A beat determines a song. And people work hard on their creations. Seems this always happens to people of color though. And everyone wanna be ooooo whats the big deal. Go ahead and flip the roles and I better everyone would be up and arms
@@nishataylor8558 I'm sorry you feel anytime something negative happens to a black person it's done out of racism. This is not the case. Flame cannot sue ANYONE because of one very simple pattern. The chord progression is not the same. Each of these songs has just one lead instrument. If flame could actually sue her, then that means many artists that came before flame can ALSO sue him. This was a bogus case through and through, nothing to do with racism and everything to do with the simplified state of music
@Pouty MacPotatohead They had an expert musicologist there, they weren't just plucking opinions out of thin air. It's a bit more than "the minor scale" since they have fairly similar synth effects, though I'm not sure that's enough for a lawsuit.
It's just that one noise that sounds similar to each other. Probably couldve been where they got the idea for dark horse but a straight copy? Not even close
Ummmm literally on the Flame “Make Some Noise” video site one commenter wrote, “Katy Perry, cough cough, rip off.” If the jury is tone deaf bright boy then why are people calling Flame’s song the rip off? ruclips.net/video/EaWurNA4rJU/видео.html Scant…do better. Shame on you who agreed with 133 thumb ups,
Literally “Make Some Noise” (by Flame) has those 3 tones through the songs entirety. It is the song’s signature, as usual you types miss the entire point. So of course he’s mad.
Yeah, this was a bogus case. Both songs are so simple that there’s not much to copy... they are different enough, and both songs have one lead instrument. Lol. But that’s what happens, when music gets this simple everything sounds the same.
If it makes it any better, Perry's defense team won an appeal which overturned the first ruling and received 2 million in compensation. Sadly, Gray has said that he will appeal the appeal lol, if that makes sense.
Elvia Costello got it right. In 2021, Elvis Costello defended teenage star Olivia Rodrigo over an accusation by a Twitter that she copied one of his songs. "This is fine by me," Costello replied. "It's how rock and roll works. You take the broken pieces of another thrill and make a brand new toy."
The funny part is that it was done by a preventative motion that argues that no competent jury could rule against them. Shit like this is why people hate lawyers.
Glad to hear that. But in cases like this, the plaintiff should have to pay three times the expenses of the defendant falsely accused. For cases where the intent was to destroy someone's life through lies like Amber Heard tried to do to Johnny Depp, 20x expenses plus damages.
wksoh You know, in all likelihood I’ll bet the publisher (Warner/EMI/Sony/Whoever owns her catalog) covered any associated fees. Could be wrong, but I know law pretty decently. Besides, “I watched Matlock in a bar last night. The sound wasn’t on, but I think I got the gist of it.”
Songs are getting more and more simple. There are bound to be collisions, but the jury decision was reversed by the judge, and rightfully so. I don't care about Katy Perry at all, but I'm a musician and I think the suit is bogus. I'd like to see the notes written out and make a comparison of that, but you'd really have to be obsessed to think that she was ripping off anything about the song by Flame.
If it makes it any better, Perry's defense team won an appeal which overturned the first ruling and received 2 million in compensation. Sadly, Gray has said that he will appeal the appeal lol, if that makes sense.
@@christiansanchez1785 yea he tried and failed. They had cease and desist letter if he continued he’d be sued for defamation. Which is insanely hard to do but in this case it’d be the easiest win.
I am not sure if songs really are getting simpler, or even if that is a problem. This is all about what is popular at any given time. So, back in the 30s/40s/50s for instance, chord progressions in songs tend to be different to now, (take Nightingale Sang in Berkeley Square or Moon River) and yet many of the songs used similar progressions to each other, just like songs do now. Noel Coward (I think) once joked that all possible note combinations had been done by 1922 so everything since then was plagiarism. These two tracks are alarmingly different. But even with comparisons that are closer, there are so many songs now released (most independently or just uploaded on RUclips) that I think you could probably find coincidences everywhere.
Anyone in the late 90’s and early 2000’s trance/techno era has heard that sound well before this rapper. Someone could argue he could have even been inspired by something similarly.
Worst argument. So you're basically saying you can change the tempo and pitch and take ANY artists music as a sample for your own music. See how that works??
Yes has a few differences but if something that is a big part of the song is stolen that part stolen. It like if a cellphone company would start making pear phones that is an exact copy of apple 11 but the only difference is that it has 4 cameras instead of 3. It’s still a stolen beat in 75% of the song which is worth around 50k but since she stole it 2 mil is a good price
@@IAmARealAlien the man responsible for checking if the song did infringe copyright described its timbre, which means if we go ahead a little bit more detailed, joyful noise ends on a portamento (that slide you can hear at the end of the high pitch saw wave) meanwhile dark horse stays completely stable. dark horse goes from a mediant down to its tonic. plus the melody are both in minor key, so theoretically bachs adagio violin sonata in f minor; jolly old saint nicholas; go down moses and so fourth infringe joyful noises copyright. you are comparing apple to nokia over here
@@IAmARealAlien fun fact: some guy generated all possible 4 note melodies and copyrighted them. so by your logic, noone is able to create 4 note melodies anymore because that would be stealing a big part from someone else.
Perfect example of why a jury should never decide cases like this. Ignorant af jurors have no clue what copyright laws are. This is nowhere close to being a copyright infringement in any form or fashion. Federal judge who reversed the jury decision. There needs to be a federal copyright board made of knowledgeable people from the music business to decide these cases.
Nah, both of those should be ok, if a proper opinion of musical experts is used. You can literally pull out percentage wise how much certain songs are similar to each other and or if their melody is based on the same notes.
You can sue people for everything. Doesn't mean you will win. It became popular for people to make themselves more relevant through suing bigger artists.
A federal appeals court on March 11th 2022 said Katy Perry and her team were not liable to Flame. The Pasadena, California-based court said the eight-note pattern, known as an ostinato, consisted 'entirely of commonplace musical elements' that lacked the 'quantum of originality' needed for copyright protection.
They're definitely similar, but not similar enough to warrant such a lawsuit in my opinion (although it's an opinion I think everyone should have, because it's just stupid for anyone to believe that Katy Perry's production team stole enough of a song for her to lose $550,000 and the record label $2,230,000). Flame didn't deserve almost 3 million dollars just because of Dark Horse's existence. The exposure Flame got from this probably already improved his profits by notable amount. Both songs kinda suck anyway.
No. Joyful noise uses three notes with a drop at the end that actually seems indeterminate were it not for the fade (decrescendo) on the drop. Perry uses a distinct four pitch pattern (with no portamento ambiguation). That the conform to a metric pattern is not significant as much of western music conforms to just a few metric patterns. Finally the sample size of the music is well within any sample length accepted in hip-hop/sampled music these days. Artists often then transform that sample to form a new substructure to their own beat. I believe this would put it well within fair use. I also think that Katy Perry's argument that the claimed "original" itself was a fascimile would nullify a claim to copyright. The jury got this wrong and I think the appeals court made a good call in overturning the verdict.
The thing you got wrong here is the "sample size" thing. A lot of people confuse what sampling means (literally taking someone's audio and using it in your song). There is no "fair" amount of time one can legally take from another's song without permission, not even a couple seconds. You have to clear the sample with either the record label or artist. Sometimes they'll ask for a share, sometimes not. I'm sure many people have disguised a sample and tweaked it enough to get away with it, BUT, Katy Perry didn't sample this song. The beat was clearly constructed with different synth instruments.
