the assembly therefore is original...

If that were the case, then Wendy's, Burger King, and all other Fast Food Burger joints, including mom and pop joints, would be gone.

No mc Donald hamburger has tomatoes onn

BUT, McDowell's buns have no seeds

Its like Apple suing you for using a screen on your phone

underrated

200

“Why is genocide a good thing, let’s ask a dead a german”

@@kcatthirtysix i wonder how many people have yet to realize that hitler was not german, but born in austria

@@kcatthirtysix I hope that you understand that there are MANY antifascistic germans

This is like Jim Sterling's copyright deadlock tactic except with music.

I was like “4 years ago” what? It only just ended. No wonder he said he would leave his career. 4 years of bs just for him to be in the right the whole time.

Thats how close he came to loosing this.

Pretty sure he's not around to know better...but his relatives can sue everyone if they want, apparently...

That person is long dead because the 12 bar blues progression goes back to at least the end of the 19th of the century

Yeah man, on my next jam session Imma call out an Ed Sheeran in C

It was me.... pay up guys!

Cortexturizer Nah man lets do a Stockhausen in Eb

I shall replace it with Fm6 Hahahaha (evil laughter)

Well played

Okay okay... I'll write my Christmas song in G major so I can use Am7b5. 😛

Defense99 GOT EM!!

And all Disney songs!

I’m guessing it will be

We hope so

I literally thought that there was an error in the date, lmao

Don't know why the US waste too much time on lawsuits

Daniel Hernandez I worked as a waitress. I had coworkers that would get the order of coke, and not even ask. They just gave them pepsi, thinking it was basically the same thing. At the time I was a cocacolic and was horrified!

Bottled coke tastes like ass. Fountain coke is much better, but if they have Dr. Pepper I'll be getting that. And Pepsi tastes good no matter where it comes from.

@@branfrd american?

@@hannahbis420 Yes

@@hannahbis420 Us Americans are conuesuers of sugar-based unhealthy beverages

Beary Boy its easy money.

Beary Boy Pretty gaye if you ask me

...and they won a case that most legal experts agree they shouldn't have won.

Jason Andrews Yup, which opened the door to all this bullshit.

Didn't they sue Blurred Lines

This guy is some kind of. Genius

All genres of music work this way. Rock and roll, blues, disco, it doesn't matter, we're all making music that sounds like the kind of music we like.

As alluded to in the video, most chord progressions are stolen from Bach anyway. I wish I could somehow get legal rights to everything bach wrote just to f*** with copyright trolls

And I don't want to overemphasize Bach too much, he made some very real changes to how harmony works but he also, you know, copied other people's ideas

Don't give the lawyers any suggestions.

Original Character DO NOT STEAL: >Insert a bad Sonic recolor

"No one has ever used this color scheme before" (says about red white and blue)

By this logic why dont countries sue each other for having similar flags

No, this is like copying the Mona Lisa and changing her hair or eye color. LISTEN to the two songs and it instantly becomes apparent that Ed's song is a copy of Marvin's. It's not just the chord progression, the songs SOUND the same in just about every aspect. Add to the fact that Ed Sheeran is a Marvin Gaye fan and has heard that song many times and there leaves no room for doubt. The only question is, was it accidental or intentional. For myself, I don't see how it could have been accidental. Either way, it's definitely a copyright issue. There are 12 notes in multiple octaves with different modes and scales, etc., in western music. There are almost 11 billion chord combinations just from 3 note chords, triads, and there are all kinds of different chords besides these basic ones. Factor in all possibilities and it basically becomes limitless, infinite, for all intents and purposes. Saying everything has been done and nothing can be original and we should expect songs to sound like each other etc., is more ridiculous than saying we should expect authors to produce the same novels etc. because there are only so many letters in the alphabet.

Not only the lawsuit, but also the decision may be due to how the jury swings in this case. I personally wouldn't mind seeing this go to the Supreme Court.

