1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

The Beckett Connection

Discussion in 'Maiden Chat' started by fisherenterprises, Mar 9, 2010.

  1. CriedWhenBrucieLeft

    CriedWhenBrucieLeft Ancient Mariner

    So at the most there's not really a specific permission (you say "blanket license", Cornfed), right? In the UK (from what Brigs is saying), I'm assuming, you're just checking if the band is registered, not whether every single song you're going to perform a cover of is specifically covered by the arrangement? Yes/no? Is that actually happening in pubs & clubs? It doesn't sound even faintly likely that a pub that holds a live music license (which they would acquire from a local authority i.e. their local council) would be asking a band what specific bands & songs they were covering. I just don't think this is a requirement, legally or otherwise. Therefore, the original copyright holder is not in a legal position to stop performances of individual songs. Are the Iron Maidens going to stop performing this song?

    Cornfed's spoiler comment probably makes this most sense in this specific case at the present time.
     
  2. Perun

    Perun Climbing like a monkey Staff Member

    Again, I think Maiden are the wrong people to sue here. It's a dispute between Quinn and Barton, and I think that involving Maiden or Steve and Dave in this reeks of a publicity thing. So the Maiden camp is right to take this to court, because, bottom line, they're asked to pay twice if they only have to do it once (and it's not important here whether Quinn is in it for the money or not - his lawyer is doing all this). It's not their fault Barton is cheating out Quinn, and no words of Quinn's lawyer that Steve "should know" make it that. Maybe ultimately, it would be fair if Quinn received a credit on future Maiden re-releases, but the way I understand it, this is not the focal issue here.
     
  3. GhostofCain

    GhostofCain Ancient Mariner

    Is Maiden taking it to court or McKay as a result of Maiden not wanting to pay them/give them a songwriting credit? According to all information, the people being sued are Steve, Dave, their publishers and Bob Barton?
     
  4. Perun

    Perun Climbing like a monkey Staff Member

    I don't know who is taking who to court here, but McKay said that if the Maiden camp does not accept his offer, he would take it to court. So at least they knew he would, unless he simply assumed they should, as he simply assumed Steve should know what Quinn wrote.
     
  5. Cornfed Hick

    Cornfed Hick Electric Eye

    No, because no one cares. I'm sure many small venues like bars and pubs don't have licenses, and are technically infringing copyrights, but no one cares, because the amount of money at stake for a small-time covers band (no offense to anyone who may be in a covers band) would be so small. For larger venues and more lucrative acts, you can bet they check clearances for any cover songs in the setlist.
     
  6. Spectralmusic

    Spectralmusic Prowler

    Regarding someone's earlier comment here, yes it is a very fishy situation
     
  7. Lampwick 43

    Lampwick 43 Waiting in line at the ending of time

    Speaking of fish, @fisherenterprises really needs to make a comeback with his current thoughts on the whole matter..
     
  8. LooseCannon

    LooseCannon Self-propelled artillery Staff Member

    If he's been subpoenaed, he may not be able to, or he might have been advised against posting publicly by his solicitor.
     
  9. Correct.
     
    LooseCannon likes this.
  10. LooseCannon

    LooseCannon Self-propelled artillery Staff Member

    Suffice to say we'll only find out more as this situation plays out in court. Obviously I hope there's a resolution that leaves all parties pleased.
     
  11. Black Abyss Babe

    Black Abyss Babe The walls are cold and souls cry out in pain

Share This Page