Slashdot Mirror
Parody or Satire? Threat To Sue JibJab
The Importance of writes "Internet multimedia producers JibJab have been getting a lot of attention recently for their version of Woody Guthrie's "This Land is Your Land" that pokes fun at Bush, Kerry and America in general. Now, JibJab is being threatened with a copyright lawsuit by the rights holders. They've already contacted EFF and there is an ongoing debate about whether the flash animation is protected parody or infringing satire."
Anti-property, anti-government... and they're worried that a satire aimed at Bush/Kerry will "damage" this "icon of americana"?? This is what the original folk music was all about! It seems to me that the copyright holders are just looking for an excuse to come down on these people. I doubt Woodie Guthrie would have approved the suit...
(PS. Just to be clear, I love this song - in its entirety - and was listening to it last week during a drive across the U.S. I wish the original message wasn't getting so lost...)
the "Foo Queue" category.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
What does someone like Weird Al Yankovich do? Does he pay the copyright holders for the songs he parodies? Seems like whatever applies to W.A.Y. applies here.
Disclaimer: I work for a company, but I don't speak for them.
The intent is to make a political message about the government not to parady the song. Ergo Ipso Facto, it's a satire not a parody and they're in the wrong.
That "This Land Is Your Land" parody is hysterical. --Proud Republican ;)
My god, something actually VALUABLE was posted to slashdot. What a rare occurance!
What's important in this case is that is clearly political speech, and the Courts have time and time again give much more freedom to political speech than any other. Political speech is what is most protected by the first ammendment, because it keeps a free government free.
The difference is that parody makes fun of the original work that the work is derived from; satire is a derivative work that makes fun of something else. Parody is protected, satire is not fair use.
It's pretty clear that the flash animation in question does not make fun of the actual song, but rather the presidential candidates and America in general. Thus, I don't think it's legal, but I'm only a law intern.
I'm not saying that I like the conclusion, however.
It's not a parody of the song. It uses the song to make fun of Bush and Kerry. If it was making fun of the song I think they could get away with it.
I wouldn't worry too much about it.
Oh, sorry, I thought the title said "Threat To Sue JarJar"
Whoever wound up with the rights to his music has, I suspect, a rather different view of things.
--Bruce Fields
it's funny, how fast this has been making it's way around the internet lately. i swear, it seems like each night another person links me to it, over aim. my dad even got it in an email. i would be damn hard pressed to see how it could be judged as anything other than a parody...
These companies don't give a hoot about songs nor artists. They only care about how much money they can make off it.
The music company is just mad because they are not making money from it.
Welcome to the land of corporations.
The song should be renamed: This land is my land, your land is my land.
Satire has a near and dear place in many people's hearts just as a coping mechanism with all of the crazy stuff happening in the news. Take it away, and we go back to rioting. That's how it works
I are winner
Though I have a hard time believing you're a proud Republican when you've got a STUPID DUMBASS as your leader.
Peace and Love! Peace and Looove!
Peaace.... And..... Looooooveeee!!!
This is what happens when artists sell the rights to their work for a buck or two. Got a problem with the RIAA, MPAA etc, talk to the stupid artists who are having caviar dreams and champagne wishes.
As scripture says, you cannot serve two masters.
The point is, artists are in complete control UNTIL the moment they worry about $$ instead of art. Most artists are too stupid to understand this concept. It is easier to blame the "Big Corporations" for their own ignornace.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
I've seen Jib-Jab's song, which is a very clever and well-done piece of bipartisan fun. The problem though, is that parody can't use an entire work - either all the words or all the melody or both. Appropriating the entire song and changing some of the lyrics goes beyond the normal bounds of fair use. It's why Weird Al Yankovic gets the copyright holder's permission before publishing his parody songs, and it's why Mad Magazine sets limits to the song parodys it publishes.
Of course, the present copyright holders of "This Land is Our Land" are still being dickheads.
144l. ph34r my 133t l3g4l 5k1lz!
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Woody_Guthrie
"This song is Copyrighted in U.S., under Seal of Copyright # 154085, for a period of 28 years, and anybody caught singin it without our permission, will be mighty good friends of ourn, cause we don't give a dern. Publish it. Write it. Sing it. Swing to it. Yodel it. We wrote it, that's all we wanted to do."
Q: What does the "B." in Benoit B. Mandelbrot stand for? A: Benoit B. Mandelbrot
that was the intro song to Robbin Hood (the DISNEY CARTOON) simpy sped up.... it was identical.... nobody ever said anything to them
"He can't say nuclear, that really scares me.
Sometimes a brain is really handy."
"He got that Botox"
There are plenty of other goodies and great images that roll by that had me laughing and laughing.
They need to make another one about the RIAA and the Girl Scouts singing "America the Beautiful". If culture can't be used for fun, what good is it? If this constitutes a republication or public performance of someone else's work, I'm going to burn all my Puff Daddy CDs in protest.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
The music is a part of the parody. I think they are saying how absurd politics are. But that is my take on it.
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
From what I remember from his VH-1 interview, he asks permission first as a courtesy to the artist who originally performed the music. But his producer swears up and down that they really don't need it, as in the mix up with Snoop Dog (He really didn't give permission, but Al thought he had it and did the parody anyway, royally pissing off Snoop. Snoop couldn't/didn't take legal cation.)
that it is indeed a satire, but I see no reason for them to be sued. If you have ever seen the Flash animation, you can probably easily determine that it is indeed a political satire. "This Land" is an old song, and has been parodied many times. I am sure that if they just played the song alone without the Flash animation, it would be considered a parody. Most likely though, they're going to be screwed, and that'll be a shame.
Ah, you found me!
"The first time I have seen a site Slashdotted before the first Slashdot post!"
The site's been WAS'd (Wide Area Slashdotted) ever since that animation came out.
$8.95/mo web hosting
I swear, I've seen the entire flash three times now thanks to the repeat airings on the news. Would anybody have gotten their undies in a twist if the animation had been something completely forgettable on Newgrounds.com?
Wonderful quote and link. I think it says everything. W.G. was an Open Source original.
Shockwave animation in question direct link.
I thought it was funny...
-Adam
"The damage to the song is huge"? I'll never understand these idiots. It's as if they assume that because somebody heard a menial representation of a very well known song in a little cartoon being distributed via the Internet that they're immediately going to think that the original work is bad/political/evil/whatever.
That JibJab parody was hilarious. If anybody should be getting pissed, it should be the Native Americans because of that bit at the end of the song (go ahead and hold your breath, I'm sure it won't be long before they jump on).
"What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
/)
They're probably making fun of Bush, not Woody Guthrie. They're just using Woody Guthrie's song to enhance their parody. Penny arcade had a simular problem when they did a comic about "American McGee's Strawberry Shortcake". Actually, Penny Arcade might have been able to win that case (the commic had Strawberry dolled up like a Dominatrix, and you could argue they where making fun of her overly sweet image by showing her in that light). Now, I haven't seen this flash, but I'm guessing it in no way makes fun of Folk songs/signers.
Now, the irony is having a champion of the little guy (Woody Guthrie), having his works controled by large corporations. Gotta love it.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
At the end of the day, ive seen it, you've seen it, they've seen it, and if it gets taken down it will be back on numerous other sites, emails or file-sharing networks. With internet memes there are no cease and desists. How about a copyright law that says even if you dont agree to the use someone wants to put your copyrighted work to, you still have no choice but to accept it and take their pre-defined royalty payment? or am i on crack?
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
Woody would have loved it!
The whole thing looks suspiciously like something Trey and Matt would make.
As a very strong personal liberties advocate, and writer of many folk songs, I'm sure Mr. Guthrie is spinning in his grave right now. I can just see his ghost walking the halls of the US Copyright office trying to haunt anybody who pretends to agree with such an idiotic stance.
The Kai's Semi-Updated Website Thingy
I just have one suggestion to improve the ending.
Nader: "This really sucks."
Perot: "Tell me about it."
If you're going to watch it anyway, why not just "wget http://images2.shockwave.com/afassets/flash/this_l and.swf" (removing the spaces) and actually save it to your HD so you have it later and don't have to download it every time you watch it or show it to people? It's just the same amount of load on the server in the beginning, but it's more convenient later.
It's shit. You'll just draw attention to it.
.... its freedom of speech but only when you say what I want to hear.....
But read the FAQ entry:
Does Al get permission to do his parodies?
Al does get permission from the original writers of the songs that he parodies. While the law supports his ability to parody without permission, he feels it's important to maintain the relationships that he's built with artists and writers over the years. Plus, Al wants to make sure that he gets his songwriter credit (as writer of new lyrics) as well as his rightful share of the royalties.
Test your net with Netalyzr
How can anyone say the song wasn't making fun of the original? By changing the lyrics and making about something else, it *is* a parody. It takes the original "this land is your land, this land is my land" and pokes fun at it ... sure sounds like a parody to me.
Besides, wasn't the original just a song and not a flash animation/video? SO, let a blind guy listen to the song and then to the "parody" in question and ask him if it's making fun of the original... if that guy happens to be a judge, end of case.