There's a difference between taking elements of music and using them in an original way, and what Ed Sheeran did with his song. The accompaniment part is a blatant rip off from the Marvin Gaye song (you really can't get much closer to that without using sampling). But is it really an original enough part? I think that's the main question, and that's why I'm not 100% sure on my opinion. This isn't only about the chords or the bassline or any of the elements separately - it's about the combination of those elements, and you rarely have songs that use the same combination of tempo, groove, bassline, drum beat, chord progression and instrumentation. The arguments the lawsuit uses, though, are flawed. I think it's trying too hard to find similarities between the songs, and it's making ridiculous claims like the song is the only song ever to use this chord progression in this tempo or that the melodies are supposedly the same when they really aren't even close.

Have you looked at what's on the Supreme Court lately, and what it's going to look like after Trump’s second pick arrives?

MaggaraMarine I think you're missing the point. The notion of "owning" a musical idea is utterly pants-on-head insane. It's like claiming to own a mathematical equation. Theorists know this already. It's just that people in the "music industry" make a lot of money by pretending that their fever-dream delusions about owning abstract concepts have any merit. It's best to tell those people to go fuck themselves and continue to make music in whichever way you see fit.

Do we know who trump's second pick is? I didn't think he'd announced it yet.

Kurt Hugo Schneider why is nobody replying to you

With technical cases of any kind the jury system is flawed - we can see this increasingly in lawsuits around software (for instance) too where juries have to rule on subjects it might take a PhD to truly understand, and the judge isn't any better informed than the jury. The same is true of politicians passing many laws, but sadly it's hard to see a simple solution.

I😉 think it would be fun and prove a point if some composers took some time to write completely different songs with the same chords and rhythm as thinking out loud to end this discussion and prevent musical restriction ;) I did it on my channel, I hope some will follow...

This is why juries, politicians, and judges need access to individuals and resources relating to the cases they're handling. Not everyone is a 'Jack of all trades'. Hearing from industry experts on matters with legal implications for those industries is almost a necessity. Related reading materials, too.

That is odd. Almost like Sheehan's legal team arranged a bunch of up votes without realizing that looks odd without actual replies.

Ευτύχης Μπλέτσας βλεπω εισαι και εσυ ανθρωπος της μουσικης θεωριας

Ο τελευταίος άνθρωπος που περίμενα να δω εδω

Ευτύχης Μπλέτσας in

Or he could just play the video... I'm just thinking out loud tho

I think he could definitely testify as a professional.

true.

and they know it, they really want to destroy music and convert it into a very very very primitive one without musical notes.

@Timothy James greedy people i guess

@Timothy James The estate holders of dead musicians.

Actually, there are an infinite number of chord progressions; ever heard of microtones? Just make sure you're .001 Hertz out of tune on the first chord and you're golden! Or maybe go all-out and compose a song using a 13-note scale!

It's not. It's going to kill small independent artists.

Mr WiseGuy I find in interesting that there's a music industry but not an art or visual industry set the same way

Agreed. Defense lawyers should hire him.

That's because Adam is an artist, not a lawyer lol

The music industry is already dead. greedy record companies killed it years ago. and these days the only reason record labels sign new acts is so they can control any real talent that comes along and steal from the real talent to help their auto tuned wannabe's they've signed to make fast money. they use the talent of the real artist to push their fake artists. Right now radio stations and record labels are telling you what to like.

Mozart? Music theory prior to book and explained

or they painted the same thing but in a different way

Not even close. It's more like someone painted the same background as you and but different subject matter in the front. He's guilty

Kougeru after thinking about your comment, it kinda makes sense..

Kougeru yeah but that background being of a geologically similar mountain rather than the same mountain. You can not copywrite chord progressions otherwise nobody (or very very few) would be able to write decent music. I refer you to the Axis of awesome 4 chord medley for reference. This is a frivolous lawsuit and I hope the plaintiff goes bankrupt for bringing it. It's only for personal gain and not just at the cost to Ed Sheeran but to the entire institution of music as a whole. Next we'll be copywriting guitar tunings ffs.