@@chamboyette853 The appeals court wasn't trying her for sampling. Sampling and using the same melody as someone are NOT the same thing. Again, sampling is literally taking somebody's audio file, or tape, or whatever the song was made out of, and splicing it into your recording. Katy Perry's recording uses it's OWN instruments and constructed a similar melody.
@@ChazWick4 Oh, so you are actually agreeing with the Appeals court but are saying that if it was a sample which was taken from the person's music, then she would be rightfully obliged to pay the artist, even if she mixed the sample a great deal? On what legal basis do you think this? Do you have a case law to support this?
I mean...they changed it last minute since he originally won. Christian's dont only think of money, you must have wanted an excuse to talk about Christians 🙄 his beat is the same but faster.
I used to listen to both of these songs growing up and never have I ever heard anyone of ever thought that these songs sounded similar this lawsuit is ridiculous 🗿
I finished the video and looking at this video compared to his this one is disingenuous. He played a lyrical chorus but the copyright was about a repeating phrase in the songs.
@@JoshuaDavidBrown-Jaded423 you're joking right there's no chance in hell he's winning the case get over it u can literally go find so many songs that predates joyful noise with the same similarities its not even funny appealed or not once a judge gets a hold of that evidence the trail is dead hence why it was overturned in the first place the jury where not experts n were swayed by a supposed expert who basically lied
Wow good call, same synth and same exact drums. She must've had permission or some shares with the song because it's way more popular and way more similar, and I haven't heard about any court cases from it
Man, there is one same rhythm and they say she stole the all music and have to pay 2.8 millions $ wtf I mean, Rihanna stole every single song she has, like word for word
@@ned8546 lol man, you say to check on Google and I'm pretty sure you've never done it. At this level, it's not sampling, it's stealing. Check that ruclips.net/video/jIdqeuXNuwU/видео.html And there are like 10 songs that Rihanna just copied. And you all jumping and thinking she's an amazing writer. She's nothing.
@@ned8546 Like this much, and I stopped Ester Dean, What's my name Ester Dean - Death of us Ester Dean - S&M The Dream - Umbrella Cristyle -Only girl Andre Merritt - Disturbia Rock City - Man Down PartyNextDoor - Work
@@ned8546 Man do your job here and f*cking listen to it like this one ruclips.net/video/jIdqeuXNuwU/видео.html So is that sampling or exactly the same song ?
The only similarity was that one instrument used. They sound similar but not so much to be infringing any copyright. It's like using same model guitar in two different songs.
I honestly don't get it this is the first time I've ever heard either of these songs and I don't think either one sounds enough Like each other - They sound like two completely different songs to me.
Pfffhhh... Money hungry and desperate so called Christian. No comparation. Only the high pitch beep beep in background could vaguely resemble. And different tempo and pitch. Besides, as other mentioned, when pop-music use mostly simple beat, it's getting more and more difficult not to have a beat or sample that slightly sound like used in another pop-song. But here it's so different, so clearly Katy should win the case. What it also did in the end. Good for her. Feel sad some famous musicians have to fight people like Flame, just because they are desperate and money hungry. And abuses the copyright law, and a waste of time for people in the court.
No, they are very different when played together. I'd love for you to compare those 2 songs from Yentl and Frozen at some point, Deadpool definitely has a point 😁
it's a common motif in minor scale arrangements. its actually the only logical way to take it based on where you are starting, while they are no doubt "similar" it's only similar in the way the music was constructed using at least basic music theory. The phrase itself isnt unique enough that I'd even call it something you can copywrite.
Perry's win, however, was not apparent right out of the gate. After a jury trial in 2019, a jury found defendants liable for copyright infringement and awarded $2.8 million in damages. But post-trial, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California vacated the jury award and granted judgment as a matter of law to defendants. U.S. District Judge Christina A. Snyder reasoned that the elements comprising the ostinatos are not, either individually or as a combination, copyrightable original expression. Plaintiffs appealed. A three-judge panel for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court judge's decision. The Ninth Circuit's opinion focused on whether the “Joyful Noise” ostinato qualifies as “original expression”-a statutory requirement to be protectable under U.S. copyright law. See 17 U.S.C. § 102(a). Reiterating longstanding principles of copyright law, the Ninth Circuit noted the “famously low bar for originality.” But this low threshold for copyrightability still “does require at least a modicum of creativity.” Copyright protection does not extend to “common or trite musical elements, or commonplace elements that are firmly rooted in the genre's tradition.” With this framework, the Ninth Circuit held that none of the alleged points of similarity between the two songs arises out of a protectible form of original expression. Without original expression, no element identified by Gray is individually copyrightable. For example, the Ninth Circuit found the use of eight-note sequences played in an even rhythm in both “Joyful Noise” and “Dark Horse” as “trite” musical choices outside the protection of copyright law. Similarly, the two songs' “timbre” (or sound quality) from the use of synthesizers has long been commonplace in popular music. Their “melodic shape” (or the way the melody moves through musical space) simply reflect “rules of consonance common in popular music” and that use “standard tools to build and resolve dramatic tension.” The two songs' “pitch sequence” are merely “basic musical building blocks” of a melody-and while a melody may be copyrightable, the abstract pitch sequence that is only a component of that melody is not. Further, the songs' “textures” (or the way different musical elements are mixed together, such as parts played by different instruments) are too abstract of a similarity to be legally cognizable.
You can’t find 12 jurors in the world that would understand how different these songs actually are. Also, where is the theft? Was the beat sampled? No. Was any original files used? No. Was there an intent to replicate his song? No. Throw out the case.
Come on, that is a shameless plug with minor sound editing. Even if Katy didn't know, the producer did. Just invite that dude to your tour as opener and perform that song together, win win. :)
I love Dark Horse, but I'm tone deaf and even I can hear the similarity. That judge was bought off by Perry. Her reputation was more important than the loss of money.
Here's the thing, that riff has been done before. Can't give an example, but it's not the first time I've heard that sequence. One must also look beyond pop/top 100 charts and consider other sources of influence - old movie scores, even jingles written for TV and commercials. They can all creep into songwriting process
lol… Ok so they slightly switched it up. They slowed it down a little but I can definitely hear where they were inspired. They changed it just enough so it wouldn’t violate and created something else. I still here the influence from the first song though.
It's definitely stolen and Katy got away with a crime. But, White artists have been ripping off Black artists since the dawn of Rock & Roll. So, it's not a shock, just a shame. I think she should do the right thing and either pay him a lump sum for using it, or give him a percentage of all future royalties. If Queen can make Blondie do it for 6 words, then Katy should have some decency, too. The only thing I object to is Mr Gray making about religion. He may feel that, but it isn't nice to say out loud. Insults don't help.
