| Author |
Topic: Patented Licks. |
Archie Nicol R.I.P.
From:
Ayrshire, Scotland
|
Posted 4 Apr 2008 4:15 pm |
|
Register now. Don't leave it too late.
Click here.
Arch.
_________________
I'm well behaved, so there! |
|
|
 |
Dave Mudgett
From:
Central Pennsylvania and Gallatin, Tennessee
|
Posted 4 Apr 2008 5:09 pm
|
|
Typical - "The Court of Appeal agreed that Mr Fisher had contributed the organ theme but ruled that he should, nevertheless, receive no money from past or future royalties."
In other words, legal technicalities and lots of money and influence trump who actually created the work. |
|
|
|
Wally Taylor
From:
Hardin, Kentucky, USA
|
Posted 6 Apr 2008 9:57 am Bummer
|
|
I agree Dave. And FWIW, it was the organ solo that really sold the song to me. A shame for sure.
Wally |
|
|
|
Stephen Gambrell
From:
Over there
|
Posted 6 Apr 2008 8:41 pm
|
|
| Naaah, it was the lyrics. |
|
|
|
Don Sulesky
From:
Citrus County, FL, Orig. from MA & NH
|
Posted 7 Apr 2008 5:34 am
|
|
It is a great song.
I remember the organ solo and play it on steel but do not remember the words.
That should prove something in its self.
Don |
|
|
|
Ron !
|
Posted 7 Apr 2008 8:25 am
|
|
| Quote: |
| In other words, legal technicalities and lots of money and influence trump who actually created the work. |
Sorry Dave but thats how it works.There are lot's of musicians that contribute to a real hit.
Nevertheless is(unless it is written down on/in a contract)there nothing that can be done in situations like these.
Ron |
|
|
|
Matt Dawson
From:
Luxembourg, Europe
|
Posted 8 Apr 2008 3:26 am
|
|
Is it general knowledge that Procul Harem singer Gary Brooker's dad was Harry Brooker, one of the greatest non-pedal steel guitar talents ever produced in the UK?
Matt |
|
|
|
Dave Mudgett
From:
Central Pennsylvania and Gallatin, Tennessee
|
Posted 8 Apr 2008 8:43 pm
|
|
Ron - one cannot argue with "the law" - it's its own thing.
But - in principle, authorship is authorship. In principle, contracts do not have to be written down.
What surprises me here is that the court even agrees that Fisher wrote the original contribution. I could understand not permitting past royalties be collected, but I will never, if I live 20 million years, understand the justification that he merits no money for "future royalties", and that a co-writer deserves to collect the royalties on someone else's original contribution. It's just wrong, period, and makes the whole notion of "intellectual property" a true joke. It's property, pure and simple - ownership by right of possession and decree by lawyers, guns, and money - and nothing intellectual about it at all. I hope there's a higher court.
My opinions, of course. |
|
|
|
Edward Meisse
From:
Santa Rosa, California, USA
|
Posted 8 Apr 2008 11:18 pm
|
|
Dave Mudgett
| Quote: |
| In principle, contracts do not have to be written down. |
Sam Goldwinn
| Quote: |
| Verbal contracts aren't worth the paper they're written on. |
They're both correct, of course. But even with people I trust, I want it in writing. It helps to prevent misunderstandings that can end valuable friendships. Of course no way of doing things constitutes an absolute guarantee. We can only do the best we can do.
_________________
Amor vincit omnia |
|
|
|