FLR
"This song is Copyrighted in U.S., under Seal of Copyright # 154085, for a period of 28 years, and anybody caught singin it without our permission, will be mighty good friends of ourn, cause we don't give a dern. Publish it. Write it. Sing it. Swing to it. Yodel it. We wrote it, that's all we wanted to do."
IANAL or do I play one on TV. But it seems to me that because of this the Copyright holders could end up losing their copyright (which apparently they should have many years ago) thus losing what money they were making off of it, seems pretty dumb to rock the boat when your own copyright is in question (and making you money).
The Native Americans should be pissed because of their portrayal in a song? I guess they finally got over the last 500+ years of American history then.
and that is protected by the first admendment. 2 Live Crew went through this a few years ago over a parody and won in the Supreme Court. This will fail too.
Just look for 3.8MB file in your browser local cache. Add .swf extension and play it in your browser.
Bigger picture, no ads.
Doug
JibJab,
a tever
It's PARODY. The precedent has been set in New York, back in the Saturday Night Live days. I remember back in 2001 or 2002 listnening to CNET Radio when they used to be on the air. Desmond Crisis or Alex Bennett (think Bennett) was on SNL (Saturday Night Live).
They used to do a skit, "You run for your life in fear!", a parody on "There's more to your life a Sears" or something like that. Their skit was on Apartheid, in Africa. It insulted or offended Sears, and they sued, but the case was settled, and mainly because, according the attorney and the judge, PARODY has to have a certain element of familiarity. Otherwise it is NOT recognizable enough to be laughed at. If it is so filtered or watered down in the fear of going beyond protected speech, then the effect of parody is nullifed. Thus, no parody, no stand-up comics, no alterations of stories, etc.
The lawyer for the company suing JibJab might need a jab in the ass to wake up to reality. Get a life.
In a little bit, maybe tonight, I'll post my renditions of UnderDog and Gilligan's Island, two songs I modified by lyrics to exorcise or cope with my having been laid off by a company that turned my life upside down. It took me from Jan 31, 2001 to Feb 8, 2004 to find a permanent job.
Stay tuned...
Underdong/Underdog.
You'll neHVUR see the headlinez read;
that wall street's filled with FILTH and GREED;
supporting, pushing Kompaneez;
Driven by an Effving NEED
for MURJ Frenzy;
Murje frenzee
Merge Frinzee
Mirge Frinzy,
Buhy a Subsid-
Clohz the Murjer;
Politik them,
Cross bought werkers-
Subsume them,
hAh-hah-ahh-ahh-
Subsyoom them,
Sbusyume them...
Tho Now the Murjer has completed;
Frightend werkers HAVE retreated;
Still there needs to be sum BLEEDING;
Because-the-new-headcount-is-still too EFVING HIGH!!!
Efving High,
Efffing High
Effving High
PUrgue some headcount
Freeze the vesting
Kissup to scald-street
Pine their blessing
Whatever...
itt-itt-tay-ay-ay-akes
wh
whattever..."
(it goes on a bit more... but I'll have to look at my script and post the verbatim)
I also prewarned that prev employer that under precedent in New York, parody permits me to say this, name them, and publish it.
Hell, I sat on the toiled innumerable days and nights wondering how I would save my mortgage. The paltry severance was vastly less than what the CEO and typical CEOs get after whacking the hell out of headcount.
David Syes
Parts of Gilligans' Island parody, not really against GI, but against my former employer:
"Jusss-sit RIGHT back,
and you'll hear a tale,
a tail of a fate-ful MERJ;
That started with the Divi-Cubes
But the DiVvees would be PURGED
The Skipper was a VC's man,
and controlled by the B-O-D.."
(Wait for the rest....)
David Syes..
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
anyone know if "the simpsons" got in trouble for that epsisode with the "this log is your log" song?
I hate songs about freedom.
This log is your log
This log is my log
When lightning struck it
It kicked the bucket!
I poured some onions
Inside my trousers
This log, it used to be a tree
Now it spreads love to you and me
Hey look, it's headed out to sea!
Don't Tread on Me
Two things. BiTorrent it. Two I can't get the Flash Player to play it, all by it's little ol self.
Some flash still skyrockets my cpu usage, but all flash has sound lag issues. In this clip the sound is about a full second behind the animation. Any way of fixing that?
I give not a whit if it's a funny satire or a funny parody. Myself and everyone I know that's politically-minded (and most of my friends are) thought this little flash animation absolutely hysterical. In fact, my Mom was -mad- at me for not telling her right away when I saw it.
The only people who seem to be pissed off about this whole situation are those who stand to make money from its destruction. The guys at JibJab stopped charging for the downloads because they stopped caring about the cash. TRO started caring about the cash and now they look like the RIAA song nazis.
ACs are modded -6. I don't read you, I don't mod you, I don't see you. Don't like it? Don't be a coward.
http://money.cnn.com/2004/07/26/commentary/wastler /wastler/
Right now lawyers for both sides are just hurling threatening letters at one another. If the dispute ends up in court, it'll be interesting.
TRO: "You've hurt our music!"
Jibjab: "You've got no humor!"
Both: "This judge will surely side with me!"
$cat
The band Aqua got sued for their Barbie song. Mattel lost - even though the song used copyrighted Barbie slogans, verbatim.
Political satire now has to be hosted outside the US because of stupid laws.
The copyright on this song should have expired years ago. I hope Congress is proud of itself.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
"If they pass a copyright term extention every 20 years, then they are perpetual, and therefore not for limited times."
Lessig already went in front of the Supreme Court to discuss this issue. Slashdot reported on it.
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Woody_Guthrie
Even more amusing (or ironic) is that you cite a site that is taken entirely and verbatim from Wikipedia: Wkipedia's Woody Guthrie -- with the GNU Free Documention License printed in <font size="1"> underneath a bunch of ads.
Opinions on the Twiddler2 hand-held keyboard?
I'm not sure if we can trust Wikipedia, but any man who says:
...very likely wouldn't be too concerned about people changing his song in any way. Perhaps a bit sad is the fact that he's been dead for almost 40 years, and yet that copyright he thought would last only 28 years is still in effect.
"This song is Copyrighted in U.S., under Seal of Copyright # 154085, for a period of 28 years, and anybody caught singin it without our permission, will be mighty good friends of ourn, cause we don't give a dern. Publish it. Write it. Sing it. Swing to it. Yodel it. We wrote it, that's all we wanted to do."
I've never bothered with standalone flash but is there a way to play these fullscreen since they are vector graphics?
Also how do you guys get a direct link?
There has been lots of flash I've wanted to grab instead of just watching in a window.
Switch to OSX ba.doom
...anybody caught singin' it without our permission, will be mighty good friends of ourn, cause we don't give a dern. Publish it.Write it. Sing it. Swing to it. Yodel it.
Woody Guthrie has never heard me sing.
One entry found for satire. : a literary work holding up human vices and follies to ridicule or scorn : trenchant wit, irony, or sarcasm used to expose and discredit vice or folly
Main Entry: satire
Pronunciation: 'sa-"tIr
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French or Latin; Middle French, from Latin satura, satira, perhaps from (lanx) satura dish of mixed ingredients, from feminine of satur well-fed; akin to Latin satis enough -- more at SAD
1
2
synonym see WIT
None of that applies to this situation. Here's parody:
Main Entry: 1parody : a literary or musical work in which the style of an author or work is closely imitated for comic effect or in ridicule : a feeble or ridiculous imitation
Pronunciation: 'par-&-dE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -dies
Etymology: Latin parodia, from Greek parOidia, from para- + aidein to sing -- more at ODE
1
2
Clearly in this case, the definition for parody applies. This case is completely without merit.
So, how do you say "troll" in your language?
Ripped from my other post in a reply to a troll:
Definition of Satire according to m-w.com:
One entry found for satire. : a literary work holding up human vices and follies to ridicule or scorn : trenchant wit, irony, or sarcasm used to expose and discredit vice or folly
Main Entry: satire
Pronunciation: 'sa-"tIr
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French or Latin; Middle French, from Latin satura, satira, perhaps from (lanx) satura dish of mixed ingredients, from feminine of satur well-fed; akin to Latin satis enough -- more at SAD
1
2
synonym see WIT
None of that applies to this situation. Here's parody:
Main Entry: 1parody : a literary or musical work in which the style of an author or work is closely imitated for comic effect or in ridicule : a feeble or ridiculous imitation
Pronunciation: 'par-&-dE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -dies
Etymology: Latin parodia, from Greek parOidia, from para- + aidein to sing -- more at ODE
1
2
Clearly in this case, the definition for parody applies. This case is completely without merit.
"Also how do you guys get a direct link?"
I run everything through a proxy. My log files give me the info.
2. No way in hell would Woody Guthrie be a Bush supporter!! He'd most definitely be in the Anybody But Bush camp.
Satire's not protected but parody of the song is?
Then it's time for a parody, no?
This song is my song,
this song's not your song,
cuz I got a lawyer
and you don't got one!
I saw you use it,
I saw you abuse it,
This song's not made for you and me.
