Another one of those classic genius posts, sure to generate responses. You log on the next day to see what your witty gem has produced to find no one gets it and 2 knotheads want to stick their dicks in it... Well played, sir!!
I looked up that campfire song on YouTube. I don't hear the similarity. But I do like Business As Usual. Great album. Most of those tunes still hold up today.
“Great losses often bring only a numb shock. To truly plunge a victim into misery, you must overwhelm him with many small sufferings.”
This is ridiculous.
A woman in 1935 wrote a nursery rythme for the Girl Guides
called "Kookaburra". As an Aussie kid you know the song
very well. She gave the rights of the song to the girl guides.
"Downunder" was released in 1980 and sold gazillions.
Fastrack to about 2 years ago and some dudes "buy" the
rights of Kookaburra from the Girl Guides for a token sum.
Colin Haye the lead singer of Men at Work had joked
on a TV unterview that the flute pieces you hear
inbetween the verses on Downunder were inspired
by Kookaburra. Straight after this interview these
guys buy the rights.
They then proceed to launch a lawsuit against Men
at Work for "owed royalties" due to Downunder
containing parts of Kookaburra.
Dudes win court case, Judge orders 40-60% of
the royalties to be paid to these dudes..
Firstly to the short flute section (maybe 8 notes ?)
that they claim is Kookaburra, I still cant pick it
even though the nursery rythme was one of my
faves as a kid. Theres youtubes where they have
one on top of the other, I still dont hear it.
Secondly, if the owners of the song thought they
had been ripped, why was this not raised when
the song was released. Why 30 years worth of
sales, later ??
I see this as some very questionable scumbags taking
a risk that the judge would be an idiot, and it
paid off. I would hope that Men at Work take this
higher.
If not its sets a dangerous precedent. Will songriters
have to submit their works to special copyright experts
to assure no pieces or passages of the music even
vaguely resemble a past song ???
Men at Work have been dealt a very unfair blow here,
and I hope they can appeal this, and the fuckers that
tried to scam them get all the costs.
BABY PANA 2 IS Coming !! All across the land, let the love and beer flow !
Love ya Mary Frances!
What in the hell is that statute of limitations on plagiarism?
It's been 28 f'ing years!!!!!
What a complete utter load of bullshit. How in the hell is the band, after all this time, supposed to pay back 60% of the millions and millions they have made on this song? Not only was that song on the first album, it has been on live albums and Colin Hay solo records as well. This could result in bankruptcy or the band never seeing royalties from this record again just in an effort to come close to paying it back.
RIDE TO LIVE, LIVE TO RIDE
LET `EM ROLL ONE MORE TIME
Im fookin mad as hell about this.
Thinking more.
Even if the notes in question are a direct copy of "Kookaburra"
which I already stated, I cant pick, and I know "Kookaburra"
backwards. Then surely the copyright owners are only entitled
to the percentage of the song these notes occupy ?
Which would be 2% at best ? So where the fuck does the
Judge get 40-60% from ??
Also what irks me, the woman who actually wrote kookaburra's
family will not see any of this, nor the girl guides she donated
the rights to.
It wasnt even the main structure or sung melody that these
guys went after, it was a few flute notes inbetween the verses ???
WTF ?? The Judge even acknowledged this.
If I posted both songs here, you would be shocked that the decision
went against them.
In the U.S. (I don't know Australia), I think it's death of the author + 75years, or 120 years from creation, whichever is longer. The so-called "Mickey Mouse Act," because Disney always lobbies to extend these dates whenever Mickey Mouse comes close to expiration.Originally Posted by sonrisa salvaje
Last edited by Blackflag; 02-04-2010 at 05:12 PM.
This Is Just BullShit.
First Roth Army Kiwi To See Van Halen Live 6/16/2012 Phoenix Arizona.
OK....I've been reading this a few times over trying to comprehend this logic, and I'm still a bit confused.
By all means, feel free to let me know if I'm off-base and un-cluster this fuck for me, but this is what I gather...
If I were to purchase the rights to a song written many years ago from the artist that wrote the song, I could then go after anyone I feel has lifted the song or even parts of it?
And though I had absolutely nothing to do with writing the song, because I now own the rights to it, I'm entitled to royalties from artists I feel have plagiarized said song?...
For example, if I were to buy the rights to "Rock & Roll Part II" tomorrow straight from Gary Glitter, could I then sue the living fuck out of Sammy Hagar?? Am I legally entitled to any royalties he's made from his cute little tequila song?
Again, correct me if I'm wrong, but if I'm right, the court will be swamped from now until the end of time.
Is that how this works?
Nope, because Hagar included Glitter and Mike Leander (the writers of "RR Pt2") in the song's credits.
But otherwise, it appears that you are pretty much correct. If you own the property, you are more or less free to protect it's rights.
“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge.”― Stephen Hawking
As long as we're talking about it, I'm going to give some props to Colin Hay. His solo stuff is incredible if you like the mellower acoustic music. This guy is fuck all talented. I've seen him solo 3 times in So CA at mid-size clubs. Always worth every single penny. Plays his solo stuff but always tosses in the Men At Work tunes to please the crowd and has fun doing it. Actually shook his hand before the show when he approached all the smokers who were in the back area by the artist entrance. Helluva nice guy. Just wish he got the critical acclaim the likes of Sting as a solo artist. Colin is every bit as good....if not better.
PS - and dude knows his eyes are crazy and even jokes about it. So no worries there.
Thanks for clearing that up for me.