Garrett Jacobs more like painted the same picture with different colors but good try

Zebo12345 then they get sued by the owner of this video...

CantBeatMeHaHa why would they be? They wouldnt be taking someone's work and stealing it to pass it off as their own

+CantBeatMeHaHa I mean it's a funny joke, but there would be no legal basis. You an show this video in court without stepping on any legal issues. If the judge permits it, it's permitted. They could show Star Wars in the court legally if it was relevant to the case.

true!

1000000% they should..!

thats why intellectual property doesn't exist

de facto intellectual property doesn't exist man, you can't prove that ideas and imaterial products are scarce

@Kaptain Kid Just wanna say that we're all impressed at how smart you are bud

exactly - "pop" "popular" "Borrowed"

@@nomnombr should not. in the USA, it's a legal concept. and the courts can bite you. want it not to exist (as a legal concept) go try to change it.

Luckily there will almost assuredly be Expert Witnesses in a case like this

Jared McLaren but will the jury be able to comprehend their evidence?

So true

Led Zeppelin would be fucked.

It looks like THAT'S exactly where this is all leading. I wonder who wrote the very first D C G song? Now that's a person with a good copyright case!

Leo Du most of them are dead. The rest of them probably don’t have the money for lawyers or even know they have been ripped off.

I thought you can't steal a chord progression cause it's naturally occurring in music...but it's the lick that you can sue for...

Imagine being a selected for jury duty in a case where you don't understand a single word of what's being said... It's like, *SUPER HELL*

Same

Rick, bruh how did you get past the screening process 😂

Rick lol I get kicked off. They ask if I have any prejudices. I say Is there any bikers on the case? Because if your an inconsiderate jerk that drives by on a loud harley my opinion of you is decided instantly. They also don't like when I openly say I'm an atheist so I can swear on god or anything.

Corylus Bluefox doesn’t mean it’s correct. But it probably is lol

Thinking the same bro

He just needs to dumb it down for the judge to understand it. :3

Nah, if I can understand that no problems, without a lot of musical background, I don't see why a judge wouldn't

Me (No, not Ashildr, I had the name before Doctor Who, and I'm not changing it!) is pretty easy to understand with the support of images And musical examples in a video versus just speech

I should sue my mum because she has similar DNA as me. Or maybe my mum and dad should sue me because I have their chromosomes.

@@v6790 xd

Well, DA artists already do that. 😂

Not quite that simple. Using yellow blue and red is fine. Using a yellow sky, blue building and red automobile, if another painting used that combination might be considered plagiarism.

@@spareplanet r/wooosh

Madness by nature knows no limits. "virtually the same" there is like imitating an internet meme involving the worst of conspiracy theory.

"Virtually identical" Jesus, could you imagine if it was a murder case (something that is actually worthwhile pursuing) and the fingerprint was "virtually identical"? The judge would throw you out of court until you can prove that it is the exact same set of fingerprints.

Those song are 4 beat apart that in DJ terms that pretty far away

@@UserJWR That is, unless you had enough money. Judges have made worse decision in the past, and legal the system in the US is designed to allow corruption.

Obviously you should've written that song in 87.3927bpm

Macabre Music In 200 years we will have made every musically possible combination of notes that everything gets sued by mass music sueing companies. Great plot for a sci-fi movie.

To quote Adam Neely himself (in his video on elemental arranging), "Nobody is original. Every inspiring piece of music and work of art you have ever experienced has been stolen from people who have done it before. Your job as an artist is not to be original. Rather, it's to take what others have done and mold that into something that you like. The more successful that you are in blending elements stolen from your influences into a unified whole, the more 'original' you are."

