From the outside looking in, I'm not exactly sure why an artist wouldn't want his or her music in a popular music game, but singer-songwriter Matthew Sweet isn't all that thrilled. Speaking with North County Times, Sweet says he was unaware that his song "Girlfriend" would be included in 2006's Guitar Hero II.
"I've been trying to see if I can get a lawsuit against them 'cause they never asked to use the song," Sweet said right after noting that "a lot of kids have gotten into" his music because of the inclusion of the song in the title.
"I found out that the Romantics have a lawsuit going against the makers of that game," he continued, referencing the lawsuit over a cover version of their song "What I Like About You" in Guitar Hero Encore: Rocks the 80s. "I don't know if the Romantics are going to win their suit, but it's really weird. I've never sued anyone in my life, but I don't think it would amount to much anyway."
Sweet is right -- the Romantics suit was recently thrown out of court because, and forgive my lack of legalese, the whole thing was stupid to begin with.
While I can understand wanting credit for the use of your music, even if it's in the form of cold hard cash, it's difficult to see why one wouldn't want their music heard by a potentially new audience. If the inclusion of the song results in more sales on iTunes, more records sold, higher concert attendance, or more shirts pushed out of Hot Topic, why all the hate?
Discuss.
[Thanks, Mark for the tip and the image!]
Contest:
1:42 PM on 08.26.2008
| 
Regardless of how helpful anyone else thinks his song appearing in Guitar Hero might have been for his career, he should have been asked.
Similarity? I think so.
It is indeed to his benefit but it was also to the benefit of the GH people and if they were allowed to go around putting whatever songs in the game that they choose with no accountability it would be quite unfair.
What he DOESN'T deserve is some large absurd settlement that everyone who sues anyone these days seems to be trying to get. Give him his fee and move on.
On the flip side though, this could simply be a case of his record company owning the rights to his songs and THEY were the ones who allowed the song to be in the game. Who knows how smart this guy is =-)
Hmm, yes, I see what you mean... who could possibly find fault with a record label--those bastions of ethics and propriety! But seriously, it looks like he recorded it under a different label so it could be a little gray as far as consent. I understand his ambivalence, but that said, as long as he's getting royalties, he's probably better off with the publicity from the game than trying to get the settlement.
Completely agree.
Yeah, but I admit if I found out one of my songs was going to be in GH4 but no one intended to tell me about it or pay me for it, I'd be a little pissed.
That said, he probably doesn't have the rights to the song (or at least those specific rights) and his record label went ahead without involving him. Either that, or the record label went behind his back and hoped he didn't ever find out (slightly implausible but not impossible).
The point being that his lawsuit should be aimed at his record label OR he should read his contract a little closer. Either way, I can't blame him for being concerned about it.
If he doesn't sue, it sets a very bad precedent for future "theft".
As a huge fan of MS and someone that's met him, I highly doubt his suit (if he even goes forward with it) is going to be driven by moneylust. He's one of the most down to earth artists around. I imagine it's more exercising control over his material.
Did he have another song? I liked it when I was a kid, but it may have had something to do with the video being a cartoon. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9aWPTCc2r0
No company would be stupid enough to use unauthorized music. Maybe you should be talking to whoever owns the rights to it for your share.
It's not as if he doesn't want the song in the game. He sounds as if he were asked, he would have OK'd having the song in the game. He just wanted someone to ask him first.
Either way, damn he's lookin' old.
I don't blame him for being a little annoyed though. Getting exposure is one thing, but other people making money off a product that uses your music without your permission is another entirely.
Is this last bit serious? You have got to be fucking kidding me. God forbid a person for wanting their fair share from a product that uses that person's personal work supposedly without permission. Its not like the other songs weren't licensed involving cash (supposedly), so the issue is where? I'd like to see your positive reaction Nick to someone using your work for profit without proving you any sort of compensation or even asking permission - doubt you'll be singing the same 'devil may care' tune.