-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Lotte Kestner accusing ND of plagiarizing her cover of 'True Faith' for the TLOU2 CGI Trailer (update: ND acknowledge the inspiration, see threadmark)
- Thread starter Deleted member 1589
- Start date
Certainly not the corporations, you boot licker!!!!!
(I think this is kind of a non-issue.)
Didn't know about The Last of Us map one. Strange. Maybe they need to keep a closer eye on this stuff. Seems a bit unfair on the original creators that nothing really comes of this simply because of who Naughty Dog are.
I mean, we had an indie dev steal trees from another indie dev and the dude got shit on hard for it once it came to light he had actually done it.
In your exemple it's not the arrangement that is copyrighted, it's the arranger who has been credited as creator of the song. In this case arrangement mean composing parts of the song (chords/horns in general) and harmonising the rest with. It's like a producer but more involved into the pure musical aspect rather than the solely recording. Transposing or just covering a song is more an interpretation, but I agree it can be extremely sophisticated to totally transform the original:As I said before, not true.
Of course you can copyright an arrangement with the permission of the original composer.
Take the classic example of "My Way", which is a French song adapted to English. When you search for it on a music copyright engine, it shows both the arranger and the composer, and both will get their part of the copyright fee.
She already said she didn't copyright hers, but as it is so similar as StudioTan posted, they for sure used her version as a temp-track and the final song is almost too similar. It would not hurt if at least they mentioned her.
This arrangement is separated from the original French song, we're arguing semantics about the 'arranger' term.
If the English song is reproduced, all on that list will receive. If the original song is reproduced, Paul Anka would not receive anything, as he is not involved in the original song.
if i need to elaborate you've missed the point. But w/e I've had enough of putting companies 'in their place" from Resetera to last a life time. Other more important stuff to worry about and put energy into.
Ya'll have fun calling out the evils and discussing it though.
You can put energy into multiple things and still not be a stan who plugs their fingers in their ears.
Yes because at the demand of composers, Anka wrote the english lyrics, that are originals and not just translated.
Then he was associated to a separate copyright, but still linked to the original song. Commercially it's not a cover but an adaptation.
I'd seen Kestner's Tweet before it was deleted, and felt really sorry for her. I have no knowledge of copyright laws when it comes to musical arrangements, but had thought she should have been credited somewhere at minimum. I've seen a few people say they've bought her cover after seeing the trailer (myself included), so hopefully she gets a boost out of that, at least. I remember Jonathan Coulton having the same issue with Glee over Coulton's unique cover of Baby Got Back being used.
I'm really baffled as some users dismissing the situation as that's just what an acoustic cover sounds like. It's a beautiful cover, and Kestner definitely added her own take and additions from the original.
I'm really baffled as some users dismissing the situation as that's just what an acoustic cover sounds like. It's a beautiful cover, and Kestner definitely added her own take and additions from the original.
So an adaptation can be copyrighted, as I was saying.
I myself have arrangements copyrighted negotiated with the original author.
I don't want to derrail this anymore, just posted to clarify arrangements or adaptations can be copyrighted, as oposed to the posts I was responding stated.
Yes in an adaptation endorsed by original authors, or with their agreements, you are right - but here New Order didn't co-signed hers, so it's only her own recording/performance that counts. I also find classical music as a better exemple to understand the difference between the authorship of a musical score and an interpretation.
Last edited:
Whether she has legal ground to ask for compensation or not, regardless it was poor form to not at least contact her first considering it is such a blatant copy of the cover with the changes made to it from the original.
I really don't know why you keep pushing this. I stated several times in this thread what you are saying, that you need to negotiate with the original author to copyright an arrangement and that she didn't copyrighted her cover.
Again, was only responding to the posters who said it was not possible to own an arrangement and receive money for it.
ND doesn't make the trailers, most likely a 3rd party creative agency. This 3rd party probably cleared the rights by the original band which is why ND was probably none the wiser. Creative agencies can be really fucking scummy.
The vocal melody she improvs in her cover which is not part of the original New Order song is redone wholesale by Ashley Johnson in The Last of Us Part II commercial. She may have a legal case.
