Quote:
Originally Posted by Hogan11
I believe the definition of derivative is something that's copied or adapted from others. Highly derivative means to the extreme, so I fail to see the difference...but to each their own I suppose.
|
"Derivative" is a vague concept (which doesn't necessarily connote infringement or plagiarism or copying a part of another artist's work verbatim) whereas the legal criteria for proving infringement are a lot more specific than just showing that the style of a piece of music reflects the influence of other artists, earlier works, etc.
The plaintiff has to show that the defendant copied the most memorable or "meritorious" part of a song (which usually means the melodic motive, motif, or "hook.") The question of what part of the song is the "meritorious" part is usually established by testimony from expert witnesses.
That's why Coldplay could be in trouble here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hogan11
I doubt it but we'll see....it's not a first for Coldplay, who are probably the most blatent riff theives in popular music since Elastica. However, if they did lose, it wouldn't bother me in the slightest.
|
Going by most of the precedents from infringement cases that have been won by the plaintiff, Satriani has a pretty winnable case. Beyond that, it's just a question of which side's expert witnesses can sell its case to a jury (and perhaps a matter of which side can outspend the other in the legal fees department.)