Here we go again...Iron Maiden sued over the rights of 6 songs

This thing about "Mr. Willcock wrote new lyrics to fit in with a theatrical stunt involving a sword and fake blood", which Dennis W also moans on about in that boring audio interview on Youtube.......should Alice Cooper's lawyers get in touch with Messrs Willcock and McKay about that? Cause it sure wasn't Dennis's idea.

(Sorry to make my first post here a moany one!:))
 
Black Bart said:
Limp Bizkit and Nightwish (in all kinds of metal) are more overrated, methinks. ;)
Click to expand...
Limp Bizkit isn’t even metal, and Nightwish is a decidedly good band. I too think that Metallica takes top honors in the overrated category.
 
Manic Gers said:
This thing about "Mr. Willcock wrote new lyrics to fit in with a theatrical stunt involving a sword and fake blood", which Dennis W also moans on about in that boring audio interview on Youtube.......should Alice Cooper's lawyers get in touch with Messrs Willcock and McKay about that? Cause it sure wasn't Dennis's idea.

(Sorry to make my first post here a moany one!:))
Click to expand...
Maybe they already contacted him and that's why he need that cash grab now?
 
CriedWhenBrucieLeft said:
Why are people citing the length of time? The Procol Harum case shines a little light on how this sort of case might go if it ends up in court. Those events were in the late 60's & Fisher filed his lawsuit in 2005 (~38 years). There are "no time limits to copyright claims under English law"...
Click to expand...

Surely there are time limits as I believe after a certain period of time copyright expires and the works become public domain.
 
Didn't the Led Zeppelin/Taurus case go to court after a few decades had passed? Different circumstances, but still, that would've been known for a long time before then.
 
Ever see those wildlife documentaries where there's a little bird picking the bugs off a rhino's back?

Or those little fish that attach themselves to a great white shark?

That's the image this whole McKay / Iron Maiden situation evokes.
 
I don't get his point here about Steve Harris having something to hide by saying that if the song is credited to him then he wrote it. To me it sounds like he was asked a question about songwriting, and answered with the fact that if it is credited to him, then he wrote it. Seems quite straight forward to me.


In 2001 Steve Harris stated, in the TV/DVD documentary Classic Albums: Iron Maiden – The Number of the Beast released on 26 November 2001 and directed by Tim Kirkby, that “If I'm writing a song and if it's, if it's just got my name on it then I've written everything, you know, except the guitar solos."

Sixteen years later, in a May 2017 interview with Seymour Duncan, Steve Harris made similar false claims:-

http://www.seymourduncan.com/.../talking-tone-with-iron...

Question from Seymour Duncan:-

"As Iron Maiden’s chief songwriter, what form are the songs in when you present them to the rest of the band?"

Reply from Steve Harris:-

"If you see a credit with just my name on it, that means I write absolutely everything. Rhythm guitar parts, guitar melodies, vocal melodies, absolutely everything really. The only thing I don’t write is the guitar solos but even then I might suggest one or two things."

The above comments beg the inference that Steve Harris had something to hide. It seems to me that Steve Harris and/or Rod Smallwood is a control freak and extremely concerned to be re-writing history as they wish it to be known.…for instance, the authorised history of the band is littered with made-up, so-called facts. One typical example is how Steve Harris supposedly formed IRON MAIDEN. No…he did not form Iron Maiden. As a young, amateur bass player, he joined an existing band when their bass player left. That is the band that became Iron Maiden.

Barry McKay
 
McKay is not, in his comments, providing arguments to support his claim that Dennis Wilcock co-wrote songs. He is more or less trying to paint a picture of Steve Harris, hoping that this negative picture will make it easier for people to buy the claim about Wilcock's contribution. Even if Wilcock has, in fact, written or co-written those songs, McKay's approach isn't about serving any justice. It's about punishing Steve Harris for something, getting back at him or whatever it is McKay wants.

To me, that takes away from his credibility and makes me less inclined to believe his concrete claims about songwriting. At least it makes it seem he has no clear proof that Wilcock wrote what he claims to have written, thus resorts to personal attacks.

Maybe Steve Harris took sole credit for ideas of which individual band members didn't claim ownership of during the early days. But as long as we only have two men's word for it, one being Wilcock and the other being McKay, of which the latter is the more vocal and in a rather cruel manner, I see no reason to believe so. Provide evidence ... lest thy pants catch fire.
 
I have no doubt personaly that former members did actually contribute to some early songs, although some claims are rather contradictory (e.g. Sanctuary). It is virtually impossible that songs which have been rehearsed and played dozens and dozens of times were not changed by of various suggestions. This is also true in my mind for the post-1977 period: some member on the official forum said that he has heard long recordings of the Wilcock-era, and that the songs were quite different from the versions we know. That said, the question is the extent of these contributions. We all know that, for Steve but also for the other members of Maiden, "minor" alterations don't deserve a credit. Steve himseld has recognized Adrian's contribution to some songs that appear on Killers (Wrathchild, Another Life and Genghis Khan), on which he made suggestions, and Adrian has never been credited. On the other hand, Steve has written great bass lines for Powerslave (song), Stranger in a Strange Land and Sea of Madness, lines that add a lot to the said songs, and he did not claim a credit. The same goes with Empire of Cloud, which was "arranged" by the whole band, with significant suggestions.
Two things might have been of great importance (and I'm sorry for the length of this post) : (1) Steve's will not to credit a person who is outside of the band; we know of one exception only, and Adrian had just been sacked when it happened. (2) Financial reasons obviously, but I'm not thinking of Steve's greed. At the very beginning of their contract with EMI, the band was obviously short of money and had to give EMI its money back. They have given great details about how little they were given by Rod during the first three years. This must have been true of the royalties. I mean that all the money must have been given/invested to the "Iron Maiden" entity; in the respect, it could have been really important not to let a single penny escape the machine. Eventually, when the band began to make money, the royalties must have been redistributed.
One last thing: there is obviously a personal thing between Wilcock and Steve. The former has always been a bigmouth, who, although instrumental in the first steps, has given some poor advice (sacking Dave) and eventually let the band down. Knowing how stubborn Steve can be (and I love that, don't get me wrong), he must have answered quite badly to MacKay when the idiot first approached him, bearing in mind his ancient hostility to Wilcock. And Mackay turned nuts (a fantastic illustration of how the Internet can turn someone into a crazy idiot).
 
Last edited:
harrisdevot said:
On the other hand, Steve has written great bass lines for Powerslave (song), Stranger in a Strange Land and Sea of Madness, lines that add a lot to the said songs, and he did not claim a credit.
Click to expand...

Often, it's in such songs that we get Steve's best bass lines, 2 Minutes to Midnight is the best example IMO
 
Also EOTC was mainly arranged by Bruce, Nicko and Kevin.

According to interviews, the only thing that Steve said when Bruce was writing it was:It's great, carry on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top