Sanity Loan Posted September 16, 2010 Posted September 16, 2010 I saw this album called 'Horseshoes and Handgrenades' come up in iTunes' RSS feed for new music. Not only is the album name Green Day related but so is the album cover. It is pretty much exactly like SixTen's piece of work for the Green Day art show. What do you guys make of this? Potential lawsuit? If the band got in trouble for their EJN artwork (displayed as background during concerts) then I think this should get in trouble as well.
captain peroxide Posted September 16, 2010 Posted September 16, 2010 Eh, I don't think so. Horseshoes and handgrenades is part of a pretty commonly-used expression, they didn't write that line in the song. My dad's been saying that to me since I was 6 or something. And for an album with that title, the cover could reasonably be assumed to have something handgrenade-related on the front. So no, I don't think there's any real reason Green Day or Warner should or would sue. But that doesn't mean they won't.
Daughter.of.Rage.and.Love Posted September 16, 2010 Posted September 16, 2010 Well, the album covers aren't that alike (well, they are, but it's both a handgrenade in the middle of the image, and that's about the similarities)... as for the title... it wouldn't surprise me if a lawsuit came out of that. Is horseshoes and handgrenades (like, the 'almost only really counts...' a common saying, or not? I thought it was, but I'm not very familiar with English sayings.... But even if it is... that's still pretty, well, y'know. But I suppose if it is, then there isn't really much to sue them for. Because it's not like they made the phrase up, it's not theirs. edit: so, yes, it indeed is a saying. this post probably doesn't make any sense. sorry. It's late and I'm tired
Guest Posted September 16, 2010 Posted September 16, 2010 That inside artwork does look awfully familiar. edit: yeah I found it, it's the same. Maybe they have permission?
IscoredWaddlesgoals Posted September 16, 2010 Posted September 16, 2010 Isn't Green Day's manager the artist's agent ?
Sanity Loan Posted September 16, 2010 Author Posted September 16, 2010 That inside artwork does look awfully familiar. edit: yeah I found it, it's the same. I posted the pic in my OP....
Guest Posted September 16, 2010 Posted September 16, 2010 I posted the pic in my OP.... Ah sorry brainfart, I thought that was from the inside artwork for some reason. I must've read it wrong
ParadoxAndPlaid Posted September 16, 2010 Posted September 16, 2010 While it is a possibility that the took the idea. Horseshoes and Hand Grenades is a common phrase. As far as the art goes: there are only so many ways to draw a hand grande, If you do a Google image search of the title, there many photos and artworks involving the same sort of concept. And it's not like they copied the dove, which is what make the artwork really unique. So I don't think the artwork was an intentional rip off. It's all too coincidental to make a legal case over.
farley drexel hatcher Posted September 16, 2010 Posted September 16, 2010 It's similar but as far as we know GD have never actually sued anyone before ... and there have been some blatent rip offs. So who knows.
Moffie Posted September 16, 2010 Posted September 16, 2010 When you have cover art, you want the theme to connect to the title of the album most of the time and the term "Horseshoes and Handgrenades" is a common phrase. There's only some many different ways you can make album art with that. Basically, I agree with ParadoxAndPlaid.
captain peroxide Posted September 16, 2010 Posted September 16, 2010 Seriously, the only thing similar about them is the hand grenade. The phrase "Almost only [really] counts in horseshoes and hand grenades" is a common saying. So there really is no case here.
Vrock09 Posted September 16, 2010 Posted September 16, 2010 Yeah it is a common phrase, which was one of the reasons why that song stood out to me when I first got the album....but I see your point because of the similarities, but I highly doubt they will take any action. If they do, I'd be surprised. I wonder if they had any idea about Green Day's song? I actually went to their Myspace page and checked them out...they're not too bad, but I only listened to a couple songs soo..
Fuzz Posted September 16, 2010 Posted September 16, 2010 I don't think it's actual legality is questionable, but I do think it's quite the coincidence. It is a common phrase, but at the same time, it is pretty similar artwork. I'm not sure why a band would name an album like that when a simple Google search will show Green Day results on the first page.
Moffie Posted September 16, 2010 Posted September 16, 2010 Didn't the GC5 make an EP called Horseshoes and Handgrenades with the cover art of a horseshoe and a handgrenade in 2001? The idea isn't exactly new.
captain peroxide Posted September 16, 2010 Posted September 16, 2010 How is the artwork similar, other than that there's a hand grenade in it? Am I missing something?
ParadoxAndPlaid Posted September 16, 2010 Posted September 16, 2010 Just an example of how common it is: This single was made in 2001 This was made in 2005
Moffie Posted September 16, 2010 Posted September 16, 2010 Just an example of how common it is: http://www.aversion.com/bands/gc5/images/rev706.gif This single was made in 2001 Exactly what I was talking about! High-five!
Fuzz Posted September 16, 2010 Posted September 16, 2010 As i said in my post, yes it's a common phrase. But why would someone doing it now name an album that when you Google it you just get Green Day results. Not exactly keen marketing.
captain peroxide Posted September 16, 2010 Posted September 16, 2010 They're a christian rock band. They're not gonna get many hits as it is.
Schlappy Posted September 16, 2010 Posted September 16, 2010 oh i thought you meant the song. naw i think thats alright
SetOnOverdrive Posted September 16, 2010 Posted September 16, 2010 Yeah, Reprise actually owns the words "Horseshoes" "and" and "Handgrenades"
Vrock09 Posted September 16, 2010 Posted September 16, 2010 What is up with every band being Christian now? I really don't think they're a relevant enough case for a major label, like Warner to care.
Bohemian+Scandal Posted September 16, 2010 Posted September 16, 2010 Wait, what ever happened with that EJN artwork case? Sorry to go incredibly off topic.
ParadoxAndPlaid Posted September 16, 2010 Posted September 16, 2010 As I said in my post, yes it's a common phrase. But why would someone doing it now name an album that when you Google it you just get Green Day results. Not exactly keen marketing. Maybe they didn't know at the time -can't expect that they would since it's not a single-. And they didn't bother checking into it first Sucks for them. Well, they're on the bottom of second results page at least. Wait, what ever happened with that EJN artwork case? Sorry to go incredibly off topic. Pretty sure the company who created their stage/screen setup was at fault. I don't know what they did about it though. But it was pretty much out of the band's control. They didn't know it was illegally used.
Salmonator. Posted September 16, 2010 Posted September 16, 2010 How would Green Day even see this? D: I don't think they randomly go on iTunes and listen to that stuff.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.