Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456
Results 126 to 136 of 136

Thread: Most blatantly obvious rip offs

  1. #126
    Quote Originally Posted by gregory View Post
    Yes, I was wrong, my mistake. The ELP rearrangment I estimate very high though.
    It's one of my favorite ELP pieces and a big improvement on the original, not withstanding anything a classical purist might think.

  2. #127
    Quote Originally Posted by A. Scherze View Post
    It's one of my favorite ELP pieces and a big improvement on the original, not withstanding anything a classical purist might think.
    Yes, and I love it too. I guess Emerson had a great imagination and talent to interpret the other writers work in unusual way.

  3. #128
    That's Mr. to you, Sir!! Trane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    in a cosmic jazzy-groove around Brussels
    Posts
    6,091
    Quote Originally Posted by A. Scherze View Post
    In fairness to Emerson, he used fairly well-known classical pieces. If you want to "steal" something, you should find some obscure piece.

    Thosec were the days where the industry was finally realizing about the lifting... remember that Page , Plant, Blackmore, etc... regularly pillaged everything they heard... It was just the way things were done in the 60's...

    Renaissance (another Yarbirds offshoot) pîllaged and made a career of it, even when the ex-YB were out of the sheme


    Quote Originally Posted by gregory View Post
    Yes, I was wrong, my mistake. The ELP rearrangment I estimate very high though.
    Indeed, Emerson's rearrangements or classical composers made them almost new composition .... his version and Tomita's of Pictures At An Exhibition are still mind-boggling nowaday....
    my music collection increased tenfolds when I switched from drug-addicts to complete nutcases.

  4. #129
    Yes indeed, in some cases ELP's rearrangements could be a food for thought to original author.

  5. #130
    http://www.salon.com/2013/10/04/big_..._the_letter_x/

    Friday, Oct 4, 2013 02:00 PM EST

    Big Oil loses it: ExxonMobil claims it owns the letter “X”!

    World's richest oil company sues FX television network in act approaching self-parody

    By David Sirota

    Apparently if you are the world’s richest oil company used to making $104 million in profit every day, no lawsuit is too frivolous, expensive or downright hilarious when you are the plaintiff. That’s the message from ExxonMobil this week as it filed a lawsuit against the FX television network. In court papers, the oil behemoth effectively argues that it owns the exclusive right to put two X’s next to each other.

    Underscoring the ridiculousness of a company claiming to own a letter of the alphabet, Deadline notes, “This double-cross brawl may come as a surprise to Dos Equis, which also has a double-X logo, and we assume the legal wrangling will be be watched with considerable interest by the XX chromosome, and the roman numeral for 20.” Same thing for any clothing companies that make t-shirts marked double extra large.

    In an interview with Ad Age, an FX spokesperson called the suit “entirely meritless” and said, “We are confident that viewers won’t tune into FXX looking for gas or motor oil and drivers won’t pull up to an Exxon pump station expecting to get ‘It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia.’”

    ExxonMobil’s narcissistic presumption seems, in part, to be that a television station would want its brand to be synonymous with the largest and most rapacious oil company on the planet. Considering the public’s view of the oil industry, though, that seems like an, um, baseless presumption. Sure, a TV network probably does want the advertising dollars that ExxonMobil spends on its greenwashing campaigns – but it probably doesn’t want to be confused for Exxon TV.

    ExxonMobil’s suit instantly makes it a candidate for the list of the most famous intellectual property claims of all time. Among others on that list are:

    - Spike Lee claiming exclusive ownership rights of his first name in a suit against Viacom’s Spike TV.

    - Fox News being laughed out of court after claiming exclusive ownership of the phrase “fair and balanced.”

    - Warner/Chappell Music arguing in court that the 120-year-old “Happy Birthday” song is its exclusive property.

    - Huey Lewis suing Ray Parker, Jr. over allegations that the latter’s “Ghostbusters” anthem resembled the former’s “I Want a New Drug.”

    - Larrikin Music suing Men At Work for damages, based on the company’s claims that the music group’s flute in the song “Down Under” derives from a 75-year-old children’s song called “Kookaburra Sits In The Old Gum Tree.” The music company claiming the rights to the Kookaburra song didn’t file suit until 28 years after Men At Work’s hit was released. That’s when a television quiz show in Australia claimed there was a resemblance between the two tunes.

    While intellectual property is, in general, real and protectable property, and while stealing intellectual property is a serious crime, let’s be honest: many of the aforementioned suits – including ExxonMobil’s – seem more than a bit absurd. Then again, the Supreme Court just ratified the right of companies to claim patent protections for DNA. So in the brave new world of intellectual property, “absurd” is apparently in the eye of the beholder.

    --

    David Sirota is a nationally syndicated newspaper columnist, magazine journalist and the best-selling author of the books "Hostile Takeover," "The Uprising" and "Back to Our Future." E-mail him at ds@davidsirota.com, follow him on Twitter @davidsirota or visit his website at www.davidsirota.com.

  6. #131
    Studmuffin Scott Bails's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Near Philly, PA
    Posts
    6,583
    ExxonMobile is evil incarnate, but not sure why this story is in this thread.
    Music isn't about chops, or even about talent - it's about sound and the way that sound communicates to people. Mike Keneally

  7. #132
    Highly Evolved Orangutan JKL2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Westchester, NY
    Posts
    16,529
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott Bails View Post
    Way back in the day when I played in a band, I always wanted to do covers, and the other two guys in the band insisted on only doing original material.
    I'll see you on the dark side of the moon!

  8. #133
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott Bails View Post
    not sure why this story is in this thread.
    First, the thread is "most blatantly obvious rip-offs"; second, it references some rip-off lawsuits; and, third, it shows that just because someone thinks something is a rip-off does not means that it is.
    Last edited by A. Scherze; 10-04-2013 at 07:24 PM.

  9. #134
    Studmuffin Scott Bails's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Near Philly, PA
    Posts
    6,583
    Um...okay.
    Music isn't about chops, or even about talent - it's about sound and the way that sound communicates to people. Mike Keneally

  10. #135
    Member jake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Xxxxxxx
    Posts
    1,064
    Forgot about this one - Ween actually admitted later on that they must have subconsciously been channelling the movie theme - so they ended up doing the two songs as a medley in concert.


    and both together

  11. #136
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Hertfordshire, UK
    Posts
    0
    Re - W & W and J-M J - not getting there very fast am I !? - but it's about two-thirds of the way into "One for the Vine" immediately after the unusual percussive section - I'm sure that turns up in Equinox somewhere but I'll keep you posted !!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •