I knew it would be. So stupid to begin with.

Still sound similar to me.

Originally Posted by richie

Still sound similar to me.

Lots of songs sound similar doesn't mean they're plagiarized.

Re-reading the old threads ... soooooo many armchair lawyers were wrong.

Originally Posted by richie

Still sound similar to me.

what song was in question?

It just means Paramore has better lawers and more $$ to pay for legal crap..

Originally Posted by Dipset!

what song was in question?

Originally Posted by kitdoor

It just means Paramore has better lawers and more $$ to pay for legal crap..

No, if it was dropped that means the other band didn't want to go through with it. Maybe because they knew their case was bullshit.

Yeah I don't know. Talking about song structure, it's REALLY rare to see bands in this genre coming up with something different than the usual when it comes to structuring their songs (intro-verse-pre chorus-chorus-intro again-verse-pre chorus-chorus-bridge-long chorus-outro)l. And this is not exactly bad, it's just that most songs have the same progression. I want you to think about every pop-punk song from every pop-punk band that used 4 power chords, and you'll know what I'm talking about. Don't think it's a matter of who can afford better lawyers, it's just that, let's face the facts: even though both are good and pretty love songs, it doesn't mean they're exactly new in musical terms. On to the next one.

Originally Posted by Jason Tate

Re-reading the old threads ... soooooo many armchair lawyers were wrong.

Haha. I did jump the gun predicting they'd settle - gave too much credit to Tenspoke's attorneys. There's so much case law on how hard it is to prove infringement in situations like these, I assumed they had a game plan. Dropping the case probably means they finally realized how little leverage they had for a settlement (or maybe Paramore's counsel scared them off by warning that they'd litigate the case, win, and ask for Section 505 attorney fees).

If anything, Paramore probably owes some money to "Parachutes"-era Coldplay, who owe it to "Bends"-era Radiohead. It goes round and round.

Why am I not surprised that the Tenspoke Indies lost? Let me paste a little something from an old article about that case...

Shill said he’s having a musicology report done to dissect the two songs and highlight what his clients claim are their copyright-violating similarities.

Those include the key, chord progression, melody, lyrical theme, rhythm and tempo, the suit states.

“We need to prove access and substantial similarity, and we believe we can do that,” Shill said. “Our client has advised me not to comment directly on the suit, but we believe ... that the similarities shared between the songs are there for anyone to hear.”

-and-

The Tenspoke Indies claim in their suit that Paramore had access to “Starlighter” because it was released in 2006 on a four-song album and got national exposure when the indie group reached the finals in the Zippo Hot Tour for upcoming bands.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2010/11/paramore_music_copyright_tensp.html

Even though those songs had a few things in common, the Tenspokes' case tried to make The Only Exception look like a complete copy and paste ripoff. And second, I guess they couldn't prove that Paramore (or really anybody else haha) have heard of that obscure ass band or that song before.

Good for them.

Quote:

There was never a doubt in our minds that the case wouldn't go any further, as this song, which Paramore wrote every note of, is very personal to them and one they are extremely proud of.

Fixed. Haha, people misusing that term is one of my pet peeves... it's like saying "I could give a shit" instead of "I couldn't".