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

Sometimes I get accused of being an armchair general. Good to know there's a bunch of armchair lawyers here too. :D
 
I always thought that Murray was playing that awesome floydesque solo on Spaceward Strange World. In the competition of slightly out of tune guitars, badly produced drums and incorrect vocal level, Paul Cairns solo is the definitive highlight of the track. It stands out in every possible way. It was the time of first studio demo of Iron Maiden, I can't accept that Harris just forgot who was there.

Edit : I listen to this version of SW only for his solo, that's why I don't accept the fact that he was not credited that easily.

 
I could kind of understand dropping his name from the original ST release - promoting the band "as it currently is" (Dave Murray's name was similarly dropped from the Secret single he played on if I remember correctly; or the Annihilator debut apparently listing more people than actually played on it). Best of the Beast was an opportunity to make it up.
 
I added a video to my post with Paul speaking and playing his version of Strange World. He clearly says song was written by Steve Harris.
 
Zare said:
I added a video to my post with Paul speaking and playing his version of Strange World. He clearly says song was written by Steve Harris.
Click to expand...
I don't see how he could have known about Paul Day's contribution - way before his time.
Thanks for the video :ok:
 
From IM debut wiki

All songs written and composed by Steve Harris, except where noted. Early vocalist Dennis Wilcock claims to have written the lyrics to the songs Prowler, Charlotte the Harlot, Phantom of the Opera, Iron Maiden and also Prodigal Son from the Killers album[36] and has sued the band for 2 million pounds[37]
Click to expand...

That link leads to loudwire article posted two days ago, I haven't seen it

http://loudwire.com/iron-maiden-sued-by-former-vocalist-dennis-wilcock/
 
Am I missing something, but even if Wilcock has a recording of himself singing the lyrics with Maiden before the album, would that in itself mean he wrote them also?

Someone else could have handed him lyrics and asked him to sing them. I am not saying he didn't write them, but how can he prove it?
 
Beats me really, unless there's Steve introducing Charlotte and blaming Dennis for the lyrics ("next song, by Mr. Dave Murray, oh and Denny our singer wrote the lyrics to it") -_-
 
Edington said:
I saw that Steve had missed some shows, apparently someone filled in for him but I can't find the comment either. I just can't believe that Steve would allow someone else to take his place in Maiden.
Click to expand...
Magnus said:
https://www.facebook.com/pg/Maiden77-341144199371675/posts/?ref=page_internal
11 October 2014 post

sorry @Niall Kielt , I had promised to find the link earlier
Click to expand...

Edit: link no longer works but you can see a screenshot attached to the original post.
 
Last edited:
matic22 said:
The other things might be true as Maiden camp states, but this paragraph seems very fishy to me:

Since it first appeared on MAIDEN's debut LP, the track has been solely credited to guitarist Dave Murray. But in the documents served to the High Court, Harris and publisher Imagemstate: "The lyrics for [the song] were written by Mr Harris in or around 1977 to accompany music written by Mr Murray, who had joined IRON MAIDEN in late 1976."

Steve put his name on anything. Anything. Why would then he dissown the lyrics to Charlotte? This is very strange.
Click to expand...
I'd really like to hope some journalist invented this, because if real, and coming from grown-ups, it's just pathetic. Steve must be either very generous (letting Dave have all the credit), extremely absent-minded (forgetting he wrote the lyrics), extremely sloppy (never noticing what it says on sleeves all that time), or, well.
 
Why do people keep sighting the time that a given party has taken before taking legal action? This has been dismissed as irrelevant by the highest legal authorities in the UK. All that matters is can any of these guys prove they wrote lyrics &/or material. Maybe they won't need to provide proof. Maybe they'll get their day in court & Steve will be asked under oath whether he wrote the lyrics/music. That could be interesting.
 
I think the time it’s taken Dennis to bring this all up is very important.

At first it was stated that Dennis turned his back on music after leaving maiden and that was a big reason why he never discovered his music was used. It’s now been made pretty clear this was a lie as he was involved in music up to at least 1984 in v1, 4 years after maiden had released the debut and by 1984 Maiden was a global band so this calls into question why he would never have known/checked out maidens albums to see if his music was used. Plus he would have been surrounded by friends and people who were in or around bands and would have known about his connection with maiden so it beggars belief that no one would have mentioned anything about maiden to Dennis even if he himself never checked out their stuff.

Also the amount of money he is demanding is based on how much he and Barry McKay think has been made off the songs over the years. If this had been brought to maidens attention sooner if Dennis really cared about his writing credits then maiden could have (if true) credited him a lot earlier and this would have had a massive impact on the future money made from the songs. Think about it, apart from the debut the song ‘iron maiden’ has been on every single live album and POTO has been on a few live releases too so since the debut these songs Dennis is claiming are his have made a lot more money they would have been if they had only appeared on the debut. If Dennis had been credited sooner the band may have never played these songs live ever again and never included them on compilations so the money made would have been limited. They certainly would t have used phantom in two big tv commercials in the U.K. which obviously made even more money.

No, my guess after what I’ve read is that Dennis did not have the input he claims on these songs. Sure I can believe he changed a line or two here and there but the songs in the main were composed by Steve. Dennis was bitter after maiden hit the big time so he’s been sitting on some old bootleg recordings for years waiting for the right time to cash in thinking this is all the proof he needs. I may be wrong but that’s my take.

Yes in the eyes of the law the time delay isn’t relevant but from a moral point of view it’s very relevant. Dennis is cashing in plain and simple and doesn’t care about being credited. McKay is kicking up a storm on the Internet whilst maiden are on tour in the hopes that they settle to shut him up and then he’ll claim another victory.
 
Wayne Bond said:
I think the time it’s taken Dennis to bring this all up is very important.

At first it was stated that Dennis turned his back on music after leaving maiden and that was a big reason why he never discovered his music was used. It’s now been made pretty clear this was a lie as he was involved in music up to at least 1984 in v1, 4 years after maiden had released the debut and by 1984 Maiden was a global band so this calls into question why he would never have known/checked out maidens albums to see if his music was used. Plus he would have been surrounded by friends and people who were in or around bands and would have known about his connection with maiden so it beggars belief that no one would have mentioned anything about maiden to Dennis even if he himself never checked out their stuff.
Click to expand...
I think the reason Dennis Wilcock waited this long is that he heard of the Beckett lawsuit and saw an opportunity to grab some cash. And I think he knew about this in 1980, I absolutely don't believe he didn't know about this until 2014(?). I also wouldn't be surprised if he did in fact write some of that material. I doubt it was significant, and I doubt he can prove anything.

The lyrics to Charlotte the Harlot are a bit of a problem though. Steve hasn't written those, there is no way he wouldn't have gotten a credit for them. So that one is quite interesting to follow.
 
CriedWhenBrucieLeft said:
Why do people keep sighting the time that a given party has taken before taking legal action?
Click to expand...
It's important because Maiden make even more money the longer time it takes. Suing back then could have earned him a credit but risking that Maiden never play the song again and don't put it on compilations and re-releases.
 
srfc said:
Exactly, he can't prove it. It's Steve's word against Wilcocks which is why McKay is trying to cast doubt on Steve as a man.
Click to expand...

I listened to the interview that was up on the Blabbermouth article and from what I could make out I think the proof that Dennis was talking about and Barry McKay has been shouting about is a couple of bootleg tapes from old gigs.

This in itself wouldn’t be proof just hearing Dennis sing these songs but I think the reason he thinks these are proof is that on the bootlegs is his banter in between songs and when he introduces the next song I have a feeling he mentions something like “right, the next song is a song I wrote about.....”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top