EDDIES BEING SUED!

1235

Comments

  • MrMerkinball
    MrMerkinball Posts: 1,978
    I don't care that Eddie is getting sued. It's not the first time (Benaroya) and it won't be the last. Price of fame and Eddie won't let it phase him.

    I also don't care that this is the second thread on the topic.
  • helplessdancer
    helplessdancer Posts: 5,293
    MrMerkinball wrote:
    I don't care that Eddie is getting sued. It's not the first time (Benaroya) and it won't be the last. Price of fame and Eddie won't let it phase him.

    I also don't care that this is the second thread on the topic.

    dude, you gotta stand for something or you'll fall for anything ;) :P
  • moses-i
    moses-i Posts: 139
    I got to play devil's advocate here. First of all, assuming he agreed, if Peterson was not aware that his lyrics were being altered he has some cause to be upset. It may seem like a small change, but when you're a writer and you are particular about your words, I could see how it would be irritating for someone to alter your words. Moreover, I decided to give Peterson's Big Harvest album a listen and was a little shocked. Personally, I heard some stuff that could've been pulled from a few Pearl Jam albums (even though the album was released well before Ten or any other Pearl Jam album). I also found it interesting how well Hard Sun "fit" Vedder. Like I was really surprised that he didn't write it. But seriously, listen to the song Grinding Wheel. I was convinced for a minute that it was actually the opening of Ten. I am by no means suggesting Eddie Vedder or Pearl Jam stole any ideas from Peterson or anything of the sort, but to me there is a definite similarity between Big Harvest and some Pearl Jam compositions.
    if jah is the ship, we smile at the storm.
  • The Juggler
    The Juggler Posts: 49,599
    MrMerkinball wrote:
    I don't care that Eddie is getting sued. It's not the first time (Benaroya) and it won't be the last. Price of fame and Eddie won't let it phase him.

    I also don't care that this is the second thread on the topic.


    good for you. board nazis are the lowest form of nazis if you ask me :mrgreen:

    why were they sued for benaroya?
    www.myspace.com
  • Fahka
    Fahka Posts: 3,187
    MrMerkinball wrote:
    I don't care that Eddie is getting sued. It's not the first time (Benaroya) and it won't be the last. Price of fame and Eddie won't let it phase him.

    I also don't care that this is the second thread on the topic.

    Wha? Benaroya? This is the first time i've ever heard of ed being sued.. then again i didn't join the message pit until like 03
  • LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun
    LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun Posts: 6,097
    JOEJOEJOE wrote:
    This sort of case dates back to the 1930s and 40s. To enable white artists to be able to "steal" songs from black artists, Congress passed a law stating that once a recording is commercially released by the songwriter, anyone else can release their own version of the same song as long as they pay the publishing royalties to the owner of the publishing rights. The amount was miniscule, something like 2 cents per pressed copy. This is what is known as a compulsory mechanical license (since the royalties were based on the number of copies that were mechanically reproduced). This allowed white artists to pretty much steal the songs written by black artists, since they did not need permission, and they paid a very small royalty.

    The same law is in effect today, however, if the artist recording the new version want to change any lyrics, etc, said artist must get the permission of the songwriter/holder of the publishing rights.

    This law has always baffled me. If a Neo-Nazi band wants to release a recording of a Pearl Jam song, as long as the new version stays true to the original version, there is no way to stop them from doing it!
    its a ridiculous concept that would make virtually every cover illegal. give me a break.
  • PJFAN_seattle
    PJFAN_seattle Posts: 2,965
    !!!
    Shows:
    Seattle Key Arena 9-21-2009
    Seattle Key Arena 9-22-2009
  • Gems and Rhinestones
    Gems and Rhinestones Posts: 861
    i heard russell crowe is filling a lawsuit against him too, citing he has exclusive copyrights to this look.

    russell_crowe.jpg
  • vedder_soup
    vedder_soup Posts: 5,861
    welcome to last week!

    viewtopic.php?f=4&t=120505
    viewtopic.php?f=4&t=120604
    2003 - Sydney x3,
    2006 - Reading Festival,
    2007 - Katowice, London, Nijmegen, Rock Werchter,
    2008 - MSG x2, Hartford, Mansfield x2, Beacon Theater,
    2009 - Melbourne, Sydney,
    2010 - I watched it go to fire!
    2011 - EV Brisbane x3, Newcastle, Sydney x3,
    2012 - Manchester x 2, Amsterdam x2, Prague, Berlin x2, Stockholm, Oslo, Copenhagen,
    2014 - Sydney, EV Sydney x3