"This song is Copyrighted in U.S., under Seal of Copyright # 154085, for a period of 28 years, and anybody caught singin it without our permission, will be mighty good friends of ourn, cause we don't give a dern. Publish it. Write it. Sing it. Swing to it. Yodel it. We wrote it, that's all we wanted to do."
as well as his rightful share of the royalties.
This does seem to imply that Mr. Yankovic shares the songwriting royalties with somebody else, no?
Actually, that is what was done with player piano rolls. The manufacturers could make a roll for any song that they wanted, but had to pay the sheet music company a predetermined amount.
Well, if you give them the benefit of the doubt (and you buy the "patriotic hymn" stuff), you could say they are parodying "This Land" by showing/saying look what has become of the idealised America of this song.
;-)
Good luck to them, it was a hilarious *parody*
Seeing all those trigger-happy lawyers make Soviet Russia look way better from here...
I'm serious, why do they keep suing everyone? It's not like regular people will complain about the song. It's a PARODY!
Open Source Java Web Forum with LDAP authentication
http://images2.shockwave.com/afassets/flash/this_
plays the cartoon bigger and without the advertising
Nathan Friedly
Back when I was grade school, we sang our own version of the song:
This land is my land.
This land ain't your land.
I've got a shotgun
And you ain't got one.
If you don't get off
I'll blow your head off.
This land was made for only me.
Fortunately, the lawyers never showed up at the playground to shut us down.
After reading what everybody else wrote:
1. This is obviously parody, not satire, given the unity vs division aspect (Woody Guthrie's unified America is a shambles today due to political infighting of exactly this type). 2. JibJab should cross-sue for the attempt to take away obvious first ammendment rights- that is, for a civil rights violation on the part of TRO. Even if the song is satire instead of parody, it's protected political speech under the First Ammendment, and constitutional law trumps mere copyright law.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
ok, this is long-shot.
the song, a populist folk song is performed by elitist presidential candidates hoping to appear populist themselves. perhaps, the artist juxtaposed bush and kerry, whom combined--based on polling data--anger almost 100% of the population, against this progressivley patriotic populist folk song.
it's an excellent (parody||satire).
just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand!
Slashdotians know that the Bono act is bad, but it's hard to convince Ma and Pa Cratchet of that. "Shouldn't those creativy types git payed for their work?" "If we'z don't have copyright, thems evil deviants goin'ta make dirty pictures of them children's cartoon carachters. - Think of the children!"
But this might help convince them otherwise. The thing about this comic is that it's popular. It's not just a web thing. And my guess is that untill they hear about the lawsuit, most people wouldn't consider it a "bad" usage of the song. So in arguments, you can tell them that it's illegal. "What, why?" When you explain, they might think that copyrights are a good thing, so they'll shrug it off and say "Well, too bad, but the law's the law." Now tell them that when the song was written, copyrights were limited to 28(?) years. -> This means that under the original law the parody *shouldn't* be illegal. You can then go through the 4-5 copyright extentions, ever increasing the date, until you run up to the 2050 or so date that it's at now. Then toss in an off-handed remark that that's only if we don't increase the date between now and then. My guess is this would give most people some much needed perspective.
Don't worry about the copyright - this cartoon will really slay your grandchildren, when it finally becomes legal. (That is, if they remember who Bush and Kerry *are*: "Kerry - didn't he come after Fillmore?")
This is the kind of gross misuse of copyrights that is appalling. A little digging around on the Google and we can see that author of this song is Woody Gurthrie who lived from 1912-1967. Now assuming Woody Gurthrie wrote this song on the year of his death under the original copyright laws this work would have passed into public domain by 1999. But due to lobbying efforts of the music and movie industry this period has been extended to before the Great Depression! This isn't all that important though because it is still copyrighted regardless of former laws. However, what is important is that this song on JibJab isn't the exact song by Woody Gurthrie that was copyrighted, it is cleary a derivative work that is based on a copyrighted work but which adds a creative element that goes far beyond what Woody Gurthrie ever did. This is an issues talked about extensivly throughout the book Freeculture by Lawrence Lessig which is freely downloadable at his site. One example given in the book is how many great works where based on copyrighted works before them that had not yet entered public domain such as Disney movies or Japanese comics. The general idea is that although new works are based on older copyrighted ones it doesn't hurt the original copyright holder and serves to stimulate the growth of culture. For more information check out FreeCulture.org
This land is our land
Your land is our land
you just don't get it
we must always profit
so get your check book
or get your goose cooked
Your cash will surley go to meeeeeeee!!!
"There is only a one in six billion chance that you actually exist"
Fans seem never to be able to bring themselves to admit this, even when it is laid out for them.
The reason the works of contemporary commercial artists can not be freely distributed and modified by fans is not that the RIAA has siezed control over the works; the RIAA has done no such thing.
These artists signed a contract. That contract said they would receive marketing and production assistance in exchange for the redistribution rights of their recordings. Why did they sign? They signed because they wanted to be "rockstars", wanted to have that money, and wanted to live that life.
They wanted this for themselves more than they wanted the freedom of their works.
They SOLD OUT. There is no kinder way to put it. They valued the possibility of money and a flashy lifestyle over the music.
It is NOT "about the music." Nothing can be plainer.
They already owned instruments. They could have saved their money as I have, working a fulltime job, to put aside enough money to pursue my artistic interests.
They could have done this. In this digital age, now more than ever, they could have done this.
But they did not. They did not, because they were greedy, because they favored themselves over others.
Just as I will not use software which is not Free, just as I will not consume media which is not Free, so also I will look up to no man whose pursuit is not the Freedom of his brothers.
"This puts a completely different spin on the song," said Kathryn Ostien, director of copyright licensing for the publisher. "The damage to the song is huge."
Taking life too serious can be damaging to your sense of humor. But hey. Life IS a big joke.
Privacy is terrorism.
I might get one of those durn "Kazaa Letters" from the postman :)
Oh, man! A 17mb Flash movie? Sure, they should be sue. It doesn't matter what the movie is, but 17mb in a flash?!?
Satire
1. A literary work in which human vice or folly is attacked through irony, derision, or wit.
2. The branch of literature constituting such works.
3. Irony, sarcasm, or caustic wit used to attack or expose folly, vice, or stupidity.
Parody
1. A literary or artistic work that imitates the characteristic style of an author or a work for comic effect or ridicule.
2. The genre of literature comprising such works.
3. Something so bad as to be equivalent to intentional mockery; a travesty: The trial was a parody of justice.
4. Music. The practice of reworking an already established composition, especially the incorporation into the Mass of material borrowed from other works, such as motets or madrigals.
you know what? I don't think there should be copyright anymore.
there should just be, notoriety-right, creator-right: but copyright just isn't making sense anymore.
the name itself is misleading. it looks to speak of the right to copy. but if I used a word, say "freedomright" in the same meaning it would say that I, I, I, have the right to freedom, it guarantees you nothing. in fact, used in the exact same meaning it would say that ONLY I, I, I, have freedom by right.
With the ubiquity of copying devices allowing consumers to create industry grade duplications (and original works at industry grade - might I add) this current notion of copyright is starting to show some serious compatibility problems IMnshO.
Take this example. The owner of a patent can actually say, "no, you can't use this" even if that patent is for some kind of revolutionary life- saving device. they have that right!?
even if you can memorize the design with ease, and can construct this patented device to save a life, the patent owner - by law - can sue you!
Is it not enough reward to have your name on something? After all, if you create enough great things then for certain some interested people would give you things for working for them; things like...money, cars, a house, a big ass boat.
take this other example.
let's say that I create a program that creates original works. It randomly goes about making a melody, harmony and rhythm. I broadcast the music created by it via internet radio.
Now, what happens if by pure dumb luck my music generation program goes ahead and plays "roxanne" by The Police? am I liable for infringement?
More to the point; can I copyright any and every song this device creates? Meaning to say, can I just have a script set to convert each song into notation and an mp3 and automatically ship it out to the copyright office? I mean. I could literally generate thousands of full-length songs every day!!! maybe 10s o' thousands! right?
copyright is really really starting to become archaic in it's entirety, mithinks
It doesn't matter. Or at least it shouldn't matter. What should matter is, was there any intention to do damage to the original song? No. The intention was to make us laugh about Bush and Kerry, not to damage the 'reputation' of the song...
;)
And if it wasn't for this parody or satire I would never ever have heared from this song in my entire life. (We have different songs, here in Europe
Privacy is terrorism.
Even if it's not a license, it might be grounds for estoppel. It layman's terms, that means if you allow something and waive your write to sue at one point in time, you can't later "change your mind" for the same thing for the same person. Since this was directed to ANYONE, allowing them to use the music with an implied promise that no legal action would be taken, the copyright holder now may not be able to take action because of the principle of estoppel. It's not quite the same as a license, but it's close. It's because of estoppel that I can't tell you, "sure you go ahead and copy this post" and then sue you for copyright infringement if you do.
Of course, IANAL.
Sure you go ahead and copy this post.
Most times... people who create such political works do so for the response it gets from those who see it.