I don't know if it's similar enough for CopyRight, but it could easily be remixed. In fact, that should happen, someone should remix them to commemorate the lawsuit XD
It pissed me off that the court ruled against Perry, and I'm thrilled she won the appeal. This copyright claim was completely frivolous. The guy who sang "This Is Why I'm Hot" should've sued the Christian rapper
The only fair lawsuit would be if she sampled the exact audio file without asking, like Vanilla Ice did with Queen. You can't copyright a few notes played on a completely different instrument/beat. There are only 12 damn notes lol. How did they win that
Therefore, the Ninth Circuit concluded that the two songs' similar ostinatos result only from the use of commonplace, unoriginal musical principles, and thus could not be the basis for a copyright infringement claim. In addition to finding no individual musical component of the “Joyful Noise” ostinato to be copyrightable, the Ninth Circuit similarly concluded that the ostinato-as a “combination of unprotectable elements”-was unprotectable. With “originality” again as the threshold question, the Ninth Circuit reiterated how a protectable combination can arise from an original “selection and arrangement” of unprotectable elements.
It's similar enough to where she should at least acknowledge it wasn't accidental, HOWEVER it's not similar enough to sue for money over. There are literally thousands of popular songs with similar chord progressions, song structures and beats. You can't copyright frickin beats or even short melodies. It's ridiculous really. Good for Kate 👍
Katy Perry does not have to pay rapper Flame 2.8 million dollars (about 2.5 million euros). He accused the singer of plagiarism with her song Dark Horse from 2013. Flame, whose real name is Marcus Gray, sued Perry in 2014 for allegedly plagiarizing an eight-note riff from his song Joyful Noise. Perry has consistently denied that. Flame was previously ruled in favor and a jury awarded him $2.8 million, but a judge later overturned the verdict, saying the tune was not "particularly unique or rare." The rapper then appealed. However, the appeals court on Friday confirmed the judge's decision, ruling that the tune is in fact too generic. Perry doesn't have to pay Flame anything now. BBC NEWS
@@SergioHernandez-gi8pj Thanks you spared my time. I wondered how I knew that beat when never listening to Kate nor that Christian rapper. But I liked Moments in love
wow I had to listen to that song.. YOU THINK THAT SONG SOUNDS ANYTHING LIKE EITHER OF THESE? ARE YOU STUPID? Geeze man... thats why no one mentioned it, because it doesnt sound like either one of those. Here, look up "Barney: I love you, you love me" there.. say that song sounds like them dipshit.
Choruses are different. lyrics are different. however musicality of the verses is where its insanely similar. dark horse has the same synth sound just at a slower tempo and in a different key. tbh considering that they were trying to sue for $20,000,000 and they only got $2,800,000 i kinda think that's fair for that one similar part. and its not like Katy Perry is really going to suffer bearing in mind her networth in 2016 was $125,000,000 and I imagine that's only gone up since.
Its not about Katy Perry suffering, its about the dangerous precedent of allowing someone to own the minor scale. Its absurd and a decision arrived at by jury not understanding musical history or common practice
Don't like either of the tracks personally - do either of them have any musical content at all or are they just noises in the dark- one thing is sure it's a minefield out there , a lawyers paradise .There are many RUclipsrs claiming this case is frivolous? What hope is there for new lyricists/composers to create new work ? There must be computer algorithms that can decipher all/any tune put out for similarities, the moguls control everything 🤔
@@k-leb4671 Mogul - an important or powerful person especially in the film or media industry - and to prove my point Google are now taking over RUclips , control will become tighter like a noose around the neck 😉😎
"What hope is there for new lyricists/composers to create new work?" The good news is that these copyright trolling lawsuits are typically targeted at the most successful artists. Think of it like a casino; the suing party rolls the dice and gambles that a multi-million dollar award for damages is worth risking the cost of filing a lawsuit and the possibility of losing. It's just a shakedown of successful artists for their money. Most new lyricists and composers don't earn anything close to what Perry does, which is why they are very rarely the targets of copyright trolling. It's not financially worth it for the trolls to go after someone over a song that only earns somewhere in the thousands (not millions) of dollars. Most songwriters don't have to worry as long as they create their own material and don't do something unethical and dumb like stealing the whole melody or lyrics from some other song.
The only consideration is the synth on the verses. The first half is the same, just like any other song playing 8th notes on the same pitch. They both then descend, but Katy’s version uses more notes and is not identical. You need a matching melody.
Flame's lawsuit claimed infringement of the musical composition, not the sound recording, of Joyful Noise. This is an important nuance the Court of Appeals noted in its opinion upholding the district court's decision to grant judgment to Katy Perry despite the jury's finding of infringement. This RUclips comparison is a nice practical reference point. That said, for purposes of comparing similarity in the actual lawsuit, it is somewhat misleading. It would have been interesting if infringement of the sound recording had also been claimed.
My understanding is that the composition is embodied within the sound recording, so if the sound recording were to be used there is the acknowledgement and proof of copying of the composition also. I'm not sure why comparing the recordings is misleading, but you're right in that it could be clearer to have them each played on the same instrument (piano for example)
@@willjamesmoore misleading in the sense that this RUclips comparison does not truly reflect the work/elements claimed to be infringed in the actual case. A sound recording covers the composition yes and the sound recording includes even more elements one might point to as part of arguing for example protectable selection/arrangement. Comparing sound recordings can suggest more similarity and protectable original creation than actually exist with respect to the underlying work (here the composition) claimed to be infringed. The jury found infringement and the trial judge then said thank you but no infringement as a matter of law, elements identified as infringed not protectable, and the appeals court affirmed the trial judge.
You need to extract the vocals to do an accurate analysis I also saw on one of the Katy Perry songs it said that the lyrics and speed had been adjusted which I'm guessing was done in a defense tactic on behalf of Katy Perry and her fans too hard to tell with the lyrics playing
Wow. I remember hearing something about Katy Perry being sued for "Dark Horse". Now, I know it is a bunch of bull. Dark Horse is my favorite song from Katy Perry. I don't even know this guy Flame.
My understanding is there was more to the case (as demomstrated in other videos I have seen on the subject, assuming they are still up.) I think before this even went to court it was pointed out. Here is where it is more than just a coincidence (in likelihood,) and not only that but in an insult intended manner. "Joyful Noise" was clearly by Christian artists, *the beat was at 177 BPM* (that ties in.) For those who don't know, 7 is sort of considered a signature number for God *and 6 a significant number with satan.* Well, neither song sounds like the other... on the suface. But if you slow the "Joyful Noise" beat down to 166 BPM and lower the pitch proportionally (in closest key I assume)... then "Joyful Noise" and "Dark Horse" line up note for note, pattern for pattern ( at least in instrument / synth leads)... The further depth is that (unless I am mistaken) the Katie Perry beat was *made by a guy who is affiliated with 3 6 Mafia* who use numerology to represent for satan (or they used to.) So the whole thing was not only copying the material, but also doing it in a mocking / diss way. I don't know what all was presented in the case, but who knows, they may have witness accounts as well or something. *To my knoweldge* the beat maker who was accused never even denied any of it... *to my knowledge.* Or no sorry... it wasn't the beat maker but the track features a 3 6 Mafia artist (Juicy J) ...so... similar situation still
@@saarapollonen8138 Katy's track is listed as "132" but it is half time which is 66 BPM (the snare falls on 2 and 4 in a 4 count measure... so really tracks like that are listed as double the true BPM) same with Flame's track 154 BPM but it is half speed so 77 BPM in reality. The first video I saw mentioned those factors, I wish I could find it. I'm trying.... assuming it is even still up. But you can def look up the BPMs yourself and see too... Flame is def 154 (actually 77 technically) and Katy is 132 (actually 66.) Idk why they take beats like that and classify them as double their speed. Those beats clearly build around the snare like most beats, which means two snares per 4 beat count and makes the actual speed half what is listed (not due to the snare but the snare is the obvious marker that shows how these beats are formatted.) If you want to look into that, look up "154 BPM drum" on here and pay attention to where the snares hit... and look up "132 BPM drum" and look where the snares hit. Then you could do the same with 77 and 66... 154 BPM is more like Jungle / Drum n Bass speed music. I'll try to edit some vid links in to demomstrate this. 154 actual BPM (note the snare [or in cases what would be clap] placement) ruclips.net/video/NeuGoVSv6II/видео.html 132 actual BPMs ruclips.net/video/D_von936FII/видео.html 77 actual BPMs ruclips.net/video/aehB8f5l_2Y/видео.html 66 actual BPMs ruclips.net/video/1kR_3y0y84g/видео.html Yea....the half speed beats will line up in timing with the standard speed beats and a lot rap stuff and pop of that nature often incorporate elements that mesh with the regular full speed instead of half for dancability I imagine... but still... the 2/4 snare / clap placement really tells you the actual speed. I also think the half speed beats are measured at double for djing purposes because Djs will often base the larger scale criteria around probability and at large over time, the half step beats are way less dancable and less common... with generic commercial rap that is different and dub step / trap / trip hop etc as well (which I do love some roots dub step, trip hop and a little electronic trap)... but at large, if you play a half step track, unless the set is more geared toward those styles, you will likely end up mixing back over to regular speed from half at some point.