Macabre Music u cant copyright chord progression. You can copyright melody and not Thick v gaye has documented that feel can be challenged too

Pradigy Musicman there's even a strong argument to say copyrighting a melody is largely bullshit I believe copyright law uses lead sheets so it shouldn't be possible to sue based on chords alone

Chord progressions cannot be copyrighted, as spelled out in copyright law. The lawyer trying to bring that up is...I'm not sure what his point is. Presumably, Sheeran has a decent legal team, and they'll get that aspect of the case tossed in pre-trial motions, as it has no basis in the law.

Lmao I was talking about the I6 iii comparison all that time ago, look at that I-I6-IV its literally Gusty Garden Galaxy my guy

Go broke because theres no money in jazz. lol

Azathoth43 Damn, as a jazz musician, that hurts that it's soo so true

Phi6er Gene Simmons actually has the copyright to all notes

You sir are a psychopath

The 2-5-1 progression would be make some lawyers very happy.

That should be reason enough to throw out the case because this makes no sense when creating music.

Yeah for real, there are 10,000 new songs uploaded to SoundCloud everyday

Adam's video like many I have made in the past uses words utter by mouth. He should expect notice from my lawyer in the near future. Added to which Anderson, you will be hearing from my lawyer for infringing use of punctuation. I have written comments that utilize puncuation that predate yours and set a precedent.

TheCompleteGuitarist, I think you will find that I have made satirical comments in a similar vain addressing two parties in the legal sense such as you have just here long before you posted this one. My attorney will be in contact and a cease and desist will be sent.

TheCompleteGuitarist He breathes while making this video, just like I did in the past. Expect to get a call from my lawyer soon.

You're writing a informal and a warning influenced comment on a RU-vid channel's comment section, sir the only person you'll get in touch tomorrow is my Lawyer.

Owen, I have previously used words erroneously, and lay claim to your confusion of the words vain/vein. That is actually my error, not yours, and you are not allowed to make it without my permission.

Yes

Yes. The lawsuit could CRUMBLE under just this video. If they brought Adam in as 'Expert Testimony', it'd be over in less time that it took to write this.

PLEASE do this

Adam should take part in ALL musical related cases.

This must happen

If Ed wins can he counter sue for his time and money wasted?

British courts already do that

The actual laws are very clear - melody and lyrics only - and the concept dates back a long time - because they were the only elements thought to be unique enough to warrant some protection. These court cases (Blurred Lines, That Ed Sheeran Song and Dark Horse), you have uneducated juries being swayed by dodgy "musicologists" who are just out to make a fast buck as a so-called expert witness. For whatever reason the defendants can't seem to get a decent one to rebut (Someone like Rick Beato or Adam Neely for example). This stuff should never have been allowed to proceed in the first place as there was no standing in the law. There is no law protecting "groove" (Blurred Lines), no law protecting chord progressions (Ed Sheeran) and no law protecting Timbre (Dark Horse). The plaintiffs motivations were different in each case as well, which is another topic entirely.

What about software codes? Its even more ridiculous. Copyright as you type? WTF!?!

Cinta Damai You cant copyright specific lines of code, but you can copyright entire software code. Its quite easily proven that you used most of the code if you used some software as backround. Fallout Shleter and Westworld had clearly the same code with different textures, so thats why you can go to court with it. Its even more lenient than if you for example, copy a line (quot) from a book and did not do any changes. Simply called plagiarism.

@@KeyUSeeCZ I agree yes. It should be fir a finished program(subset) or product. Its silly to copyright a mathematical expression such as codes.

I'll see you in court pal.

I never use that chord anyways Ba-Boom

Chase Dunkley and don't even think about transposing! I think I also used a minor chord once, so it's best to avoid those too

You're right. From now on I'll only use diminished#11 chords.

Chase Dunkley go ahead, that chord is too complicated for my music anyway

Everyone uses that in aural skills to cop out sight singing

Including everonye who ever whistled, sneezed more than once on a row, hummed, clapped, snapped their fingers or made sounds. All these filthy criminals belong in prison...