All this fighting is exactly the response they look for.
BTW: from what I've seen all politians are lying @$$ holes that don't deserve to be in power, and are usually un aware of the real issues that people want addressed. That said I guess we aren't allowed to talk about them on the news either because everything they do is a skrew up and it makes them look bad (like this parady)
DarkMantle I been bored, so I started a blog.
Anyone else notice that the phrase on the loading screen is:
"A parody of Woody Guthrie's This Land"?
Unless JibJab was intentionally trying to falsify their information, it seems like they're not doing anything wrong.
*I* can play songs and sing with my friends, and I can eat. We sing, and we are joyous.
I can do that because first I do the work I must to contribute my share. It is not flashy, it is not romantic, but it is honest. And in the darkest night, my honest word and that of my brothers is all I have, all anyone can have.
You who would stoop so low as to exploit the present capitalist order to lock down what is open, to exchange what is free for extortion, to lord power over your brothers; you who do this deserve neither to eat, nor to sing.
You are right. You can not live the life of a rockstar if you are not first willing to exploit your fellows.
May your greed be your downfall. Your choices have already condemned you, you and your chosen lot.
Al does get permission from the original writers of the songs that he parodies. While the law supports his ability to parody without permission, he feels it's important to maintain the relationships that he's built with artists and writers over the years. Plus, Al wants to make sure that he gets his songwriter credit (as writer of new lyrics) as well as his rightful share of the royalties. (emphasis added)
That flippin' song was written in * 1 9 5 6 *
NINETEEN FIFTY SIX!!
Almost 50 years later, it's still copyrighted material, and they're trying to say that you can't make a parody of it?
This copyright extension crap has to go. I swear, it's getting way out of hand. Even "Happy Birthday" is copyrighted.
If some kid sings "Happy birthday to you.. you smell like a zoo.." then they're probably opening themselves up to a similar lawsuit, eh?
Silly. Just plain silly..
If I recall correctly (and I know y'all will step up and correct me :), the Supreme court sided with 2 Live Crew saying that they had to err on the side of parody.
Hey, Windows users, there is no such thing as "forward" slash, there is only slash and backslash.
The American sense of humour eludes me. I think it is because it's ... not funny
Two words.... Benny Hill.
Well, considering no less than six (6) posts before yours include the same quote verbatim, with sources ranging from woodieguthrie.com to the linked article to some commercial site that actually uses the wiklipedia entry and only cites in tiny font below the ads at the end up the page, I think we can "trust Wikipedia."
;)
Seriously, have you any examples of Wikipedia being wrong? Wikipedia does have examples of Encyclopedia Britanica being wrong. I wonder if you'd have included such a disclaimer when citing EB? How about now, after reading this?
everything in moderation
This song is my song, this songs NOT your song. .....
(Feel free to add more.)
I looked at the summary and said to myself what I waste of everybody's money and time. A flash animation is like any other creative work.
And this particular piece of work is a parody, no doubt. no questions needed.
Quit wasting my time and tax dollars. If the artist wanted to say stuf about the president then he should, if he has good cause. He cant go blaming random stuff on the president without good cause and evidence either. If he just doesn't like the guy thats fine with me. This person is exercising Free speech to its fullest. The question of copyright infringment by satire is bogus. But that is for the courts to decide......
This was brought to you buy the Department of Redundancy Department
blogs are fucking gay and worthless.
It's unbelievable how many people know about jibjab -- a lot more than know about DMCA and "fair use." This may finally get the message through to Joe & Jane Public that the music industry's actions aren't just about making people pay for music, it's about limiting availability of possible creative works by preventing them in the first place. Joe & Jane Public understand "can't get this at all" a lot better than "you oughtn't've downloaded that without paying for it."
Walt Disney was closer than this to "ripping off" Steamboat Bill, Jr. (a work currently playing in theaters at the time!) when he put Mickey Mouse in "Steamboat Willie," and his work earned him a media empire and the adoration of millions. And it was LEGAL.
"This puts a completely different spin on the song," said Kathryn Ostien...
No shit, lady! That's what makes it creative and original! The fact that this is even an issue makes me so baffled and angry I lack the vocabulary to describe it. Is The Richmond Organization blinded so badly by God-only-knows-what that they will waste time, money, and lawyers to shut down a perfectly legitimate creative work? This creative work harms them in no way, yet they assault it. What can they gain by this? The song is fifty years old! The mind reels.
This whole lawsuit is testament to the truth of what I've been reading in Free Culture. Read this book. It's free to download, and extremely important if you care about anything vaguely related to this topic.
Anyway, the comment that "the damage to the song is huge" by the publisher is absolutely false and demonstrably so.
When I saw the JibJab piece my first thought was "I don't own a copy of this song." I went to iTunes and picked up a few Woody albums and a single version of "This Land..." with Arlo and Woody.
I noticed the top search return for Woody Guthrie on iTunes was "This Land..." and the #2 and #3 most purchased Woody songs? "This Land" and an instrumental version of the same song. (#1 was City of New Orleans if anyone is wondering)
I wonder what the sales data on this tune and Woody's other stuff are recently? Doesn't the old adage that 'there's no such thing as bad publicity' seem to hold true here?
I wish I knew some latin to put in my post so that I might look smarter but alas, I don't. Do remember though, if you buy some of Woody's albums, caveat emptor, folk music from that long ago can sound scratchy at times.
this sig deleted by another sig
However, since Jibjab did not make any money directly or indirectly by advertising, the copyright owners may not be able to get much monetary damages, aside from a seize and desist order.
I've always admired ol' Pete's sentiment, but, as slogans go, Woody's wins hands down. Pete's is just too wordy.
...
If I could play guitar, I'd have a favorite Pete story reference written on it: "This too shall pass."
(One version of Pete's story, paraphrased, and probably protected under Fair Use:
A benevolent king wants to pass on all good knowledge to his children, so calls together his wise men and women to write it into a book. A year later, they present him with a book six inches thick.
"Too long," he says, after reading it. "I need a single sentence that conveys all of this."
Five years later they come back. The sentence is "This too shall pass."
"Excellent," he says, and has it carved on all the lintels of the kingdom. "Still, it'd be nice if we could have it in a single word."
Twenty years pass. The king is on his death-bed, when the wise folk come back and give him the word: "maybe."
Hundreds of years later, some people are trekking through a sandy wasteland. They come across some scattered stone fragments, one of which having "oo shall pa" carved in it. They ponder this briefly, and walk on.
)
Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachtani?
www.fogbound.net
Remember this?
Seem's like the same situation.
No, I did not read the f***ing article!
InnerWeb
Freud might say that Intelligent Design is religion's ID.
The Richmond Organization (TRO Inc.)
Judy Bell, Printed Music Manager
11 W. 19th St., Suite 711
New York, NY 10011
Telephone: (212) 627-4646
Fax: (212) 633-1233
Email: Larry Richmond larry.richmond@songways.com; Email: trony@banet.net
U.S. Agent: Hal Leonard Corp.
R.I.P.
I beg to differ.
Regardless of party policies, the Republicans are *effective* and implementing them, and the Democrats generally less so.
Most of the time, we don't need *effective* government. (Perhaps right now we do, for the War on Terror, but we're getting War in Iraq, instead. Perhaps War on Terror is even the wrong metaphor, at that.) But in general, a less effective government also gets in our way, and in our bedrooms, less.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
Wow,
... that being that your political system is totally fucked. that you fools elected yourselves a dumbass texan prick (sorry, that's redundant), who murders thousands of innocent civilians, who accepted $1.4billion in gift money from the Bin Laden family to fund his oil companies, who isn't really trying to find Osama, the true cause of 911! ... and that Kerry is one brutally lame alternative to that genocidal murderer Bush, who's ass anxiously lick at every chance.
YOU ALL MISSED THE POINT
There were mother rapers. And there were father rapers! And then the biggest, meanest, father raper of them all, came up to me and asked, "what you do time for, boy?"
And I said "fer violatin a copyright." And they all slid away from me on the Group W bench.
And then I said "and fer addin' obscene words," And they all slid back towards me on the Group W bench.
Ergo Ipso Facto, it's a satire not a parody and they're in the wrong. Stop watching Matrix 2.
"True dat with a wiffle ball bat." -- kabrakan
Recomended reading related to the topic (copyrights that last forever): "Free Culture" by Lawrence Lessig.
It could be downloaded for free from: http://free-culture.org/get-it
No sig today.
How is this different from wierd al?
Go easy on my little server.
i sland.swf
http://freecache.org/http://k2wrpg.org/~leader/th
Slashdot is an anagram for Has Dolts, and I am Dolt number 468543
Woody Guthrie said in his will that he didn't want his song used for political purposes.
This is my letter sent to those imbeciles who run Lodlow Music (aka The Richmond Organization):
"Greetings, all the way from Australia!