@@agapeleone5847 okay thanks a lot! I totally believe this can be the truth. They love to mock Christians and I felt that in my spirit while I was listening Dark horse and thought to myself there's something very evil here
Imho..very bold for Juicy-J to try and claim copyright infringement when HE could have been subject to the same since the original artist is actually The Art of Noise -Moments In Love from 20 years ago. Clearly the inspiration for both Katy Perry and Jucy J songs.
Yeah, Katy Perry in this circumstance is really more of a code name for Katy Perry and all those writers, producers and engineers that worked with her.
The bit you miss from the comparison is the break in the song with the lowered voice. "there's no going back" vs "chapter 1 if you cared". The riff I have no problem with, but the riff and the lowered voice combined is worryingly similar.
And both songs have rappers say "y'all know what it is" to start off the song, almost at the exact same point in the beat. And the beat was modified slightly and the tone changed. However, I would have had a hard time saying it was a total copy. My guess is that maybe Perry or the producers heard the Joyful Noise song and it influenced it. At this point, it is hard for beats and notes to not be "copied" from somewhere.
It's 3 damn notes. This is lame
Billy Badass it’s not Evan creative it’s just a minor scale lol
Billy Badass ikr! Just that effing beat xD
@@Promilus1984 it was a jury that made the verdict, and just a few days ago the judge actually vacated the decision so they don't have to pay
A beat determines a song. And people work hard on their creations. Seems this always happens to people of color though. And everyone wanna be ooooo whats the big deal. Go ahead and flip the roles and I better everyone would be up and arms
@@nishataylor8558 I'm sorry you feel anytime something negative happens to a black person it's done out of racism. This is not the case. Flame cannot sue ANYONE because of one very simple pattern. The chord progression is not the same. Each of these songs has just one lead instrument. If flame could actually sue her, then that means many artists that came before flame can ALSO sue him. This was a bogus case through and through, nothing to do with racism and everything to do with the simplified state of music
You can’t own the minor scale wtf
A judge reversed the decision
@Pouty MacPotatohead They had an expert musicologist there, they weren't just plucking opinions out of thin air. It's a bit more than "the minor scale" since they have fairly similar synth effects, though I'm not sure that's enough for a lawsuit.
@@johnmartinez7440 no, it's literally just the 3 notes, the songs sound nothing alike in terms of it's synths used
@paul alcohol if you’re UMG you can
Memeza's Synth No, the melody in “Dark Horse” uses FOUR notes.
The jury was tone deaf.
It's just that one noise that sounds similar to each other. Probably couldve been where they got the idea for dark horse but a straight copy? Not even close
Lucky for them.
Ummmm literally on the Flame “Make Some Noise” video site one commenter wrote, “Katy Perry, cough cough, rip off.” If the jury is tone deaf bright boy then why are people calling Flame’s song the rip off?
ruclips.net/video/EaWurNA4rJU/видео.html
Scant…do better. Shame on you who agreed with 133 thumb ups,
@@ashenmadeit8348 Wrong Flame wrote there’s first. Nice try.
Literally “Make Some Noise” (by Flame) has those 3 tones through the songs entirety. It is the song’s signature, as usual you types miss the entire point. So of course he’s mad.
Yeah, this was a bogus case. Both songs are so simple that there’s not much to copy... they are different enough, and both songs have one lead instrument. Lol. But that’s what happens, when music gets this simple everything sounds the same.
Considering both songs use a beat similar to Art Of Noise - Love
@@BiggMatt183 100% and that song has been sampled a million times also.
If it makes it any better, Perry's defense team won an appeal which overturned the first ruling and received 2 million in compensation. Sadly, Gray has said that he will appeal the appeal lol, if that makes sense.
I think this is the exact analysis of the problem.
Let me guess… you have an album out or something right?
Elvia Costello got it right.
In 2021, Elvis Costello defended teenage star Olivia Rodrigo over an accusation by a Twitter that she copied one of his songs.
"This is fine by me," Costello
replied. "It's how rock and roll
works. You take the broken
pieces of another thrill and make
a brand new toy."
I love Elvis Costello
Unless you’re the one whose music is getting ripped off & you haven’t been paid or even discovered…All while someone else gets rich off your work.
2020 Update: Court reversed decision.
Funny that it even had to be reversed in the first place.
The funny part is that it was done by a preventative motion that argues that no competent jury could rule against them. Shit like this is why people hate lawyers.
Glad to hear that. But in cases like this, the plaintiff should have to pay three times the expenses of the defendant falsely accused. For cases where the intent was to destroy someone's life through lies like Amber Heard tried to do to Johnny Depp, 20x expenses plus damages.
@gary hawkins Beware of bringing "intent" into a policy. Because actual intent is harder to prove than someone did a thing.
wksoh You know, in all likelihood I’ll bet the publisher (Warner/EMI/Sony/Whoever owns her catalog) covered any associated fees. Could be wrong, but I know law pretty decently. Besides, “I watched Matlock in a bar last night. The sound wasn’t on, but I think I got the gist of it.”
Sounds a little similar to me but not enough to say Perry copied it.
@Vic Birth idk, we just, kinda hear them? There's not much resemblance
@Vic Birth because they're in different keys, but if you transpose them then those backing quarter notes are exactly the same
@@talimpalomino9589 you can't own copyright on an ostinato
@@talimpalomino9589 they literally aren’t
Anyone who thinks these two songs sound like either has sh¹t in their ears or sh¹t for brains, or both.
Songs are getting more and more simple. There are bound to be collisions, but the jury decision was reversed by the judge, and rightfully so. I don't care about Katy Perry at all, but I'm a musician and I think the suit is bogus. I'd like to see the notes written out and make a comparison of that, but you'd really have to be obsessed to think that she was ripping off anything about the song by Flame.