TheKlikluk | Lets Plays apparently you can gey sued for singing the happy birthday song

Not anymore, it's public domain now.

Jay Sea was just about to say

John Smith lmao yep, especially now, all pop music sounds the same...

I thought that the entire point of pop is that it all sounds the same

punch3870 Not necessarily. The whole point of a genre is that songs within it tend to sound the same. All pop music definitely doesn't sound the same....if you've spent any amount of time listening to it. One could just as easily say there's something wrong with baroque music, metal music, indie music, and literally any other genre. What's wrong here is people being greedy for money and trying to find theft where there isn't any; not the genres.

HrhMk pop music is more susceptible to sounding similar because of its simplified chordal and rhythmic structure. The lack of modulation is already a huge hindrance. More complex music like the Baroque style will present more possibilities, producing different sounds and ideas as long as how far conventional theory can take you. As a genre itself, creating pop only becomes difficult when trying to write something different than pop.

Didn't you just watch the video? He talks about making new music based on old music being one of the pillars of musical tradition....

Fanchen Maybe I just don't have an idea of what resides exclusively under the pop genre, cause I usually think of just whatever plays on top 10 stations but that can't be the case cause while those stations dont play distinct genres like metal or rap, the artists also dont sound the same at all and many probably fall under multiple genres. Now country, country music sounds exactly like what you just described.

Nah they just want money

@@Sockem1223 Money for nothing. Scumsuckers.

they said in the video the original composer is dead...so obviously i's someone trying to make money who owns the late composers rights o the song...

Money.

Unless the melody is completely stolen. The comparison between “Amazing” by Matt Cardle and “Photograph” by Sheeran is possibly the only type of lawsuit which has some actual logical basis.

Yep, it's almost as if you patented scientific discoveries. Sorry, I now own the concept of both nuclear fission and fusion. That old glowing ball in the sky ain't freeloadin' anymore!

The overarching theme of all of this is ego (gone mental). Also fear. Specifically existential fear as a tool of control.

“It is a pattern found in nature” What drugs were you on when you wrote that? An octave is certainly a physics thing (doubling or halving the frequency) but otherwise it was an arbritrary choice of humans to divide up an octave into twelve notes. Other systems have existed. Chords, scales, and keys were all made up by humans, not discovered.

well damn, shots were fired (but I totally agree)

Certain minimalist styles of metal maybe, but metal as a whole? No.

@Shockheadd45 I'm not saying the vast majority of metal consists of original chord progressions (there being so many bands, of course there are going to be plenty of similar progressions), but metal as a whole is nowhere near the level of simplicity of genres like punk, and is not based on just a couple of familiar chord progressions. The OP seems to imply metal does only consist of a handful of chord progressions, similar to genres like punk. There has been some evolution since the days that bands like Motörhead, Judas Priest, Mötley Crüe, Black Sabbath, etc. dominated the genre. Not every metal band still bases its song structures mainly on blues, rock'n'roll, etc. Basically everything you can do with a guitar, has been done by some metal band. The past decade plenty of bands have based their whole sound on dissonance, atonality, microtonality and several other unconventional writing methods (Suffering Hour, Deathspell Omega, Skáphe, Last Sacrament, Malthusian, ...), other bands have used progressions inspired by classical music for decades (not just talking about obvious stuff like neo-classical and symphonic metal) and still come up with fresh sounding stuff (Cor Scorpii, Týr, Mistur, ...), etc.

Oouf, that's gonna upset some people lol.

@@Bock3039 someone's gonna copyright Chugging then you are all fucked.

LOL

0:59 get rekt, n00bs

Post it in 6 months time and swear you never saw this one.

Sue him.

Do it and ill get my lawyers on you for copyright infringement

Jason Darkflame W ht? I need the letter ' ' tho. You know wh t, I own the letter 'b' now then.

I now own the rest of the ‘ lph et. H ve fun with th t.