Well, I felt obliged to look you fine folks up at "The Richmond Organisation" or "Ludlow Music" through the MPA website (http://www.mpa.org/agency/370p.html) and offer you just one or two lines on the story that I've read about you objecting to the use of Guthrie's "Our Land" by the JibJab parody. I'd be mighty appreciative if you sent this directly to whoever is responsible for this issue. Larry Richmond is a name that springs to mind. So is Kathryn Ostien. Mr Richmond is on record stating his view that he regards derivative works as "damaging and dangerous"- in the Robbie Williams case, so it's safe to assume that he is a driver behind this embarrassing decision.
Gentlemen, I can only conclude that there's something in the water over your way. You lost the battle as soon as you listened to the wiener on your payroll who said "Hey that's *our* song. Those scurrilous satirists can't be allowed to exercise their first amendment rights! Show me the money!"
Gad! Whoever of you who have chosen to chase this has generated a huge amount of bad publicity for you- vastly outweighing any potential gain. For pete's sake, Woody Guthrie wouldn't have cared less who sang it (or how) 60 years ago. You didn't earn the creative rights to that song, you merely paid for it, and anyway, the copyright should have rightly expired decades ago. Your shirt-necks are all too tight. No! I'm being far too kind. Your kind of lawyer-ese, small thinking, greedy shit-stirring typifies all that is bad about the stagnant, corrupt music industry. You're greedy and stupid. You barely deserve the time I'm taking to write this letter, except that it makes me feel better knowing I've vented my spleen. That, and the fact that your type don't last long in the world.
Not being in America, I can afford not to take sides about the political parody that the JibJab people have brilliantly put together. However, I can see a weasel from a mile away. Rather than call JibJab and threaten litigation, why don't you call and thank them for having the humor and creativity that you lack?
Sincerely,
Nathan Zamprogno,
Sydney Australia."
What a freakin riot. It's refreshing to find someone that can poke the appropriate amount of fun at both parties without getting too wrapped up any moore.
The swf file can be found here so you don't have to deal with the ads and can save it on your own drive. Show the corporate types what the Internet is all about, sharing.
I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
Much has been said about Guthrie's standard copyright notice to do whatever you want with his music, but I haven't read anything yet about the "folk process" to which Guthrie and his contemporaries such as Pete Seeger (who was in the folk group "The Weavers" and is still alive) depended on.
What was the folk process?
In short, it was the age-old practice Guthrie and others used of taking old music and writing new words. Just like a folk-tale is a story that has been told and changed as time goes on.
When the Weavers took [Guthrie's] 'So Long (It's Been Good To Know Yuh)' into the pop charts '51, the song had been written originally to cheer up migrant workers, adapted as a patriotic war song and as a jingle for selling pipe tobacco; far from being outraged, Woody was there in the studio, helping the Weavers adapt it yet again: 'For better or worse,' wrote Colin Irwin in Mojo '97, 'this was the folk process at work.'
As Seeger says,
"My father was more sensible. He said to think of the folk process as something that has gone on through the ages. The folk process occurs in cooking, with cooks rearranging recipes. And lawyers rearrange old laws to fit new citizens. If you look at it this way, then the true importance of folk music is to let ordinary folks change things."
W
-------------------
This is my SIG. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Jesus, does everything we do these days end up in court? I have been a firm believer that the career of the millenium is law. We see law suits now for just about everything. If I was back in college, Id switch to law. Definetly going to have a job waiting for you. Business is booming! About the only field that has an unlimited future.
Let's see, Republicans stand for states rights, so they try and fail to push a federal constitutional amendment to override states rights on marriage.
They are for fiscal responsibility, so they throw out the budget surplus they inherited from Democrat president Clinton and replace it with the biggest deficits in history.
They are for limited government, so they lie about how much a huge prescription drug plan will cost so they can ram that through, and they expand the police state powers tremendously, including snooping on library records.
Yep, that's effective alright.
Infuriate left and right
TRO: 'You've hurt our music!'
Jibjab: 'You've got no humor!'
Both: 'This judge will surely side with me!'
This just in. The Richmond Organization is now sueing CNN.
TRO believes that the Jibjab creation threatens to corrupt Guthrie's classic -- an icon of Americana -- by tying it to a political joke; upon hearing the music people would think about the yucks, not Guthrie's unifying message.
If you ask me, this parody only makes the message of the original song more poignant. Instead of "this land belonging to you and me" the parody says "Screw America. This land belongs to the politicians!" And that gives me plenty of reason to appreciate the message of the original song and hope it can come true some day.
This nation has become far too much a nation that turns to litigation for every small reason. These people are trying to make a political statement, not cut a huge profit off someone elses work. If this makes it through the courts and the ruling is in favor of Guthrie's publisher then the future looks grim.
Seems pretty silly to me too, at least in this case. FWIW, here's a handy and recently updated chart on US Copyright terms from Peter Hirtle.
I was a republican until about 2 years ago, then the idiot puppet George Bush took over along with Cheney and the rest of my idiot party refused to repudiate the idiot Bush and his thieving cabinet.
Its sickening.
So yes, I think right now the republicans would push killing babies if it benefitted their friends in big business.
I'm not a democrat either. as I've hit middle age, I realize both parties are full of shit, and it sickens me that I was so stupid to fall for their little taglines and mindless saying. God, I was a bigger idiot, than our stupid, mononic, idiotic president Bush.
At this point, I view a vote for Bush as proof that people have cloth for brains.
link
Utilizing magnetic schemata since
"The problem though, is that parody can't use an entire work "
Of course it can. Where did you come up with that oddity?
As to Weird Al, if you read prior links, you'd see he gets permission as a courtesy, not a requirement.
of american blind justice and the judge wasn't going to look at the 27 8x10 color glossy photographs..... I know that's the son. but the 'alices resteraunt' movie was on this morning. kind of ironic all this...
The More Laws, the less Justice --Marcus Tullius Cicero
This potential case has already been decided in U.S. case law.
5 31 01petrhr.pdf
The case that recently decided this issue on the federal level was SunTrust Bank v. Houghton Mifflin Co. It's the case where the estate of Margaret Mitchell, the author of "Gone With The Wind" went after Alice Randall, author of "The Wind Done Gone" for copyright infringement. The case claimed that it was illegal for Alice Randall to take the story and characters of Gone With The Wind, put it in a blender and use them to make a new story that made a social and political statement.
The SunTrust Bank v. Houghton Mifflin Co. case was first affirmed for the plantiff but was overturned on appeal. The issues of that case aren't any different from this potential case. Can parody be defined as making a political satire or statement? Is it legal to take an entire previous work and use the characters and places and story line to make your own case for such parody?
The reason I know about all of this is because it is very personal to me. Alice Randall is my sister-in-law. And in the end, the plantiff not only lost the case, but decided to contribute to charities dear to the defendant.
You can read the case yourself. But if I were the holders of the Woody Guthrie copyright, I would read this case carefully and choose not to file. Because I guarentee that the defense will be using this case as the cornerstone of their argument.
http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/suntrust/wdg
More like
+1 Sadly True
a verse cut before most published recordings of the song, but included in the manuscript:
Was a high wall there that tried to stop me
A sign was painted said: Private Property,
But on the back side it didn't say nothing --
[God blessed America for me.]
says it all.
- Entertaining Bits from the Ancient Kernel Tree
The bottom line here is that fair use is not about allowing you to quote a work in order to make fun of that particular work; it is about allowing you to quote a work in order to make a particular kind of social commentary. The fact that this particular social commentary is also core political speech (and not just making fun of a song, like in the 2livecrew case) is simply icing on the cake for jib jab's defense attorneys -- in fact, it means this kind of speech would be MORE protected than a parody of the song, not less.
... so with tears in our eyes, we drove the VW microbus back to the recording studio with the rakes and the shovels and the implements of destruction, and had ourselves a copyright-burning party that couldn't be beat...
Human being (n.): A genetically human, genetically distinct, functioning organism.
My kids elemetary school uses "This Land " as a basis for thier school song "This School is my School Oh Flood Brook Union School We Know we Love you To the things we learned here And the friends that are dear This school was made for you and me" thats just one verse So be prepared to sue the US school system and the US govornment if this goes ahead .And be prepaered to explain to a whole lot of 5 , 6 and 7 year olds they cant sing thier song to thier mums and dads at the end of school celebration becuse of the law .
That is not true. I agree with your point that this was a good song for them to pick. But as far as jibjab's legal protection goes, it doesn't really matter what song they picked. A dancing picture of Bush in bra and panties singing "Oops, I Lied to the Public Again" would be protected fair use. It doesn't have to be a good parody or even a particularly insightful social comment in order to merit protection under the first amendment, and that's really what is at issue here -- it is the reason that parody is considered fair use.
Frankly, if I were jib jab's lawyers I would be popping the champagne. You couldn't ask for a better case that would not only have a solid basis for winning in court but also bring your client so much favorable media attention as astute commentators being persecuted for speaking their minds.
This is the common definitions of the word. Sometimes the legal definition can be significantly different. I have no idea in this case, so could some lawyer tell us if these definitions are what the courts would go by?
If I drive fast enough at the red light, it'll appear green.
