In what is probably the most publicized copy write lawsuit of the year, rock musician Joe Satriani sued the band Coldplay over their number one hit “Viva La Vida.” Satriani claims that the song copies his 2004 song “If I Could Fly,” which is an instrumental guitar track. The lawsuit, filed in December, will be heard in Los Angeles Federal Court as Satriani tries to prove that his original music was stolen without permission. “Viva La Vida,” winner of Song of the Year at the Grammy awards, is an extremely successful song while “If I Could Fly” never made it big. This controversy, however, is gaining a lot of media attention, especially for not-so-famous Satriani. According to an article on NPR music, the YouTube video comparing the two tracks has had millions of visits. Although music copy write cases go way back, it is amazing to see how the internet can affect the way people talk about and respond to such an issue. Bloggers write about the details and their opinions on the case, people comment their own views, and sites like YouTube allow for an instant comparison between the tracks for anyone to hear. Before the internet, people would probably not have heard much about the case, or ever heard the lesser known song. Today, even if nothing comes out of the lawsuit, it has already circulated the Joe Satriani name and music among millions of people all over the world.
Because I was not familiar with “If I Could Fly,” I became one of the million people to check out the YouTube video. There were several comparing the two. This first one I thought was helpful because it broke it down technically in terms of chords and keys, etc. Though I don’t know much about music, it seems as though this guy knows what he is talking about. In the second video of the series, he explains his music background. It is also interesting his findings during his research that music infringement cases are very hard to prove and rarely go anywhere.
Here are the two videos:
As far as defenses go for Coldplay, there really is no way that they could try and argue Fair Use. The song certainly was not a parody, it earned the band huge commercial profits, and even if only a portion of the song was used, it could be argued to have caused Satriani major lost revenues. It seems the best bet for Coldplay is to continue to stick by their argument of pure coincidence. Satriani’s legal team claims that the band used significant portions of original music in this case, which if it is proven true in court will leave Coldplay owing Satriani a lot of money. Satriani says, however, that for him it isn’t about getting the money from Coldplay but about protecting his intellectual property that took him almost ten years to write. He supposedly tried to handle the situation without a lawsuit but was left with no choice when Coldplay refused to speak with him about it. It is hard to know what is true and what is not, but this is the stance he has taken in the media since the whole thing started. The song, written for his wife, is one that means a lot to him and he won’t give up the fight to protect what he truly believes is his own work.
Coldplay has been very quiet in talking about the issue, but has made public statements saying that they respect Joe Satriani as a musician, but did not copy his melody.


Great post Kay. I've seen the first two videos before but the third one you posted is awesome. When you remix the two songs the similarity jumps right out at you. Good research on this case.
ReplyDeleteGrade - 5