Lana del Rey vs Radiohead


#302

Nope. She alleged something very specific - that she had offered 40% of her publishing to Radiohead, but that they had knocked this back and were demanding 100%. She/her people also added that Radiohead’s lawyers were “relentless” and she effectively had no choice but to go to court. However, this appears to be either a willful misunderstanding of the position, or a total fabrication. Can only assume that whoever was behind it considered it good for publicity.

All Warners have said is that there have been ‘discussions’. This may have been something a simple as Warners/Radiohead requesting acknowledgement that their song was an influence, or that parts of it had been used in the creation of the LDR song. There are a number of reasons why they could of done this and I suspect that the main one was that they didn’t want a high profile precedent set that it was ok to take elements or use their songs without acknowledgement. It certainly doesn’t look like squeezing LDR for $$$ was the intention or motivation, though, despite what LDR said.

She/her people have effectively made Radiohead look like dicks, though, which could have been (maybe has been) far more damaging for a band like Radiohead than ripping off Creep. I’d probably advise them to sue her over that, tbh, but maybe that’s just me


#303

Yes I’m sure suing her for making them look like petty dicks would have the desired effect


#304

I wasn’t being entirely serious…


#305

Oh good. Sorry, at the end of a long serious looking post I was losing it :grin:


#306

we don’t know what has gone on or whether lawyers were relentless or not, all we know is no lawsuit has been filled. If discussions were being had, certain demands were on the table and had been rejected and negotiates had broken down and it effectively reached the ‘see you in court’ stage, I can see why she would phrase it like that even if it wasn’t strictly precise


#307

If Radiohead had demanded 100% of her royalties, she* would have a demand letter to that effect and it would be an absolute formality for her to prove. If it had reached the “see you in court stage”, she would also have a letter before action and both parties would have taken a number of formal steps by now. Again, an absolute formality for her to be able to show, and there would be an official record of initial claims being filed at court.

There is also a difference between not being “strictly precise” and making something up.

  • I am totally aware that this might not be LDR herself and it could well be her label or publicity people who are behind it.

#308

Mate it was just patter


#309

Can we close the thread now? Doesn’t seem to be anything left to discuss


#310

ctrl+f Lana del Reydiothread


#311

Wo


#312

Is there anything Jordan_229 didn’t predict?!!


#313

‘multi-millionaire Lana Del Rey not actually sued for relatively small amount by multi-millionaires Radiohead’


#314

#315

Lovely stuff. I particularly like how the claims are against very specific sections of the ten hours.


#316

:upside_down_face:


#317

There must be some kind of bot that notifies rights holders whenever something is uploaded with audio that matches the sound patterns of their content…or something?


#318

Yup. Used to run a YouTube account for a public sector organisation. The slightest bit of music - even pieces you’d already paid for - could see your video disabled immediately. You would then have to go through the whole process of challenging YouTube who were usually slow or complete dicks about it. It was irritating as hell.


#319


#320

Tbh it probably won’t be too long before Matt Groening and the rest of the writing crew take these boards to the cleaners for copying and pasting all their jokes


#321

The Vines - Get Free >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lana Del Radiohead