I`m glad JibJab uses Microsoft, otherwise SCO would own the song.
b ja b.com
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.ji
Can you cite a US Court decision making this distinction between satire and parody in this manner? I agree this is not a direct parody of the song, but so what? Parody is protected because it is an important means of social commentary, not because it is an important means of making fun of other artists! I'm no lawyer but I do study the first amendment and copyright laws, and I don't recall seeing this distinction being made in the 2 Live Crew decision. We protect parody because it is an important way for an artist to make a point -- that protection is not to my knowledge based on the kind of point the artist is making. In jibjab's case, the fact that the artist's point is core political speech only strengthens its protection under fair use.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur. Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
Sunlit World Scheme. Weird and different.
If it had, there wouldn't have been any money involved.
Duh. That's the first rule of Lawyernomics.
Number of Lawyers Involved in any given cause increases in direct proportion to the Potential for Money Making and inversely to the Legal Merit.
In anticipation that this might soon disapear, you can download the flash-file directly at: "http://images2.shockwave.com/afassets/flash/this_ land.swf?siteBandwidth=300&siteBrowser=unknown&sit eOS=unknown&fake=param"
---
the pen is mightier than the sword, the sword is mightier than the court, the court is mightier than the pen.
Clinton graduated from Yale, too. Do you really think that the country led by Kerry will be no different from the country led by Bush? Do you see no differences in Bush's militarism, with no risk and much profit to himself, and Kerry's "militarism", in which he volunteered for Vietnam, and came back as disillusioned as everyone else, and worked to end the nightmare? Don't you think there's a difference between endless global war, and appropriate American defense preparedness? That vote you cast, and those you influence, might be the most important acts you commit this year. Don't throw them away on oversimplification, against your best self interest.
--
make install -not war
I think all this discussion misses the point of protection of parody completely. Parody is protected (as I posted in response to another comment) because it is an important way for a speaker to make a point. Not because it is an important way to make fun of another artist's work. It doesn't matter what kind of point you're making; and in fact someone like jib jab who is clearly making a political point can probably expect MORE protection than someone whose only goal is to try to make another artist cry.
There were a lot of alternate lyrics for that song, too.
I met her in the attic .40 automatic
with a
I met her at the bank
with a British Army tank
I met her in the tub
with a U.S. Navy sub
And so on and so forth. But I used to like to sing
Deck the halls with gasoline,
Light a match and watch it gleam,
Watch the school burn down to ashes,
Aren't you glad you played with matches?
I left the Fa-la-la out. And there was also
On top of Old Smoky, .44 Slug.
All covered with blood,
I shot my poor teacher
with a
And down at her funeral,
Her body was laid,
Some people threw flowers,
I threw a grenade.
Oooh, I'm going to cause a rash of expulsions with these old tunes! But I agree. What we need is zero tolerance for zero tolerance!
Sunlit World Scheme. Weird and different.
but watching the cartoon left me with the original version of the song stuck in my head for days.....I don't think that supports the "rights holders'" idea of dilution of the original at all......
That's false, as others have pointed out. It's true that the courts will look at how much of a work is used in another work when determining fair use, but that is only one factor to consider and they have been correctly reluctant to make a hard and fast rule about how much use of a work is OK. The big copyright case involving parody is the 2 live crew case; they used the entire song though changed the lyrics, just like Weird Al does, and the Court held that as parody it was strongly protected. Political parody like this case will be protected even more so.
*SNAP* Wake up - you've fallen asleep in front of Fox(hypnosis)News again. Bush has the unlimited funds not only of his *cough* Carlyle Group *cough* father's family, and his wife's rich family, but the bottomless resources of the corporate multinationals whose agenda he serves. Kerry can't approximate that.
Your main point, inventing a strawman argument that you dispute, that Republicans aren't the only ones "pushing heavy copyright enforcement", doesn't follow from the post to which you reply. That post only claimed that the Republicans, and their corporate interests, are selling a sense of "patriotism" at odds with the sense of Guthrie's song. Then there's your belief that somehow "most of Hollywood and the music industry are [D]emocrats", at least the ones who peddle copyright policy. Those lapses in reason come from the rightwing propaganda that lashes at any politics less authotarian then its authors, inexorably moving the consensus ideology to the "right", no matter what that actually means in practice. But at least you're tracking the real agenda beneath the political brands, so with a little more independent thinking, you'll lose the reflexive opposition to the Democrats that is really just making you a Republican patsy. With luck, you'll suspect all "patriots" as scoundrels seeking their last refuge, and remain independent of any party, in defense of your right to remain a free thinker.
--
make install -not war
Come on. This is the state of the country we Amercians live in. Does it make us proud? Not me, ashamed would be a better word.
Things have really gotten bad here. We elect officals who constantly support big business instead of supporting us, the people.
Sure, some reading this forum may agree this argument is okay, but I'd be willing to bet you're all republicrats too.
Honestly, this country needs to revert to the original constitution of the US, leaving out the provision of adding admendments. That one provision has distroyed this country and made it worse than anyone could have ever imagined.
Polititions are professionals, and must support their livelyhood. They do this by supporting big business, not us. I think senators and delegates should NOT be paid. It should be a voluntary service. Meet one month a year (unless a national crisis is at hand) and continue with their day jobs.
This would also prevent them from voting themselves a raise. Remember that? What a joke that was!
This would certainly help hender the f**king ridiculous laws they make, and continue to make in Washington.
Jesus!!! Wake the f**k up people!!!
you will make a much bigger statement by registering to vote as an independent then voting for yourself (or me) for president. if every person who felt like you would vote for themself we would show our representatives that we are not a lazy apathethic electorate -- we are an electorate who is sick of bad candidates.
when the election results show bush with 30%, kerry with 30% and "myself" with 40% the media will start asking questions. until then they will assume the people who didn't vote are apathetic, content, or stupid.
ok, so your vote doesn't make a difference in the presidential elections. not a whole lot at least. but it does matter at the state and local level. i live in california where we have voter initiatives -- the electorate directly votes on what laws will be created, then the state legislature must listen to the voters. but in every state (a few exceptions like, maybe, nevada where i hear anything gos) local officials decide (thru zoning and taxing) if wal-mart will be allowed in your town. so far, they have been successfully fought off here in los angeles. local and state officials dictate tax rates, tax breaks, green space, and zoining -- a well planned, sustainable community will have a higher property value in the long run than a community which allows an oil refinery to go next to a school.
staying silent says something but no one will understand unless you speak up.
fear is the mind killer
They explicitly mention intent to parody Woodie Guthrie's song. Of course, this probably doesn't mean a Goddamned thing to greedy, sue-happy lawyers and the freaks who employ them. The rights-holders, whether they be estate or record company, are probably just miffed that they're not getting a cut off something so popular.
I think the parent of the parent of this post meant democratic as in democracy, not democratic as in democratic party. At least I hope so...
Through all this I think most of us would agree that what JibJab has created is an amusing satirical parody. Beyond that it also brings into the discussion the fact that the creator of the original work, Woody Guthrie, made explicit comments regarding the distribution of his music. Not only do JibJab and the EFF have good grounds to win the case but also good grounds to have the later extensions to the original copyright reviewed as being explicitly against the written wishes of Woody Guthrie. I say it's time for a counter, these bastards have stolen enough from the amorphous "public" but here are even disgracing one of our greatest American songwriters.
"Secrecy is the Beginning of Tyranny" "No intelligent man has any respect for an unjust law" -Robert Heinlein
But when they have Bush in the toon say "the right wing nuts" you now have a paraody of the song.
The copyright holders could end up paying any defendent lawyer fees after the Mattel v. Aqua decison by the Supreme Court.
I could be way off on this, but I read somewhere else that the tune for "This Land is Made for You and Me" actually existed in the public domain long before Woody Guthrie recorded it.
The music that accompanies it may have been based on an old gospel song called "When The World's on Fire" which dates back as far as the 1930's.
A group called "The Carter Family" did a cover of it, as did many others. Could it be the tune was in the back of Woody's mind when he wrote the lyrics "This Land"? If I remember correctly, this is how our national anthem had started out, as well.
Anyway, if what I read was correct on this, couldn't JibJab simply claim they were using "When The World's on Fire" as a starting point, and that the "this land" lines are merely coincidental?
8==8 Bones 8==8
That way over palyed way to popular piece of flash crap shoudl be sued!
"Plagiarism is basic to all culture." Pete Seeger claims that his father, a Harvard musicologist, told him that.
doo doo doo
me is anonymous.
me hates self right now.
why me make this post? cause parent worth modding up. parent, you get email saying you get response? I apologize.
I go die now.
Doo doo doo. Anonymous bob.
The attitudes the parody exhibits are pretty much in line with what Guthrie believed. I think you have forgotten (or most likely never knew about) this verse:
In the shadow of the steeple I saw my people,
By the relief office I seen my people;
As they stood there hungry, I stood there asking
Is this land made for you and me?
Once you realize that "This Land" was originally written as a Marxist response to Irving Berlin's "God Bless America", it has a whole new meaning. In fact, the original lyric was "God Blessed America for Me", not "This Land Was Made for You and Me".