This guy did a great break down of it. ruclips.net/video/0ytoUuO-qvg/видео.html
I dont think Flame is the kind of guy who can comprehend sheet music
If it makes it any better, Perry's defense team won an appeal which overturned the first ruling and received 2 million in compensation. Sadly, Gray has said that he will appeal the appeal lol, if that makes sense.
@@christiansanchez1785 yea he tried and failed. They had cease and desist letter if he continued he’d be sued for defamation. Which is insanely hard to do but in this case it’d be the easiest win.
I am not sure if songs really are getting simpler, or even if that is a problem. This is all about what is popular at any given time. So, back in the 30s/40s/50s for instance, chord progressions in songs tend to be different to now, (take Nightingale Sang in Berkeley Square or Moon River) and yet many of the songs used similar progressions to each other, just like songs do now. Noel Coward (I think) once joked that all possible note combinations had been done by 1922 so everything since then was plagiarism. These two tracks are alarmingly different. But even with comparisons that are closer, there are so many songs now released (most independently or just uploaded on RUclips) that I think you could probably find coincidences everywhere.
Anyone in the late 90’s and early 2000’s trance/techno era has heard that sound well before this rapper. Someone could argue he could have even been inspired by something similarly.
This is so simple that you can find many songs like that...
One time I played something similar to both on accident because i was bored
It's insane that they ruled in favor of the plantif.
It's clearly the same track/beat with the tempo slowed. Clear and plain copyright infringement. Quit simping for a popstar lmao
@@Zoroaster4 it ended up being overturned in favor for Katy Perry.
@@crampusmaximus8849Six notes is not plagiarism.
If you have to modify the pitch and speed to get them to sound alike, then it's obviously not copied.
On the flip side, you could just take anyone's riff and modify the pitch and speed a bit to make something new.
just because its been sped up or pitched differently doesntly change anything
This is a pretty dull argument
Worst argument. So you're basically saying you can change the tempo and pitch and take ANY artists music as a sample for your own music. See how that works??
You’re an idiot 🤡
And the chord progression is entirely different
Yes its a lie stop talking about katy preey
Yes has a few differences but if something that is a big part of the song is stolen that part stolen. It like if a cellphone company would start making pear phones that is an exact copy of apple 11 but the only difference is that it has 4 cameras instead of 3. It’s still a stolen beat in 75% of the song which is worth around 50k but since she stole it 2 mil is a good price
@@IAmARealAlien you're an idiot
@@IAmARealAlien the man responsible for checking if the song did infringe copyright described its timbre, which means if we go ahead a little bit more detailed, joyful noise ends on a portamento (that slide you can hear at the end of the high pitch saw wave) meanwhile dark horse stays completely stable. dark horse goes from a mediant down to its tonic. plus the melody are both in minor key, so theoretically bachs adagio violin sonata in f minor; jolly old saint nicholas; go down moses and so fourth infringe joyful noises copyright.
you are comparing apple to nokia over here
@@IAmARealAlien fun fact: some guy generated all possible 4 note melodies and copyrighted them. so by your logic, noone is able to create 4 note melodies anymore because that would be stealing a big part from someone else.
Perfect example of why a jury should never decide cases like this. Ignorant af jurors have no clue what copyright laws are. This is nowhere close to being a copyright infringement in any form or fashion. Federal judge who reversed the jury decision. There needs to be a federal copyright board made of knowledgeable people from the music business to decide these cases.
The rap "song" sounds like it ripped off streets of rage 2's sound track where as dark horse at least had enough difference to be used as it's own.
ruclips.net/video/LisW-5HJVx8/видео.html
Agreed
Judges are no less prone to bad judgement, you can bet on that.
Nah, both of those should be ok, if a proper opinion of musical experts is used. You can literally pull out percentage wise how much certain songs are similar to each other and or if their melody is based on the same notes.
Soon, artists will be able to sue each other for using a similar tempo. This seems to be the direction we’re headed in.
Unless the song isn’t successful 🤣
You can sue people for everything. Doesn't mean you will win. It became popular for people to make themselves more relevant through suing bigger artists.
A federal appeals court on March 11th 2022 said Katy Perry and her team were not liable to Flame. The Pasadena, California-based court said the eight-note pattern, known as an ostinato, consisted 'entirely of commonplace musical elements' that lacked the 'quantum of originality' needed for copyright protection.
They're definitely similar, but not similar enough to warrant such a lawsuit in my opinion (although it's an opinion I think everyone should have, because it's just stupid for anyone to believe that Katy Perry's production team stole enough of a song for her to lose $550,000 and the record label $2,230,000).
Flame didn't deserve almost 3 million dollars just because of Dark Horse's existence. The exposure Flame got from this probably already improved his profits by notable amount.
Both songs kinda suck anyway.
The last part of this comment 😂
In fact the both suck.
Rude? Like wth the beat is sick 😂
Hahahahahahahaha can't compete with the song of BTS
The last part of the common is the holy Grail of JUDGEMENT!!!! 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
No. Joyful noise uses three notes with a drop at the end that actually seems indeterminate were it not for the fade (decrescendo) on the drop. Perry uses a distinct four pitch pattern (with no portamento ambiguation). That the conform to a metric pattern is not significant as much of western music conforms to just a few metric patterns. Finally the sample size of the music is well within any sample length accepted in hip-hop/sampled music these days. Artists often then transform that sample to form a new substructure to their own beat. I believe this would put it well within fair use. I also think that Katy Perry's argument that the claimed "original" itself was a fascimile would nullify a claim to copyright. The jury got this wrong and I think the appeals court made a good call in overturning the verdict.
The thing you got wrong here is the "sample size" thing. A lot of people confuse what sampling means (literally taking someone's audio and using it in your song). There is no "fair" amount of time one can legally take from another's song without permission, not even a couple seconds. You have to clear the sample with either the record label or artist. Sometimes they'll ask for a share, sometimes not. I'm sure many people have disguised a sample and tweaked it enough to get away with it, BUT, Katy Perry didn't sample this song. The beat was clearly constructed with different synth instruments.
@@ChazWick4 thank you for the correction.
@@ChazWick4 Uhhhh, the Appeals Court doesn't agree with you.
@@chamboyette853 The appeals court wasn't trying her for sampling. Sampling and using the same melody as someone are NOT the same thing. Again, sampling is literally taking somebody's audio file, or tape, or whatever the song was made out of, and splicing it into your recording. Katy Perry's recording uses it's OWN instruments and constructed a similar melody.
@@ChazWick4 Oh, so you are actually agreeing with the Appeals court but are saying that if it was a sample which was taken from the person's music, then she would be rightfully obliged to pay the artist, even if she mixed the sample a great deal? On what legal basis do you think this? Do you have a case law to support this?
I really hate that this happened.
This was a reach… congratulations to Katy for winning this money hungry lawsuit 💕💕
Christians, only thinking of money as usual, typical 😇🤑
I mean...they changed it last minute since he originally won. Christian's dont only think of money, you must have wanted an excuse to talk about Christians 🙄 his beat is the same but faster.
It was a joke but whatever...
The girls are fighting!! 🤣🤣🤣
@@itsmartha9727 what a cute little sassy comment 😉
I used to listen to both of these songs growing up and never have I ever heard anyone of ever thought that these songs sounded similar this lawsuit is ridiculous 🗿
Bs
How many just watched Viva Frei on the over turning of this case and came looking to hear the two songs
I finished the video and looking at this video compared to his this one is disingenuous. He played a lyrical chorus but the copyright was about a repeating phrase in the songs.