I've read this a few times in this thread but do you have any proof to back this up? The main character of the game is singing the song in this video.
Has anyone ITT even bothered to check?
PS global creative agency is adamandeveddb.
Maybe start asking the questions there.
Last edited:
Lol wait a second. She is upset that her "cover" song has a cover and wants to be compensated?
Is that even possible?
Is that even possible?
She may not, as she doesn't own the song. She doesn't have writing credits for adding ad libs to the cover either.
It's certain that the company responsible for the ad paid the original artist for the license to use their song in the ad. And that's all they legally had to do.
I think you're not recalling that properly. First reaction was entirely against Tequila Works for going after a small indie over a tree. Then when Tequila Works release a statement that they never intended to seek legal action and it became clear the other dude was making it public with ulterior motives and trying to paint Tequila Works as this evil company, THEN he got shit on.
No it's not... She won't get anything. I'm rolling my eye's in the takes in this thread..(Edit:oops Universal now) ... Technically I'm curious if this artist complaining whom released a single of the cover in acoustic via a minor indie label received permission first for commercial rights to release also as it's using same chord progression of said original just tempo changes and instrumentation change. But wait that doesn't grant you immediate permission to claim copyright on other artists original works over your interpretation which is similar or cry foul cause you ad-lib some words/harmony/humming cause you slowed it down. Reminds of the constant Led Zep Stairway to Heaven and Taurus legal battle of stealing the intro chord progression. People who use samples have to be very careful with time length and content to avoid royalty/copyright strikes for this reason also.
Oh by the way... The Original True Faith lyrics in this video are exactly the same in the key parts sung as the Lotte Kestner version... That she claimed were stolen(ironically the name of her album) in this version, not sure how you steal what's already there. If she just means guitar arrangements and other stuff that's another debate but hers is faster and contains strings and different timings. The vocal adlib is just imitation of the guitar harmonic melody in the middle and towards the end of the track.
I get tired of explaining this stuff.
Last edited:
No its not possible but this is another case of Era wanting to lynch a company for doing nothing wrong. As long as they compensated and got the song from the original creators I don't see the issue.
It's so weird. Lots of people defending Naughty Dog here. If it was Activision, for example, would they still jump to their defense? This feels like bias to me.
Regardless of whether or not the lady has rights to the song/cover, it's still scummy to steal her interpretation wholesale.
Regardless of whether or not the lady has rights to the song/cover, it's still scummy to steal her interpretation wholesale.
Lol. I'm sorry but if you have been a fan of new order at all, it's very hard to take her serious. If you heard this or her version of the song, it's all new order
No one wants an explanation, they want something simple. Like so: "Naughty Dog steals song from poor indie singer songwriter".
Did anyone actually steal her interpretation wholesale? Do you know what you're talking about or is this just a hot take?
Please feel free to explain the theft while not ignoring the rest of the thread where the situation has been repeatedly explained and continues to fall on deaf ears for some unknown reason.
This thread seems more like people looking for an excuse to pile on ND rather than actual concern for an artist they'd never actually heard of before now.
I...listened to both of them. How is my opinion a hot take? I'm aware of the whole corporate rights situation and everything, I'm talking about the objective similarities. But please, continue to be vitriolic for no reason I guess?
User Banned (1 week): Inflammatory drive-by, previous banned for similar behiour
cool, one more reason to avoid this turd soup of a game
Yeah it's seems like it's being used as just an excuse to get riled up over nothing
Based on your earlier posts about the game, I hope you have a pillow in hand to scream into when the game inevitably reviews well.
So, a person who did a cover of an original song from a well known band is upset that her version of a song that isn´t hers was featured in a trailer and she wants compensation? good luck with that
I asked this earlier but I reiterate: What kind of outrage would there be if someone like EA or Activision did exactly the same thing? I guarantee that very few here would not be outraged. But when it's ND, suddenly everyone is an expert in copyright law and ND can do no wrong. I like ND, but it just feels gross to see this kind of bias.
