http://ultimate-guitar.com/news/general_music_news/romantics_sue_guitar_hero_publishers.html Well in a way thats high praise for the cover band..."virtually Indistinguishable"
That's stupid. The game makes it clear which songs are covers and which songs are the original masters.
This will get thrown out pretty quickly. The game clearly says "(song title) As made famous by (artist)" when it's a cover and "(song title) As performed by (artist)" when it's an original recording. Although I've heard that while the case is pending, all copies of Guitar Hero Rocks the 80's have been pulled from store shelves. Can anybody confirm that?
This is an obvious ploy to make more money, and it's funny how everyone is seeing right through it. Why? Because the song is labeled as a cover in the game itself, and nowhere on the actual game packaging or it's manual does it claim itself to be the actual song. This will not make it far in the courts...I expect to see this thrown out in a couple of weeks guaranteed.
Uhh... I don't get it... do they actually want a court order for the Guitar Hero cover band to not play as well on their song?
They are suing the makers of guitar hero for copyright infringement basically. But since this is marked as a cover and not the original version, the makers of GH basically found a loophole in the copyright laws which is why this lawsuit wont make it that far in the courts.
So are there no laws against covering a band against their permission and then making a profit off that cover?
I dont see why there would be a law like that. In a sense, it would be logical but there are cover bands that exist that I'm sure don't get permission to play a band's songs but they play local gigs and make money from the shows. Thus resulting in profit from covering another bands songs without their permission.
There definitely is a law like that....it falls under the US copyright law. Technically, all those cover bands are in fact breaking the law and can be sued....that is, assuming they never got permission. But there are so many of those bands and they make barely any money from those shows that no one really bothers them. If a cover band got big enough, they'd either need to get permission (and likely pay royalties) or write their own stuff. Bands who release covers on their albums definitely have to at the very least get permission. Guitar Hero is no different. They're likely paying royalties as well. The Romantics probably don't have any grounds to sue. I'm sure Activision did everything legally when they made the game, it sounds like the Romantics have just run out of money and want a quick buck. Besides, the only person who has the right to sue over this would be the copyright owner, which is likely The Romantics' record company. If you really want to see shit get interesting, stick around for another 60 years. The copyright on all recordings published before 1972 expires on Feb 15, 2067. Which means almost all of the Beatles catalog, the Elvis catalog and all the other huge bands back then will be in the public domain and anyone and everyone can use that stuff for whatever the hell they please. Which means we may see some Beatles on Guitar Hero 62 for the Playstation 17 and Xbox 7200
Not really. Once a song has been recorded and released for the first time, anyone else can then cover that song and release it themselves, provided that they 1. Credit the original songwriters and 2. Pay the proper royalties to the songwriter (the standard rate is 9 and a half cents per recording sold containing that song, but some artists negotiate that in their contracts). Having to "get permission" to record and release a cover is one of the biggest misconceptions in the music business. I'm sure use of a song in video games falls under a different law (use of music in movies has different laws as well), but as far as releasing a cover on an album, I could record a covers album tomorrow and as long as the original songwriters are getting paid the proper royalties for each copy of the album I sell, I wouldn't be breaking the law.
They didn't find a loophole. They didn't need to. Obviously their cover band is that good. It's definitely a cover though. Even my dad came in the room and was like, "That's not the original band is it?"