And the asshats at TRO who think "This puts a completely different spin on the song. The damage to the song is huge," they apparently are not familiar with this verse:
Was a big high wall there that tried to stop me
A sign was painted, said 'Private property.'
But on the other side it didn't say nothing.
That side was made for you and me.
Betcha didn't know that this song was originally a scathing political commentary, didya?
aQazaQa
i already have my copy
-r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 3941166 Jul 21 18:52 this_land.swf
Seriously, it's getting worse.
It's like they don't want material to enter the Public Domain. Ever. Hell, forget "like", they don't want it.
The problem is I don't think I like the justifications. Remixes and samples without having to pay. What a tragedy. And other companies could release "Best Of" compilations at 10 $LOCAL_CURRENCY, rather than the 20+ they try to sell at.
It's getting ridiculous.
Tiggs
"120 chars should be enough for everyone..."
I figure I would point out that through out our history of printed media we have had satire. To single out jib jab over this flash file is just too pethedic. Today in most of our national magazines and newspapers we see countless satire comics pointing fun at the political arena with little to no backlash. I call them like I see them, polititians are just scared of the masses seeing this and to get a bad sterotype. Yet again this is common ocurance at any newstand. I figure little johnny was up in his room on jib jabs site and was watching this flash animation while laughing on the floor. meanwhile johnny's mom whom is prolly some SUV driving polically correct soccor mom decides to micromanage little johnny and peek in on him to see "censor" what he is surfing for/ watching. Next thing we know moms on the warpath calling everyone on the planet who will listen or gossip about the ramifications on little johnny's political views based on this very cartoon. This translates to mom making drama and trying to become her sons savior.
Maybe this is how it all started. Maybe not but in a society where you can sue anyone just for there opinion and torch the first amandment is just a socialist in my opinion. May the flaming begin.
P.S. to anyone offended by this reply please note that I am in advance am equally offended by there offendedness. I think that makes us even and null & void. Thank you for your time Slashdotter, happy voting.
Do everything in moderation, including moderation otherwise you will never know your limits.
ironic?
(please don't sue me!)
woodie guthrie is so trying to climb out of his grave right now.
i speak for myself and those who like what i say.
If you can't bother to google this, at least post it to Ask Slashdot, the appropriate forum. =)
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
I'm just really surprised at all this because the song used by jibjab isn't really all that different from how the version used on the Simpsons poked fun at massive corporations and such.
And that one was written about a giant log with Lisa's head on top (or the front by the time it headed "out to sea").
So where were the concerns about the corruption of the message and the song back then? Why is it only now, when it involves politics (which the original does as well), that the copyright holders decide to sue?
I'm not a nerd. I'm a geek. Nerds make more money.
"Republicans believe every day is 4th of July, but Democrats believe every day is April 15." - Ronald Reagan
Today's US politicians (both brands) believe every day is 9/11.
From the fields of Texas, to the streets of Boston
From the right-wing nut jobs, to the liberal sissies
This song was made for you and me.
"This Virtual Machine Kills Fascists" -Debian Woody Guthrie
I'm not sure if you meant to highlight this as a problem, or simply an interesting fact, but I always cringe whenever I see people pressuring the public to get out and vote. Stuff like this can even be dangerous:
Such advice is dangerous, because it encourages everyone to get out and vote. Now, on the face of it, that may not sound like a bad thing. However, "everyone" isn't informed. "Everyone" hasn't been paying attention to the issues, the candidates, and the platforms. That 50% who don't vote were busy watching Survivor and Friends instead of the Presidential debates.
What possible benefit is there to having those people show up and randomly select a name on their ballot? They know nothing about the issues. They're not making an informed vote. At best, they make a lucky guess. At worst, their vote cancels out the vote of another citizen who actually invested the time to read up on the platforms and get informed about the candidates.
What I'm saying is, if you get that other 50% out to vote, they'll pollute the pool. You can lead a horse to water (force people to vote), but you can't make him drink (force people to get informed on the issues and make an informed vote).
It is best to leave things the way they are. Leave the voting to that 50% that actually cared enough about the election to get informed. That's still 150 million people, that's a reasonable cross-section of the USA. Chances are, they'll pick the right candidate.
If you can't even name 4 of the candidates that will be on the ballot you will be given, then it's better to just stay home and leave the important stuff (democracy) to those who actually give a shit. Besides, you wouldn't want to miss Big Brother - it might be a new one.
Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
Well, does democratic mean the same as Democratic?
You's a lyier! All thems people was good old Americans! If your done gonna make them sounds liek intellekturals and libruls and socilaists I'm gona drive up from Texas and kick youur SORRRY ass!
Waltz, nymph, for quick jigs vex Bud.
Ever notice that those 2 verses are hardly ever taught to kids when they learn that song in public schools?
It simply wouldn't DO to have kids questioning the class structure or the concept of "property rights", now would it? Hell, next thing you know, the kids might listen to some of Guthrie's OTHER songs, like "Pretty Boy Floyd", with commie/pinko lyrics like this:
"There's a many a starving farmer
The same old story told
How this outlaw paid their mortgage
And saved their little home.
Others tell you 'bout a stranger
That come to beg a meal
And underneath his napkin
Left a thousand dollar bill.
It was in Oklahoma City
It was on a Christmas Day
There come a whole car load of groceries
With a letter that did say:
You say that I'm an outlaw
You say that I'm a thief
Here's a Christmas dinner
For the families on relief.
Now as through this world I ramble
I see lots of funny men
Some will rob you with a sixgun
And some with a fountain pen.
But as through your life you travel
As through your life you roam
You won't never see an outlaw
Drive a family from their home"
Woody must be spinning in his grave over this lawsuit. Looks like the bastards with the fountain pens won...:(
Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
I wrote him in in 1996, and all you democrats blaming Bush's presidency on Nader can go to hell).
Thanks to the likes of folks like you, that's where we are. Happy are you?
SteveM
Regardless of precedent, the existence of thousands of other very similar "skits", or the constituation, we all know who holds the power in this country and who will get their way: the politicians. I remember in school being taught that America was founded so we could get away from monarchy, aristocracy and people being treated like royalty, above the common man. Sure seems like the politicians have forgotten this and expect to be treated like royalty: no taxes, substantial pay raises every year, and immunity to laws.
Regardless of any laws or legalities, the politicians will win this lawsuit and the little man (JibJab) will lose. This will set a horrible precedent and raise even more doubt in our legal system.
If two guys can't make a creative political satire using a parody of a classic American song with out getting sued, then what the hell is First Amendment for?
Why not call "Free Speech" for what it really is: "Expensive Speech" because it's only "Free" if you have a Free Lawyer.
Authority questions you. Return the favor.
The original songs are almost never the subject of his "parody".
"Smells Like Nirvana"
The song, set to the tune of smells like teen spirit, is largely about how you can't understand the words to smells like teen spirit
"I'll have a Guinness, no wait, make that a Coors Light" -Grad student I work with, who shall remain anonymous...
"Left Wing, Right Wing: it tastes the same to me." I gotta get me some of those T-Shirts.
My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
Here's the sheet music for "This Land Is Your Land":/ this_land.html
http://www.themomi.org/museum/Guthrie/sheet_music
There will allways be people creating all kinds of art just for fun, to give or tell something to the others or out of other reasons not related to money at all. Some of them actually may be even willing to pay for publishing of their art. The job of paying good artists for the benefit of the society, for them not to starve to death and not to have waste their time by making their living by things unrelated to their art, had been for hundreds of years succesfully done by rich benefactors, who themselves did that not just out of their filantropy, but also to amuse themselves or to add to their image. Although the artists may---to some extent, untill it gets out of bounds---benefit of the copyright, they did not demanded such a concept, they did not invented it, and they never have any power to bring it into existence.
The publishers, on the other hand, can not rely on the authors creating their art for the art, they have to pay them first to have enough of their art to publish, and second to encourage their best artists to create for them, and not for the competing publishers. And this is the point, where the idea of copyright takes its part, as soon as the technology allows cheap copying of the art. Since if one publisher pays the artist, and all the others may then simply and cheaply copy the published art, what preventss the competitors from offering much lower prize? Or even worst---what prevents the consumers from just copying and sharing the art, not feeding the publishers? Ladies and gentlemen, let me introduce The Copyright!
Justified by the artists' right to get their reward for their art, the copyright ensures the business of the publishers. And well, untill it gets out of bounds, it may do quite a good work, truely providing the artists reasonable income, helping them create more art, and helping the consumers to get the art from the publishers. Unfortunately these days the copyright concept backfires allready, the validity of the copyright being constantly prolonged ad absurdum, the publishers taking the rights away from the artists and denying public access to their art against their will, and various law enforcers making their living of sheer parasiting on the system, taking all rights away not only from the authors but of their publishers too, spreading their own power all over this world, commanding people, spying on people, and collecting royalties just for everything, no matter who created it and wheather the name of the author is known at all, to their own pockets.
All the concepts of so called intellectual property seam to be backfiring these days, serving rather some might-loving rulers to call the intellect of the others their own property, than to the intelligent people to gain some property through their intellect or to the society to develop proper intellect.