Currently watching his breakdown of Adam Neely's video...
At the end, she won :))
Dude still got 2 mill
@@SantaAna_714 no..new verdict overturned that award
It will be appealed, and the judge's verdict will probably be overturned. Its far from the end.
@@JoshuaDavidBrown-Jaded423 Ugh, it's never over...
@@JoshuaDavidBrown-Jaded423 you're joking right there's no chance in hell he's winning the case get over it u can literally go find so many songs that predates joyful noise with the same similarities its not even funny appealed or not once a judge gets a hold of that evidence the trail is dead hence why it was overturned in the first place the jury where not experts n were swayed by a supposed expert who basically lied
“Joyful no’ise stole it from “art of noise “ as their song “moments in love “ it’s more clear in Perry’s version
YES the original beat Is moments in love of art of noise ^_*
Wow good call, same synth and same exact drums. She must've had permission or some shares with the song because it's way more popular and way more similar, and I haven't heard about any court cases from it
Are you dumb? 🤡
Man, there is one same rhythm and they say she stole the all music and have to pay 2.8 millions $ wtf
I mean, Rihanna stole every single song she has, like word for word
Maxime Dupré that’s called Sampling. Completely legal and pre arranged. Google it
@@ned8546 lol man, you say to check on Google and I'm pretty sure you've never done it. At this level, it's not sampling, it's stealing. Check that ruclips.net/video/jIdqeuXNuwU/видео.html
And there are like 10 songs that Rihanna just copied. And you all jumping and thinking she's an amazing writer. She's nothing.
@@ned8546 Like this much, and I stopped
Ester Dean, What's my name
Ester Dean - Death of us
Ester Dean - S&M
The Dream - Umbrella
Cristyle -Only girl
Andre Merritt - Disturbia
Rock City - Man Down
PartyNextDoor - Work
Maxime Dupré are you just naming songs that have the same title? Titles are not protected by copyright
@@ned8546 Man do your job here and f*cking listen to it
like this one ruclips.net/video/jIdqeuXNuwU/видео.html
So is that sampling or exactly the same song ?
And they both sound derivative of "Moments in Love" by The Art of Noise.
The only similarity was that one instrument used. They sound similar but not so much to be infringing any copyright. It's like using same model guitar in two different songs.
That wasn't an instrument. The days of making music with instruments is looooooooong gone.
This has nothing in common. Topic closed. Bye.
You’re an idiot 🤡
An appeals judge just reversed the case.
It was actually the same judge and the same court. The Judge overturned her own courts decision as a matter of law.
Whats funny is...it was the same judge that was on the jury trial..
@@markd2438 She overturned it because the Led Zeppelin lawsuit set a new precedent for how to decide copyright cases in that circuit.
@@teraxefalse it was a different judge. 🤡
Bet he’s not so joyful now he’s lost his court case 😂
😂😂😂
But flamez verse and juicy j verse sounds almost identical
She completely stole it 🤡
@@zaywhite337 What? Can you not hear the difference? Sure it sounds similar, but its not enough to sue someone lol
@@rose_blue1 It is completely the same and the way she acted about the entire court situation definitely makes her guilty.
1:41 that's the pre-chorus...
I honestly don't get it this is the first time I've ever heard either of these songs and I don't think either one sounds enough Like each other - They sound like two completely different songs to me.
ditto
2 VERY different songs. Both fire, both different
I SWEAR, everyone’s dissing the songs in the comments but Dark Horse is a bop, haven’t heard the other but might need to give a listen
Dark horse is good but it is 100% stolen.
Bs
I don't hear any melody nor rhythm...three notes and some basic beats.
that's what happens when nobody can play an instrument anymore and everybody only uses samples and loops. fools among themselves.
😂😂
Facts.
Pfffhhh... Money hungry and desperate so called Christian. No comparation. Only the high pitch beep beep in background could vaguely resemble. And different tempo and pitch. Besides, as other mentioned, when pop-music use mostly simple beat, it's getting more and more difficult not to have a beat or sample that slightly sound like used in another pop-song. But here it's so different, so clearly Katy should win the case. What it also did in the end. Good for her. Feel sad some famous musicians have to fight people like Flame, just because they are desperate and money hungry. And
abuses the copyright law, and a waste of time for people in the court.
Bro has anyone ever actually heard of joyful noise
Rappers taking about Composition Copyright is the Biggest Irony.
No, they are very different when played together.
I'd love for you to compare those 2 songs from Yentl and Frozen at some point, Deadpool definitely has a point 😁
it's a common motif in minor scale arrangements. its actually the only logical way to take it based on where you are starting, while they are no doubt "similar" it's only similar in the way the music was constructed using at least basic music theory. The phrase itself isnt unique enough that I'd even call it something you can copywrite.
Perry's win, however, was not apparent right out of the gate. After a jury trial in 2019, a jury found defendants liable for copyright infringement and awarded $2.8 million in damages. But post-trial, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California vacated the jury award and granted judgment as a matter of law to defendants. U.S. District Judge Christina A. Snyder reasoned that the elements comprising the ostinatos are not, either individually or as a combination, copyrightable original expression. Plaintiffs appealed.
A three-judge panel for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court judge's decision. The Ninth Circuit's opinion focused on whether the “Joyful Noise” ostinato qualifies as “original expression”-a statutory requirement to be protectable under U.S. copyright law. See 17 U.S.C. § 102(a). Reiterating longstanding principles of copyright law, the Ninth Circuit noted the “famously low bar for originality.” But this low threshold for copyrightability still “does require at least a modicum of creativity.” Copyright protection does not extend to “common or trite musical elements, or commonplace elements that are firmly rooted in the genre's tradition.”
With this framework, the Ninth Circuit held that none of the alleged points of similarity between the two songs arises out of a protectible form of original expression. Without original expression, no element identified by Gray is individually copyrightable. For example, the Ninth Circuit found the use of eight-note sequences played in an even rhythm in both “Joyful Noise” and “Dark Horse” as “trite” musical choices outside the protection of copyright law. Similarly, the two songs' “timbre” (or sound quality) from the use of synthesizers has long been commonplace in popular music. Their “melodic shape” (or the way the melody moves through musical space) simply reflect “rules of consonance common in popular music” and that use “standard tools to build and resolve dramatic tension.” The two songs' “pitch sequence” are merely “basic musical building blocks” of a melody-and while a melody may be copyrightable, the abstract pitch sequence that is only a component of that melody is not. Further, the songs' “textures” (or the way different musical elements are mixed together, such as parts played by different instruments) are too abstract of a similarity to be legally cognizable.
You can’t find 12 jurors in the world that would understand how different these songs actually are. Also, where is the theft? Was the beat sampled? No. Was any original files used? No. Was there an intent to replicate his song? No. Throw out the case.
Come on, that is a shameless plug with minor sound editing. Even if Katy didn't know, the producer did. Just invite that dude to your tour as opener and perform that song together, win win. :)
Why be a opener for a couple hundred grand when you can sue for 2 mill 😂
DION JOHNSON 😂😂😂😂😂
I love Dark Horse, but I'm tone deaf and even I can hear the similarity. That judge was bought off by Perry. Her reputation was more important than the loss of money.
