This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.
Legal
Poison respond to 1980s song theft allegations
By CMU Editorial | Published on Friday 28 October 2011
A legal rep for glam metallers Poison has responded to that previously reported lawsuit relating to alleged song theft 25 years ago.
As previously reported, songwriters Billy McCarthy and James Stonich are claiming that some of their songs were incorporated into tracks on Poison’s multi-platinum selling 1986 debut album ‘Look What The Cat Dragged In’. They allege that Poison’s guitarist CC DeVille auditioned for their band in 1984 and was given a number of their studio tapes. When DeVille subsequently joined Poison, they claim, sections of their songs were lifted.
Quite why the two songwriters would wait 25 years to make a legal claim over this is a bit of a mystery, and the delay, Poison’s legal rep says, proves the lawsuit is baseless. Mark D Passin told The Hollywood Reporter: “Poison will vigorously defend against the baseless accusations alleged in the complaint. Obviously, if the Poison songs that are the subject of this complaint infringed any songs written by plaintiffs McCarthy and Stonich they would have filed their lawsuit over 20 years ago when Poison released the albums on which the songs are embodied. It is unfortunate that success in the entertainment business often invites unmeritorious lawsuits”.
Aside from such a long delay in taking action arguably damaging the credibility of McCarthy and Stonich’s lawsuit, there has also been some discussion in legal circles as to whether the duo can actually sue, even if they have a great case, because of America’s ‘statute of limitations’, which sets a deadline for plaintiffs to take action when they believe they have been wronged. In this case the claimants’ lawyer has cited a precedent that says that – as the harm being sued over continues (because the allegedly stolen songs are still be sold) – the statute of limitations does not apply. But Passin disagrees.
So, it remains to be seen if this case is allowed to proceed to court for technical reasons, before the credibility of McCarthy and Stonich’s claims will even be assessed. Passin confirmed that he will seek to have the lawsuit dismissed forthwith.
