Rapper Outrage: GTA V Stole My Beats, Cease And Desist
- Thread starter Karloff
- Start date
Especially considering all the preaching about piracy Rockstar has done and their claims that the PC versions come out later because they get pirated.CriticalMiss said:
+1 on the interest in Rockstar's explanation. Although I'm betting it's gonna be settled quietly.
There is a rap group with that name, and yes their album cover is like GTA's.Andy Shandy said:
That is a pitifully low sum of money to have a song put into something like this. Although now I see how Tyler got on there. That Garbage song couldn't be more appropriately named...*cough* But um, returning to the real subject, Rockstar had plenty of other rappers to choose from, I'm surprised they didn't get Nicki Minaj on there what with them putting that awful Fergie song in-there I go again...I'm uh, I'm just gonna leave......
AND PLAY MORE GTA V! AHAHAHAHA!
*runs into the door frame and falls unconscious*
EDIT: Although to be fair, rappers constantly rip off other things, Magno AKA Magnificent uses the Mcdonalds M to spell his name, and he has a golden arches chain, plenty of rappers use album covers ripping off copyrighted symbols, and Lil' Flip (who has no talent and thus makes it that much funnier to show this picture) put out an album with this cover:
Heck, even Chamillionaire calls himself King Koopa,
There's no fairness involved in the price. Rockstar is free to offer whatever it wants and the artist is free to accept or reject if he wants.Yosharian said:
It doesn't matter is the other artists got paid much more. It doesn't matter if they got paid equal or less. All that matters is whether or not they have a licensing deal, how much was paid for that deal and other deals is irrelevant.
So you're saying that, from your ethical point of view, if I offer you a lot of money for something, more than I gave others, and you refuse after which I steal it that somehow makes a difference?Yosharian said:
It's not about legalities. It's about not stealing from others. Having been willing to pay for it but gotten rejected does not make a difference, regardless of how much you were willing to pay.
No, you're looking at it wrong. It doesn't matter which point of view you care about, this isn't an ethical issue, it's a legal one.Yosharian said:
I seriuosly doubt somone like rockstar would be doing things like this.... which is precisely why they may just get away with something like this.
still, though, this feels a lot like that female acress shouting "they used my face" about a game model - just want to get some of that gaming publicity.
still, though, this feels a lot like that female acress shouting "they used my face" about a game model - just want to get some of that gaming publicity.
Well, didn't take long for somebody to insult rap music. Not all rap is bad, and it definitely does not all sound the same.Glaice said:
OT: I understand why he's mad, but if the label said it's okay there's not much he can do about it.
ehhhh I'm willing to bet there's a misunderstanding or he's just money-grubbing. Rockstar have been doing this for a looong time, why would they suddenly screw someone over now? We haven't had anything like this pop up before concerning Rockstar to my knowledge and considering the amount of money they poured into the game, I'm sure whatever he wanted wasn't going to to break the bank. We'll have to see wait for more details, but I'm expecting it to be a Courtney Love case.
It can be considered unethical for them to have stolen his music, but that doesn't stop it being a legal issue. Rockstar either stole it or didn't. That's all that matters.
Granted you could say it was unfair the offer they gave him if other artists got paid a lot more, but the price they offered him /if/ he accepted has nothing to do with the legality of the case. If he accepted a penny offer then they used the song and he still bought up this case, he wouldn't have a leg to stand on legally. In fact, in that case, he could be considered in breach of contract.
Though nobody appears to have heard of him before now, so it would make sense that his music would cost less to license compared to say...Queen or any of the other big name songs in the game. Speaking of Queen, Radio GaGa and not Stone Cold Crazy? c'mooooon!
Yes it is. Regardless of who is at fault here, the case is: he was offered X and apparently turned it down. Rockstar then used it without paying licensing fees, infringing on copyright law. Ergo legal issue. Why you think that isn't or don't care whether this is a legal issue /completely/ eludes me.Yosharian said:
It can be considered unethical for them to have stolen his music, but that doesn't stop it being a legal issue. Rockstar either stole it or didn't. That's all that matters.
Granted you could say it was unfair the offer they gave him if other artists got paid a lot more, but the price they offered him /if/ he accepted has nothing to do with the legality of the case. If he accepted a penny offer then they used the song and he still bought up this case, he wouldn't have a leg to stand on legally. In fact, in that case, he could be considered in breach of contract.
Though nobody appears to have heard of him before now, so it would make sense that his music would cost less to license compared to say...Queen or any of the other big name songs in the game. Speaking of Queen, Radio GaGa and not Stone Cold Crazy? c'mooooon!