Her song sounds more like another song called quiet storm and nobody cares lol
Here's the thing, that riff has been done before. Can't give an example, but it's not the first time I've heard that sequence. One must also look beyond pop/top 100 charts and consider other sources of influence - old movie scores, even jingles written for TV and commercials. They can all creep into songwriting process
Time to put an AI program on it.That'll totally confuse the issue.
One about Jesus and one about Satan.. he's the ruler of this world.. UNTIL Jesus comes back which is SOON!! I'm ready. I hope you are!
This dude 100% saw an opportunity to get mad money off of Katy. His best sounds no where near the same
and then lost it lol
lol… Ok so they slightly switched it up. They slowed it down a little but I can definitely hear where they were inspired. They changed it just enough so it wouldn’t violate and created something else. I still here the influence from the first song though.
i personally dont hear the similarities
You're delusional
It's definitely stolen and Katy got away with a crime. But, White artists have been ripping off Black artists since the dawn of Rock & Roll. So, it's not a shock, just a shame.
I think she should do the right thing and either pay him a lump sum for using it, or give him a percentage of all future royalties. If Queen can make Blondie do it for 6 words, then Katy should have some decency, too.
The only thing I object to is Mr Gray making about religion. He may feel that, but it isn't nice to say out loud. Insults don't help.
this is like trying to sue someone for using the letter “J”
the songs are like completely diffrent
I don't know if it's similar enough for CopyRight, but it could easily be remixed.
In fact, that should happen, someone should remix them to commemorate the lawsuit XD
It would at least be something positive coming out of this case.
I say judge and jury should reconsider, drop charges and dismiss the case since they hardly have any similarities
Is math related to science?
haha
It pissed me off that the court ruled against Perry, and I'm thrilled she won the appeal. This copyright claim was completely frivolous. The guy who sang "This Is Why I'm Hot" should've sued the Christian rapper
The only fair lawsuit would be if she sampled the exact audio file without asking, like Vanilla Ice did with Queen. You can't copyright a few notes played on a completely different instrument/beat. There are only 12 damn notes lol. How did they win that
3 notes and not even in the same key
Yeah they changed the pitch abd slowed it down. Definitely deserved to be sued
Therefore, the Ninth Circuit concluded that the two songs' similar ostinatos result only from the use of commonplace, unoriginal musical principles, and thus could not be the basis for a copyright infringement claim.
In addition to finding no individual musical component of the “Joyful Noise” ostinato to be copyrightable, the Ninth Circuit similarly concluded that the ostinato-as a “combination of unprotectable elements”-was unprotectable. With “originality” again as the threshold question, the Ninth Circuit reiterated how a protectable combination can arise from an original “selection and arrangement” of unprotectable elements.
The jury got it WRONG the first time out of the gate - I have been writing beats like that for YEARS...
I disagree with the jury (different key, different note progression, etc) but it wasn't just beat, it was that whole ostinato.
It's similar enough to where she should at least acknowledge it wasn't accidental, HOWEVER it's not similar enough to sue for money over. There are literally thousands of popular songs with similar chord progressions, song structures and beats. You can't copyright frickin beats or even short melodies. It's ridiculous really. Good for Kate 👍
Good for flame too cuz that beat is fire 🔥
Katy Perry does not have to pay rapper Flame 2.8 million dollars (about 2.5 million euros). He accused the singer of plagiarism with her song Dark Horse from 2013.
Flame, whose real name is Marcus Gray, sued Perry in 2014 for allegedly plagiarizing an eight-note riff from his song Joyful Noise. Perry has consistently denied that.
Flame was previously ruled in favor and a jury awarded him $2.8 million, but a judge later overturned the verdict, saying the tune was not "particularly unique or rare."
The rapper then appealed. However, the appeals court on Friday confirmed the judge's decision, ruling that the tune is in fact too generic. Perry doesn't have to pay Flame anything now. BBC NEWS
All pop music sounds pretty much the same nowadays. This decision seems so random. If it becomes the new norm, you artists are all screwed.
when someone says the joke louder and everybody laughs
How are the jury members qualified to make that judgment? This copyright infringement shit is really starting to get carried away
Hmmm, no one mentioned how both of them stole from MIMS "This is why I'm hot".
Nah man. Youre about 25 years off. ALL of these are taken from a song called "moments in love" by Art of Noise.
@@SergioHernandez-gi8pj Thanks you spared my time. I wondered how I knew that beat when never listening to Kate nor that Christian rapper. But I liked Moments in love
wow I had to listen to that song.. YOU THINK THAT SONG SOUNDS ANYTHING LIKE EITHER OF THESE? ARE YOU STUPID? Geeze man... thats why no one mentioned it, because it doesnt sound like either one of those. Here, look up "Barney: I love you, you love me" there.. say that song sounds like them dipshit.
The two sound nothing like each other
Choruses are different. lyrics are different. however musicality of the verses is where its insanely similar. dark horse has the same synth sound just at a slower tempo and in a different key. tbh considering that they were trying to sue for $20,000,000 and they only got $2,800,000 i kinda think that's fair for that one similar part. and its not like Katy Perry is really going to suffer bearing in mind her networth in 2016 was $125,000,000 and I imagine that's only gone up since.
Its not about Katy Perry suffering, its about the dangerous precedent of allowing someone to own the minor scale. Its absurd and a decision arrived at by jury not understanding musical history or common practice
Don't like either of the tracks personally - do either of them have any musical content at all or are they just noises in the dark- one thing is sure it's a minefield out there , a lawyers paradise .There are many RUclipsrs claiming this case is frivolous? What hope is there for new lyricists/composers to create new work ? There must be computer algorithms that can decipher all/any tune put out for similarities, the moguls control everything 🤔
The moguls?
@@k-leb4671 Mogul - an important or powerful person especially in the film or media industry - and to prove my point Google are now taking over RUclips , control will become tighter like a noose around the neck 😉😎
"What hope is there for new lyricists/composers to create new work?" The good news is that these copyright trolling lawsuits are typically targeted at the most successful artists. Think of it like a casino; the suing party rolls the dice and gambles that a multi-million dollar award for damages is worth risking the cost of filing a lawsuit and the possibility of losing. It's just a shakedown of successful artists for their money. Most new lyricists and composers don't earn anything close to what Perry does, which is why they are very rarely the targets of copyright trolling. It's not financially worth it for the trolls to go after someone over a song that only earns somewhere in the thousands (not millions) of dollars. Most songwriters don't have to worry as long as they create their own material and don't do something unethical and dumb like stealing the whole melody or lyrics from some other song.
Underrated
Honestly
OMG they're using the same Y in their name. See U in Court !
If i copyright / published a song ,beat,tone , ECT... its mine .... period.
The jury went with expert opinions from an independent music engineer. So most likely the producer/s of the song sampled without permission.
Flame: I USE THOSE 3 NOTES! NO ONE ELSE!
The only consideration is the synth on the verses. The first half is the same, just like any other song playing 8th notes on the same pitch. They both then descend, but Katy’s version uses more notes and is not identical. You need a matching melody.
Flame's lawsuit claimed infringement of the musical composition, not the sound recording, of Joyful Noise. This is an important nuance the Court of Appeals noted in its opinion upholding the district court's decision to grant judgment to Katy Perry despite the jury's finding of infringement. This RUclips comparison is a nice practical reference point. That said, for purposes of comparing similarity in the actual lawsuit, it is somewhat misleading. It would have been interesting if infringement of the sound recording had also been claimed.