Woody Guthrie's spirit may sing in the wind (until RIAA gets power to shut down the wind and to get spirits under custody) something like:
The song was my song, I made it your song,
to sing it freely, if it is handsome,
but lawyers came out, demanding ransom,
my song no longer belongs to me.
"The Saga Begins"
As I mentioned in another post, the song, set to the tune of American Pie, is largely about Star Wars, and has absolutely nothing to do with the original song by Don McLean.
Er, the Vietnam War was turned from (D) Johnson's lying travesty into (R) Nixon's terminal catastrophe. (D) Johnson's war was criminal and wrong, but was about on the scale of (R) Reagan/Bush's war in Central America. And (R) Bush is taking Afghanistan and Iraq to Vietnam-caliber from the get-go. Compare that with (D) Clinton's stable conclusion in Yugoslavia. Compare Yugoslavia with (R) Eisenhower's failure in Korea, which is still a top-5 military threat today, rising to a nuclear threat. Here's a breakdown of Republicans and Democrats, with their wars, in the 20th Century:
(R) McKinley: Won Spanish War, bungled Phillipines
(R) T. Roosevelt: Killed 1M Phillipinos
(R) Taft: no wars worth mentioning
(D) Wilson: Helped win WWI
(R) Harding: no war record
(R) Coolidge: no war record
(R) Hoover: no war record
(D) F. Roosevelt: Helped win WWII
(D) Truman: Helped win WWII
(R) Eisenhower: open-ended Korea stalemate
(D) Kennedy: started, and attempted to stop, Vietnam escalation
(D) Johnson: escalated Vietnam into unwinnable war
(R) Nixon: escalated Vietnam into lost war
(D) Carter: no war record
(R) Reagan: helped end Cold War (no fighting), illegal covert wars, escalated open-ended Afghanistan wars
(R) Bush Sr: helped end Cold War (no fighting), illegal covert wars, open-ended Iraq War
(D) Clinton: ended Yugoslavia War
(R) Bush Jr: open-ended Iraq War, open-ended Afghanistan War, escalated Korea war, introduced (escalating) Global War on Terror
Next up, (D) John Kerry, Vietnam hero (both for combat valor and for veteran activism to end it). So are we done with the D/R warrior competence discussion?
--
make install -not war
But if you decide to stay home, Targon is faster!
...you can feed'em information, but you can't make'em think
I tried to watch something at their stupid site. It made me sit through a fscking ad, and then *didn't play anything*. Last time I go back there... someone should sue them for bait-and-switch too.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
We WERE paying down the national debt. There WAS a surplus. I am not talking about the 10 year projectsions. These were cold hard payments and debt reduction.
Infuriate left and right
The Flash animation in question accurately and lovingly captures the style of the old Monty Python animated bits Gilliam used to make.
The animation is showing the two sides of the American bipartisan political machine in a satiricaly accurate fashion so that is ultimately what all the fuss is probably about.
And when Bush's thugs trample all over you civil liberties nobody's gonna give a shit about your protest vote.
and
Thanks to the likes of folks like you, that's where we are [hell, that is]. I agree there's no way Nader could have won this past election, but I don't just think of the short term. Brazil's president, Lula, ran unsuccessfully against estabilished politicians several times, but once the populace got sick enough of the corruption, they knew Lula was an alternative. Voting for Nader is not just about a single term, but about building a third-party so in the future we have more choices. And on the local level, the Green party has made some big inroads. I know this has been said before, but the lesser of two evils is still evil. If you can stomach that, then good for you. But my conscience would bother me too much. It's a slippery slope when you make those kind of compromises. Why do you think so many clean politicians turn dirty? It doesn't happen overnight, but over years of not being able to get anything done unless you do a few favors. So they do a few favors. And the favors get bigger and bigger until they start cutting deals with Enron or Halliburton or whoever else has deep pockets. You think I vote too idealistically; I think that by lowering your standards you're heading into questionable moral territory. Keep that in mind next time you vote.
Si la vida me da palo, yo la voy a soportar Si la vida me da palo, yo la voy a espabilar
Personally, i think Woody (and Arlo) are both awsome musicians and even though i have no right or control, being that i'm woody's second third cousin (i think its n times removed, ...) i give anyone permission to do whatever they want to do with the song
Pete Seeger, June 1967: When Woody Guthrie was singing hillbilly songs on a little Los Angeles radio station in the late 1930s, he used to mail out a small mimeographed songbook to listeners who wanted the words to his songs, On the bottom of one page appeared the following: "This song is Copyrighted in U.S., under Seal of Copyright # 154085, for a period of 28 years, and anybody caught singin it without our permission, will be mighty good friends of ourn, cause we don't give a dern. Publish it. Write it. Sing it. Swing to it. Yodel it. We wrote it, that's all we wanted to do." W.G.
---
You say that not voting is like deserting your post in the army. Interesting. Do you know why that isn't allowed, even when it won't affect the outcome of a war? Because it undermines the authority of the officers, and of the army itself. If that's the case, and not voting is like desertion, then great. Undermining the system is *exactly* what I want to do.
I hope that not voting clues elected officials into the fact that a whole lot of people don't believe that they should be doing what they're doing in our names. Low voter turnout should clue them in to the fact that their jobs are in jeopardy, not because people are going to vote for "the other guy", but because people don't believe in the system itself.
Do you know what country had a much higher voter turnout than the US? Well, all of them. But I mean specifically which one had a much higher turnout about a year and a half ago? Iraq under Saddam Hussein. Apparently upwards of 90% of the population voted to keep him in office.
What, the election wasn't fair? Of course not. But he staged one anyhow. Why? Because elections help to legitimize those in power. Even better are elections with very high voter turnout.
In Iraq, people knew their votes were meaningless. Here, some people still have the illusion that they're really going to make significant changes with a vote. But it seems like half the population no longer believes that. It's hard to argue with them. If you live in a state where there's a vast majority supporting party 1, your vote will make no difference in who is elected, whether you vote for party 1, party 2, party 3 or whether you spoil your ballot.
If you believe the democratic process, and even democracy itself is fundamentally flawed, how hypocritical would it be to try to change it by participating? That's like agreeing to have your speech censored before you speak out against censorship.
I don't think that voting will ever fix the flaws in the government. The system can only be changed from the outside, not the inside. Revolution or takeover are the only real options. Revolution won't happen if too many people believe in the system. Low voter turnout says that many people don't believe in the system. That's great. It means that revolution is more and more likely.
I'm jizzing all over your face right now. Jesus Christ this feels good.
You stupid shit. Say something that makes sense next time.
And wipe my cum off your face.
None of the above!
This sig left unintentionally blank.
That's exactly why RMS is so pushy about needing offical copyright and needing to "only" use the GPL. He's not stupid. He sat down with an IP lawyer 10 years ago and worked out a contract to handle stuff just like this! The 1976 copyright law made nothing you write "free". ever.
According to Mexican law, you may write the name of the person you vote for, no matter if he is not a candidate, maybe US law allows for something simmilar to happen? You can vote for Barney to make a difference ;)
I recall an old Richard Pryor movie, where his character campaigns calling voters to vote speciffically for NOBODY, giving free hot dogs at the rallies, at least a free weblog for users at a vote for yourself website is possible now a days heh
Agreed. But on different terms: I am a Canadian and this is a socialist country in which I have rights that America's poor can only consider a unreachable dream.
I have to say that it is better: corporate interests play less of a hand in our day to day lives within the letter of the law, for instance. Our political system has over 30 functioning parties due to the funds provided by the government for campaign and operations --- they actually are created by and represent the needs of their constituency because they have the means to do so.
This is unheard of in the US where leadership is clearly a rich man's [sic] sport.
My case is interesting: while I am a Canadian my father is a naturalized American due to work requirements He helped design a fighter jet engine and so was required to be a citizen due to the contracting work with the military --- that the needs of the US military should be the reason for his corporate sponsorship and then completed immigration may very well point to something useful about the climate of the US and its needs as a whole.
He lives in the US and is able to vote there. He considers it a priveledge, but has difficulty choosing as none of the choices have anything to do with his needs. He votes for the perceived most moderate in every election because he hopes that they will do the least damage.
If a person on the streets of Toronto is asked if they should have free health care, they will guffaw and state that this is a human right. In the US, the costs of health care have been estimated to be the third highest cause of poverty.
The US minumum wage, while functional more than twenty years ago, has long since failed to fulfill its purpose which is to keep a family of four out of poverty. Now, it is merely the federal definition of poverty that keeps people out of poverty.
The same is true of your government's definition of unemployment, please don't think for a second that the federal decision to no longer extend unemployment is for any reason other than your administration hoping that it will appear to be an improved job market. When the bulk of those with unemployment eligibility expire within months of the upcoming election.
Your country's populace will likely be wowed when the unemployment rate suddenly drops. What's more, your current administration will take credit for it, and get it.
News of this kind actually hits international press, although my guess is that it is usually understood quite differently...
Regardless, flame all you wish. It won't matter to me, but let this matter to you:
All of this is absolutely your fault.