Does anyone else notice the similarity between "No one but you"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QOoH-Okd0U
and John Lennon's "God"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wv3ic6OOXns
ariel 695
Thread
Posts in chronological order
Soundfreak
Probably no coincidence as Brian May used to play that particular Lennon song on his 93 Tour. And he didn't get the permission to use it on his live-album.
john bodega
Yeah, Yoko blocked the release of it. She was within her moral rights (apparently that's a thing, although it's been a while since I did copyright class) to block the cover, although I'm still not sure why she felt that way.
bigV
Zebonka12 wrote: Yeah, Yoko blocked the release of it. She was within her moral rights (apparently that's a thing, although it's been a while since I did copyright class) to block the cover, although I'm still not sure why she felt that way.
----
Yoko didn't block the release. Brian May (or his people) wrote the Lennon estate, asking for permission to use the song and the Lennon estate never replied. Yoko didn't actually deny permission, she just did not respond.
V.
----
Yoko didn't block the release. Brian May (or his people) wrote the Lennon estate, asking for permission to use the song and the Lennon estate never replied. Yoko didn't actually deny permission, she just did not respond.
V.
john bodega
Yeah, but she's such a passive-aggressive bitch that it's practically the same as blocking it.
Soundfreak
From what I have heard way back then the problem was, that Brian May changed the lyrics at the end from "Beatles" in "Queen", and also removed the "Yoko and me" line from the song. And that was the "no go" for the Lennon estate.
thomasquinn 32989
bigV wrote: Zebonka12 wrote: Yeah, Yoko blocked the release of it. She was within her moral rights (apparently that's a thing, although it's been a while since I did copyright class) to block the cover, although I'm still not sure why she felt that way.
----
Yoko didn't block the release. Brian May (or his people) wrote the Lennon estate, asking for permission to use the song and the Lennon estate never replied. Yoko didn't actually deny permission, she just did not respond.
V.
====
When it comes to formal requests like this (i.e. written requests by registered mail), not responding = denying permission. It's just the impolite way of denying permission.
----
Yoko didn't block the release. Brian May (or his people) wrote the Lennon estate, asking for permission to use the song and the Lennon estate never replied. Yoko didn't actually deny permission, she just did not respond.
V.
====
When it comes to formal requests like this (i.e. written requests by registered mail), not responding = denying permission. It's just the impolite way of denying permission.
malicedoom
Forgive my ignorance on copyright, but how does that work anyway?
He can play it live at his concert WITHOUT needing permission but needs permission to release it on an album, etc.?
He can play it live at his concert WITHOUT needing permission but needs permission to release it on an album, etc.?
Soundfreak
You can play live any song you like.
But when you record a song for a public release and you change the arrangement or the lyrics, then you need the permission of the writer.
I think it's fair game. Imagine you write a song and someone turns it into something you did not intend - but it is labelled as your composition....
But when you record a song for a public release and you change the arrangement or the lyrics, then you need the permission of the writer.
I think it's fair game. Imagine you write a song and someone turns it into something you did not intend - but it is labelled as your composition....
master marathon runner
Full respect to Yoko, she's had 31 years of indescribable pain, she's in charge of the legacy, that's the end of it.
Master marathon runner
Master marathon runner
The Real Wizard
^ what he said.
bigV
master marathon runner wrote: Full respect to Yoko, she's had 31 years of indescribable pain, she's in charge of the legacy, that's the end of it.
Master marathon runner
Yeah.... but she broke up The Beatles.
The bitch!
V.
Master marathon runner
Yeah.... but she broke up The Beatles.
The bitch!
V.
master marathon runner
bigV wrote: master marathon runner wrote: Full respect to Yoko, she's had 31 years of indescribable pain, she's in charge of the legacy, that's the end of it.
Master marathon runner
Yeah.... but she broke up The Beatles.
The bitch!
V. .
.That's another forum.
Master marathon runner
Master marathon runner
Yeah.... but she broke up The Beatles.
The bitch!
V. .
.That's another forum.
Master marathon runner
Soundfreak
Yeah.... but she broke up The Beatles. The bitch!
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
One of the biggest errors in rock history. She did not break them up.
If she had been the reason, both Ringo and George would not have carried on recording with John and Yoko...
The story is much deeper - but this is the wrong forum....
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
One of the biggest errors in rock history. She did not break them up.
If she had been the reason, both Ringo and George would not have carried on recording with John and Yoko...
The story is much deeper - but this is the wrong forum....
brENsKi
absolutely right!
she didn't break up the beatles....she was one of several factors that helped to highlight cracks that were already there
the relationship between lennon/mccartney had not been great for about 3 yrs
some of the contributions to the breakdown were:
the influence of non-band members - wives/girlfriends
friends with ready supplies of mindbending and paranoia-inducing drugs
management choices Klein rather than Eastman
george and ringo getting sick of the arguments - and disappearing (on skiing trips and such like)
lennon's heroin addiction resulting in his invisibility for huge chunks of time
but the overriding key nail was Klein's near-bankrupting them...that was the final nail...and the Macca's need to break up the band to prevent them going broke (listen to the abbey road medley - it's all there)
if you've watched the Let It Be rehearsals film you can actually see the band breaking up
they had worked together almost continually for ten yrs....george was developing as a writer and wanted more room to express himself, lennon and mcacrtney were heading in different directions musically and were sick of each other
fact is, that as much as i have always love the beatles...lennon mccartney (and those they trusted) behaved like arseholes at the one time in the band's existence when it could least be afforded
the one's who came out of it with their self-respect intact were George and Ringo
she didn't break up the beatles....she was one of several factors that helped to highlight cracks that were already there
the relationship between lennon/mccartney had not been great for about 3 yrs
some of the contributions to the breakdown were:
the influence of non-band members - wives/girlfriends
friends with ready supplies of mindbending and paranoia-inducing drugs
management choices Klein rather than Eastman
george and ringo getting sick of the arguments - and disappearing (on skiing trips and such like)
lennon's heroin addiction resulting in his invisibility for huge chunks of time
but the overriding key nail was Klein's near-bankrupting them...that was the final nail...and the Macca's need to break up the band to prevent them going broke (listen to the abbey road medley - it's all there)
if you've watched the Let It Be rehearsals film you can actually see the band breaking up
they had worked together almost continually for ten yrs....george was developing as a writer and wanted more room to express himself, lennon and mcacrtney were heading in different directions musically and were sick of each other
fact is, that as much as i have always love the beatles...lennon mccartney (and those they trusted) behaved like arseholes at the one time in the band's existence when it could least be afforded
the one's who came out of it with their self-respect intact were George and Ringo