As I am not versed in "the law", I appreciate all of the legal research some of you have done, but I think the point is being missed. In the Guitar Hero games, your character is performing several different songs, some of which are the originals and some aren't. But all of the songs are supposed to sound like the originals, effectively creating the fantasy that you are the guitarist for the specific band that created the song. Who wants to play a song that's specificly liscened for the game that doesn't sound anything like the original? It doesn't make sene. I highly doubt that The Romantics weren't made aware of the concept of the game before they signed the release forms. In all of the Guitar Hero and Rock Band games the disctinction is always made between a cover and the original. When the title of the song is displayed on screen it will say "As made famous by..." if the song is a cover. Anyone who plays can make this distinction, so I have no idea why The Romantics think they have a leg to stand on. I do think that this case is completely different than cases where a corporation goes and apes another artist's style for a commercial. The musicians and song writers whose songs appear in Guitar Hero are being paid specificly for the style of their songs that are in the game. Their style is integral to the gameplay itself. If you remove the fantasy that you (the gameplayer) are actually in That rock band, why have any recognizable songs at all?