There was that thread regarding the dances in Fortnite and whether or not Epic should pay people who they stole the dances from (or something along those lines) and that thread was mixed as well. So no, it's not because it's ND. It's just that legally they're not in the wrong.
I think they should at least credit her fwiw.
I honestly feel for the artist, especially since I move in the niche music circles and know how difficult it is for many vs. the corporate giants, but this type of whataboutism doesn't add much to the discussion and only implies further that members on this board are ND/Sony shills, which has been a supremely annoying ResetEra trend lately. The fact is, EA or Activition aren't in this mess and are not worth bringing up.
Naughty dog actually did the same to me with Uncharted 4....
You see the table in the back beneath the Starlight 2 poster?
That is actually MY table, which Naughty Dog copied without crediting ME!!
Actually the table is made and designed by Ikea https://www.ikea.com/us/en/p/raskog-utility-cart-white-20382932/
But I changed the color on the cart, IKEA only offers it in darker green, not light mint.
You see the table in the back beneath the Starlight 2 poster?
That is actually MY table, which Naughty Dog copied without crediting ME!!
Actually the table is made and designed by Ikea https://www.ikea.com/us/en/p/raskog-utility-cart-white-20382932/
But I changed the color on the cart, IKEA only offers it in darker green, not light mint.
It's disingenuous to say that my argument is invalid because I used a proven example of the board's past behavior to provide evidence to my argument. I never said that the board are ND or Sony shills. I said that there's a clear bias that I'm sure even some of the people in this thread don't realize they have. If this situation was flipped and this was one of the big EA/Activision/Ubisoft/whatever companies, I believe the discussion would have a completely different tone. I'm not calling anyone a shill. I'm saying that ND is more well-liked than those kinds of companies on this forum, but should still be held just as accountable.
That's arguable. I personally think they took a little too much from the cover, but it seems like that's contentious. This is not based on anyone else's thoughts, this is based on my listening to it. Yeah, a cover artist doesn't own any rights to the song, but just because something isn't illegal doesn't mean I can't issue with it morally.
Yeah I know right?
She has a youtube channel right, how does it work if you put a cover up there? You need too spli your ad revenues with the original artists?
Uhh no you would not see that at all look at how everyone responded to the allegations that the one random developer stole the tree assets from Tequila Works. That was a legit asset and everyone thought TW was being aggressive until it came out that guy had stolen the asset and tried to backtrack. This is just a completely ridiculous complaint for this girl to have. She just wants credit which is fine they should have said the song was influenced by her which was also influenced by the original creators but she really doesn't have any legitimate reason to expect real compensation.
I've gone over this multiple times in this thread but what they did wrong was take her arrangement of the song and copied it by paying someone else to replicate the work she did with her cover even going so far as to copy parts her version that are unique. If they liked the rendition she did they could have paid her for her version instead of just stealing the arrangement and rerecording it. She didn't write the song but the version they used is clearly based on her arrangement and arranging music in a different style is something people get paid for in real life all the time. It's a full time profession for some so the excuse that "well it's not her song who cares?" isn't real valid.
To expand on that if her version didn't exist and someone at the agency said "lets take this upbeat pop song and make a slow version for our video" they would hire would someone to create the version they want. That person would have to take time to figure out mood, instrumentation, vocal arrangement, etc before recording it and handing to the agency. I know this because it was literally my job for many years. I've worked on doing interpretations of big pop songs before, like on a Dove campaign I worked on that used Cindy Lauper's True Colors. My version sounds nothing like the original and sounded different even from the other versions the writers in my group made. For whatever reason they instead they took the version she had already created and just rerecorded it.
She doesn't have legal recourse since arrangements are not typically copywrited but it's a scummy thing to do since the work she put into coming up with the arrangement is work that is typically paid for.
Now is it POSSIBLE that two people came up with almost the exact same arrangement independently and it's just a coincidence? Yes, it's possible, but after listening to both versions it's highly unlikely IMO. There are too many similarities. It's much more likely that her version was used as a temp track when they were cutting the trailer and they just got someone else to recreate it when the final cut was done.
Wait till the 12th June. Then start crying like a bitch. Pathetic hating on a game