I own breathing and everything in existence I can sue you for you trying to sue

You know how ez it is to not use that letter?

I now own " "ll the numbers

Eeeeey! Someone who knows what an axolotl is! Aren't ya a cool kid?

@@void_fimshe ???

A lot of them literally just play the blues proggression in arpeggios for the bassline too.

@@crazycoder2434 my old profile picture was an axolotl

Well... You mean every Doo Wop piece. There were all of TWO chord progressions in the fifties.

I think it would be fun and prove a point if some composers took some time to write completely different songs with the same chords and rhythm as thinking out loud to end this discussion ;) If I found some motivation I‘d do it as well🤔

That's a really good idea

Did it ;)

That Blurred Lines case was a disgrace to law and music.

You call yourself a composer but want this law suit thrown out? Any musician with ears would know if there ever was a blatant knock off this is just that. Its not only the chord progression, the tempo, placement of the 4 chords on the third beat of each bar, bass line etc. Its like taking the music from the Beatles song 'Hard Days Night' and adding another melody and different lyrics to it. Then saying it was mine. Would that deserve a law suit too? Well yes it would.

Yep

Tbh thinking out loud is one of ed sheerans most popular songs, it probably made an unimaginably large amount of money. If you knew that number, the amount he's being sued for might make a little more sense

I guarantee you, suing for the money is not a new thing.

YOUR ARGUMENT THAT YOU CAN'T COPYRIGHT TWO BASS NOTES ("Under Pressure" by Queen & Bowie) IS CHILDISH AND IGNORANT.

I once got copyrighted for doing a cover. The people tried to put ads on the video just in case I didn’t do anything about it. And I did.

No he is not, because he is dead. Also you can't own your name.

Alex Harshegyi haha relax! Only a joke :)

Daniel Paul Music he should sue his parents

@@captainalex8003 r/woosh

I was just about to comment on the same First Name Copyright Infringement matter.

Rekt Gaming exactly, it requires a larger similarity rather than some obscure component, like chords. Sue someone for using a same composition of chords is like suing for cooking on the stove

That's why it would be just if they lost all of it. All of it!

Except that's exactly what they're doing. They're suing over chord progression (which isn't the same between the two songs) and tempo.

All the royalties will go to Canon Inc.

There's more in common between these songs than just the chord progression. If it was about the chord progression on its own, yes, you would have a point. But since the accompaniment parts of these two songs sound so similar (it's about the whole arrangement, so the combination of chords, bassline, drum beat, groove, instrumentation), I don't think it's really getting out of hand - I can see a justification for this case. Though, I'm a bit on the fence on this one. I'm not sure if the accompaniment part in the Marvin Gaye song should be considered an original enough idea. Because I think it's definitely more unique and recognizable than a stylistic cliche like the "boogie woogie riff", but it's really not as unique/recognizable as the accompaniment part of a song like "Bohemian Rhapsody" (I mean, when you hear that piano riff, you know instantly that it's "Bohemian Rhapsody", and if some other song used that same accompaniment pattern, it would be a total rip off). It's kind of in between those two.

It’s just crazy it’s literally like suing someone for using letters or sonething

MaggaraMarine Honestly I want the case to be thrown out primarily because it's a blatant scam. It's not protecting the work of an artist, their legacy, or the livelihood of that artist's family; it's a firm trying to abuse the legal system for profit. If they win this case this sort of cynical profiteering will only become more common, and that's not good for anyone. I would also like to point out that "stylistic cliches" differ from cases like this because of how frequently they're imitated. There's no way to objectively define the point where a combination of recognizable elements transcends personal ownership and become public domain.

The "q. e_h q. e_h" pattern is exactly the same in both songs' verses.

Mathcartney tru dat!

Iannis Xennakis? Pretty far out guy. saudações

Bach = Endgegner 😎

Bach is still the guy with the biggest cock in music aka o que bota o pau na mesa mesmo depois de séculos

Denis Willer this might be the best comment I've ever seen