While my heart was in the right place, I find the whole idea downright preposterous.
Any musician born after the 18th century is influenced and inspired by music that came before them, anyone claiming otherwise is full of shit. As Robert Plant has said many times before "Rock and Roll is not averse to a bit of thievery". And it goes deeper than that....there is no possible way that music you're influenced by will not come out in your own, subconsciously or otherwise..that's how it continues.
In Men At Works case, it's just tones from their homeland, which is unavoidable and completely natural. It's gonna come out in your music no matter what the fuck you do. Upon comparison, I just don't hear the blatant ripoff.
Rap "sampling" is another case altogether, where they take consciously rip a song, or when Billy Ocean lifted the bassline to Michael Jacksons "Billie Jean" wholesale.
This is something completely different.
This case should be thrown out purely on the basis of its ridiculousness.
They're going to get 40 to 60% of the royalties for the flute part?
I don't hear it either and after 20+ years of continuous radio....now they sue?
Sure it's about protecting the copyrights......bullshit.
E- Jesus . Playing both sides because he didnt understand the argument in the first place
"I come from the Land Down Under...."
One of the best songs by any band...ever...period.
Fuckin' love that song.
And Men At Work lost.
40%-60% of the royalties from that song! Outrageous. For such a tiny piece of it. And Ron Strykert is basically MIA. Good luck finding him anywhere. He turned into some recluse/Unabomber hippy guy living in Montana last I heard. Colin Hay said he doesn't even know how to get in touch with him.
Men At Work vs. The Man: '80s Band Charged With Plagiarism - Stop The Presses!
On the bright side, maybe this will hit them in their bank accounts and they'll be forced to do a huge worldwide reunion tour to recoup their losses. That would be a fun show.
Hmmmm....I think twinkle, twinkle, little star sounds a lot like Hot For Teacher.
Make up your own minds...
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/iygkpxzbVt8&hl=en_US&fs=1&color1=0x402061&color2=0 x9461ca"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/iygkpxzbVt8&hl=en_US&fs=1&color1=0x402061&color2=0 x9461ca" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
And "Downunder"
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/DNT7uZf7lew&hl=en_US&fs=1&color1=0x402061&color2=0 x9461ca"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/DNT7uZf7lew&hl=en_US&fs=1&color1=0x402061&color2=0 x9461ca" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
Its so ironic for me, we live in an area with a lot of Kookaburra's
(Yes they laugh) nice sound to hear in mornings and evenings.
We had a baby boy 8 months ago and have been singing this old
classic nursery rythme to him. I've never once thought of the
old Kookaburra song when I listen to Down Under....
Fucking Bastards !!!
Direct comparison, how out of whack is this ??
THe dudes that did this went to the trouble of pitch shifting too,
to try and make it sound more similar...
<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/MLbFEsgJ71Y&hl=en_US&fs=1&color1=0x402061&color2=0 x9461ca"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/MLbFEsgJ71Y&hl=en_US&fs=1&color1=0x402061&color2=0 x9461ca" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>
I don't hear it. Usually these copyright infringement things are obvious enough (i.e the Satriani/Coldghey thing) but this one is complete crap.
I suppose next they'll say "Who Can It Be Now?" was ripped off from "Waltzing Matilda"? :confused:
Damn... now I have a sudden urge to dig out my vinyl copies of the first two Men at Work albums.
Eat Us And Smile
Cenk For America 2024!!
Justice Democrats
"If the American people had ever known the truth about what we (the BCE) have done to this nation, we would be chased down in the streets and lynched." - Poppy Bush, 1992
And even if there is a faint resemblance, is it worth 60% of the songs royalties ??
Fark that.
No shit ! Seriously, how can you write a song now ??
We only have 12 notes to play with. Is it possible to
write a combination of 12 notes that has never
been played before ??? This Judge is a total dickhead
I hear it. The overlay isn't a good one because the timings are off from each other. Sounds like the exact same note progression to me. I guess it technically fits plagiarism but I don't think any reasonable person would go after them.
I was wondering who was gonna be the first
The timings are off as they had to modify Downunder, slow down the riff
pitch change etc etc in an effort to make it fit.
Last edited by Panamark; 02-05-2010 at 02:14 AM.
Doc Love, even if you detect similarity, knowing how little
(even measured in time) that those notes comprise the whole song,
do you think they deserve 60% ?
The Australian People Should Be Marching In The Streets Over This.
Do you guys own stock in the band, or something?
No,Just Give A Shit About,What The Fuck Is Happening To This Fuck-Up Case.
No More Vegemite SandWiches Next.
Innocent people go to jail, and we're supposed to march about a copyright case? Wake the fuck up, Dan. When you hear about the $1.5B patent case, you're going to have a stroke.
Just use ketchup instead.
You Mean,Sauce.Just use ketchup instead.
Im there if it happens !!
Its like our second Anthem !
Who cares if there is a 2 sec tribute to
another Australian icon (Kookaburra)
Are Kraft gonna sue them now because they
sing "He just smiled and gave me a Vegemite Sandwich" ????
The question needs to be asked.....who in the fuck was their lawyer?
I think it was Guitar Shark.
No More Vegemite SandWiches Next.
great minds !
WTF?
This Song Is Like A National Anthem To The Australian People.
Just Dont Fuck With It.
Jesus Marky, don't give 'em any ideas.
Sure as hell wasnt Johnny Cochran !
But they're not fucking with the song. They're just shaking down the people who wrote it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
