I wonder if I could now claim several million for the Oooga Chagga intro nicked by others copying my Hooked On A Feeling version?

JK2006 wrote:
I wonder if I could now claim several million for the Oooga Chagga intro nicked by others copying my Hooked On A Feeling version?
Yes I think you should!

I really can't hear the similarity with the Men At Work song though.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/8497433.stm

I've heard other songs where the likeness was more obvious but no fuss was made. I'm suddenly thinking of all the songs "inspired by" Bo Diddley, for example. And Slade's "Here's to the New Year" took many parts directly from The Stranglers' "Golden Brown".

There are not many notes to play with and so it's always likely that one song will remind us of several others.

I'm quite surprised that the judge ruled this to be so similar. "Down Under" is a song I've known for many years. I played the Kookaburra song first (via the link) and did not find myself drifting into "Down Under" at all. Then I played "Down Under" and still heard little similarity. It could just be the way the kids sing the Kookaburra song. Maybe the original composition is a closer match.

The Cat wrote:
It could just be the way the kids sing the Kookaburra song. Maybe the original composition is a closer match.Or maybe the melody has evolved over the years with the influance of Down Under?

The judge should be shot... deaf as a post poor old stick.
Probably thinks the wobbleboard is a violin.

Mad.

Facinating piece by the only law writer I trust-Richard Akland in the Sydney Morning Herald about the possible ramifications about this decision which has rocked the music industry.

www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-cultu...w-20100204-ng23.html

I spoke the folk singer Warren Fahey who was the founder of Larrikan Music today who still owns plenty of it's shares. He was actually suprised on the win but not very confident about the certain appeal.

JK2006 wrote:
The judge should be shot... deaf as a post poor old stick.
Probably thinks the wobbleboard is a violin.

Mad.Have to agree. I was more than surprised. A very strange ruling.

JK2006 wrote:
The judge should be shot... deaf as a post poor old stick.
Probably thinks the wobbleboard is a violin.

Mad.

I don't think the judge is that old. Perhaps he is tone deaf.

I've listened several times and I can only pick up the hint of similarity but the amount of damages is surprising-60% of royalties. That will be huge as the album sold millions.

It also means the judge is saying that the success of the song is 60% due to that little riff.

This is a very odd decision..although it's a compeltely infectuous riff that I believe makes the song.

But that's just my opinion and I couldn't possibly prove it.
I think this will fall over on appeal.

Judge DEAF as a POST.

Crazy judgement and could only be made by someone who was tone deaf.

This shows how silly it is to ask a non musician to rule in this type of case.

The two songs are totally different - the flute rhythm shows some similarity in the last 2 bars - but if that is plagiarism it would mean that EVERY song every written could be classed as plagiarism because rhythms are often similar because of music notation.

Also, the riff is part of the arrangement, not part of the sung melody.