    I wave to all my Friends... Yeah!
  • HollisBrown
    HollisBrown Posts: 4,325
    The only credible Canadian singer/songwriter named Gordon is Gordon Lightfoot.
    TRANSPLANTS SAVE LIVES
    www.UNOS.org
    Donate Organs and Save a Life
  • helplessdancer
    helplessdancer Posts: 5,293
    the lawsuit was personally delivered to eddie before he took the stage for the benefit concert/benaroya hall

    the basis of it had to do with pj copying the process as to how bootlegs were made. never heard anything more on it

    eddie said it was a punk rock thing to do to deliver a lawsuit before a benefit show

    at least thats how i remember the story...

    being punk rock is also about calling out people who post numerous threads on the same topic ;)
  • helplessdancer
    helplessdancer Posts: 5,293
    teenage wasteland
  • Elzar
    Elzar Posts: 966
    Smellyman wrote:
    Could of gone the Jerry Hannan route Gordon.....

    Play with Ed enjoy your royalties and second life.

    continue to wallow in your self pity.

    i agree - i had no idea who Jerry Hannan was (even though he lives quite close to me) until ITW - and after i heard Society, i went and bought a couple of Jerrys albums - he seems like a real cool guy too.
  • The Juggler
    The Juggler Posts: 49,599
    shiningstar wrote:

    being punk rock is also about calling out people who post numerous threads on the same topic ;)

    wrong. that is called "douchebagery." look it up.
    www.myspace.com
  • LloydXmas
    LloydXmas Posts: 7,539
    Gems and Rhinestones wrote:
    i heard russell crowe is filling a lawsuit against him too, citing he has exclusive copyrights to this look.

    russell_crowe.jpg

    hahahha. hilarious
  • helplessdancer
    helplessdancer Posts: 5,293
    The Jeagler wrote:
    shiningstar wrote:

    being punk rock is also about calling out people who post numerous threads on the same topic ;)

    wrong. that is called "douchebagery." look it up.

    u r wrong. LMFAO

    BUMP

    i bet if i create a BRAND new thread we will finally get a MERGE :lol:
  • The Juggler
    The Juggler Posts: 49,599
    shiningstar wrote:
    The Jeagler wrote:
    shiningstar wrote:

    being punk rock is also about calling out people who post numerous threads on the same topic ;)

    wrong. that is called "douchebagery." look it up.

    u r wrong. LMFAO

    BUMP

    i bet if i create a BRAND new thread we will finally get a MERGE :lol:

    yeah...i am SO hoping for a merge here.
    www.myspace.com
  • helplessdancer
    helplessdancer Posts: 5,293
    ha ha kat is in hiding
  • JOEJOEJOE
    JOEJOEJOE Posts: 10,839
    MrSmith wrote:
    JOEJOEJOE wrote:
    This sort of case dates back to the 1930s and 40s. To enable white artists to be able to "steal" songs from black artists, Congress passed a law stating that once a recording is commercially released by the songwriter, anyone else can release their own version of the same song as long as they pay the publishing royalties to the owner of the publishing rights. The amount was miniscule, something like 2 cents per pressed copy. This is what is known as a compulsory mechanical license (since the royalties were based on the number of copies that were mechanically reproduced). This allowed white artists to pretty much steal the songs written by black artists, since they did not need permission, and they paid a very small royalty.

    The same law is in effect today, however, if the artist recording the new version want to change any lyrics, etc, said artist must get the permission of the songwriter/holder of the publishing rights.

    This law has always baffled me. If a Neo-Nazi band wants to release a recording of a Pearl Jam song, as long as the new version stays true to the original version, there is no way to stop them from doing it!
    its a ridiculous concept that would make virtually every cover illegal. give me a break.

    I am confused...which concept is so ridiculous that you need a break?
  • helplessdancer
    helplessdancer Posts: 5,293
    The Jeagler wrote:
    shiningstar wrote:

    i bet if i create a BRAND new thread we will finally get a MERGE :lol:

    yeah...i am SO hoping for a merge here.

    dude i tried my best

    but um i like(?) yer thread better cause it contains so much unintelligent info

Categories