My understanding is that the composition is embodied within the sound recording, so if the sound recording were to be used there is the acknowledgement and proof of copying of the composition also. I'm not sure why comparing the recordings is misleading, but you're right in that it could be clearer to have them each played on the same instrument (piano for example)
@@willjamesmoore misleading in the sense that this RUclips comparison does not truly reflect the work/elements claimed to be infringed in the actual case. A sound recording covers the composition yes and the sound recording includes even more elements one might point to as part of arguing for example protectable selection/arrangement. Comparing sound recordings can suggest more similarity and protectable original creation than actually exist with respect to the underlying work (here the composition) claimed to be infringed. The jury found infringement and the trial judge then said thank you but no infringement as a matter of law, elements identified as infringed not protectable, and the appeals court affirmed the trial judge.
You need to extract the vocals to do an accurate analysis I also saw on one of the Katy Perry songs it said that the lyrics and speed had been adjusted which I'm guessing was done in a defense tactic on behalf of Katy Perry and her fans too hard to tell with the lyrics playing
There’s a achieve article because of this
Wow. I remember hearing something about Katy Perry being sued for "Dark Horse". Now, I know it is a bunch of bull. Dark Horse is my favorite song from Katy Perry. I don't even know this guy Flame.
Is it similar? Only if you modify the speed and pitch. Otherwise no not even close.
Both of these songs sound like this song for sure:
ruclips.net/video/knaGIOJNxTc/видео.html
Nice find. I can't wait for these lawsuits to get so out of hand that multiple copyright holders are sued over the same sample of music.
You right. Love moments in love
My understanding is there was more to the case (as demomstrated in other videos I have seen on the subject, assuming they are still up.)
I think before this even went to court it was pointed out.
Here is where it is more than just a coincidence (in likelihood,) and not only that but in an insult intended manner.
"Joyful Noise" was clearly by Christian artists, *the beat was at 177 BPM* (that ties in.)
For those who don't know, 7 is sort of considered a signature number for God *and 6 a significant number with satan.*
Well, neither song sounds like the other... on the suface. But if you slow the "Joyful Noise" beat down to 166 BPM and lower the pitch proportionally (in closest key I assume)... then "Joyful Noise" and "Dark Horse" line up note for note, pattern for pattern ( at least in instrument / synth leads)...
The further depth is that (unless I am mistaken) the Katie Perry beat was *made by a guy who is affiliated with 3 6 Mafia* who use numerology to represent for satan (or they used to.)
So the whole thing was not only copying the material, but also doing it in a mocking / diss way. I don't know what all was presented in the case, but who knows, they may have witness accounts as well or something. *To my knoweldge* the beat maker who was accused never even denied any of it... *to my knowledge.* Or no sorry... it wasn't the beat maker but the track features a 3 6 Mafia artist (Juicy J) ...so... similar situation still
Oh very interesting thanks for sharing, do you remember the source? I would love to read more about this case
@@saarapollonen8138 I wish I could remember. Let me see if I can find it.
@@saarapollonen8138 I was somewhat mistaken... instead of 177 & 166, it was 77 & 66 instead.
@@saarapollonen8138 Katy's track is listed as "132" but it is half time which is 66 BPM (the snare falls on 2 and 4 in a 4 count measure... so really tracks like that are listed as double the true BPM) same with Flame's track 154 BPM but it is half speed so 77 BPM in reality.
The first video I saw mentioned those factors, I wish I could find it. I'm trying.... assuming it is even still up.
But you can def look up the BPMs yourself and see too... Flame is def 154 (actually 77 technically) and Katy is 132 (actually 66.)
Idk why they take beats like that and classify them as double their speed. Those beats clearly build around the snare like most beats, which means two snares per 4 beat count and makes the actual speed half what is listed (not due to the snare but the snare is the obvious marker that shows how these beats are formatted.)
If you want to look into that, look up "154 BPM drum" on here and pay attention to where the snares hit... and look up "132 BPM drum" and look where the snares hit. Then you could do the same with 77 and 66...
154 BPM is more like Jungle / Drum n Bass speed music. I'll try to edit some vid links in to demomstrate this.
154 actual BPM (note the snare [or in cases what would be clap] placement)
ruclips.net/video/NeuGoVSv6II/видео.html
132 actual BPMs
ruclips.net/video/D_von936FII/видео.html
77 actual BPMs
ruclips.net/video/aehB8f5l_2Y/видео.html
66 actual BPMs
ruclips.net/video/1kR_3y0y84g/видео.html
Yea....the half speed beats will line up in timing with the standard speed beats and a lot rap stuff and pop of that nature often incorporate elements that mesh with the regular full speed instead of half for dancability I imagine... but still... the 2/4 snare / clap placement really tells you the actual speed.
I also think the half speed beats are measured at double for djing purposes because Djs will often base the larger scale criteria around probability and at large over time, the half step beats are way less dancable and less common... with generic commercial rap that is different and dub step / trap / trip hop etc as well (which I do love some roots dub step, trip hop and a little electronic trap)... but at large, if you play a half step track, unless the set is more geared toward those styles, you will likely end up mixing back over to regular speed from half at some point.
@@agapeleone5847 okay thanks a lot! I totally believe this can be the truth. They love to mock Christians and I felt that in my spirit while I was listening Dark horse and thought to myself there's something very evil here
Imho..very bold for Juicy-J to try and claim copyright infringement when HE could have been subject to the same since the original artist is actually The Art of Noise -Moments In Love from 20 years ago.
Clearly the inspiration for both Katy Perry and Jucy J songs.
Good thing the judge reversed it because it seems the jury did not have a clue.
These songs sound better together than they do individually 😂
There is only so much you can do with 4 beats per bar . It's inevitable
As if Katy Perry wrote anything herself. Somebody made the beat somebody else the lyrics. She just did what she was told. Like all poop stars.
Yeah, Katy Perry in this circumstance is really more of a code name for Katy Perry and all those writers, producers and engineers that worked with her.
It sounded awesome when they were played at the same time
It’s 6 years ago... me sitting here in 2021
If you think about it. Walk it out is the same rhythm but a just little uptempo
No people are pathetic and will attack everyone else until it’s turned back on them and they are the one under fire.
This decision was overturned. Judge vacated jury's decision, stating the part in question was not original enough to be copyrightable.
Yes they got it right for sure
The bit you miss from the comparison is the break in the song with the lowered voice. "there's no going back" vs "chapter 1 if you cared". The riff I have no problem with, but the riff and the lowered voice combined is worryingly similar.
And both songs have rappers say "y'all know what it is" to start off the song, almost at the exact same point in the beat. And the beat was modified slightly and the tone changed. However, I would have had a hard time saying it was a total copy. My guess is that maybe Perry or the producers heard the Joyful Noise song and it influenced it. At this point, it is hard for beats and notes to not be "copied" from somewhere.
Crazy to sue someone for a beat that ain’t even ya to begin with is wild. If that’s the case the original owner needs to sue tf out of flame too
It reminds me more on moments in love from art of noise
No one gonna mention how the mix kinda slaps
Nothing alike. Unlike Dua Lipa (Levitating?) which is pretty much an exact copy in every way. Looking forward to seeing how they one goes!