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."
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 was the intro song to Robbin Hood (the DISNEY CARTOON) simpy sped up.... it was identical.... nobody ever said anything to them
"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
/)
It seems to me that a lot of Weird Al's parodies have nothing to do with the original song except for the melody (ie. the lyrics are completely unrelated to the original song). So if your definition is correct, shouldn't Weird Al be getting sued lots?
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
To quote Ren Hoek...
"Sometimes your wealth of ignorance is astounds me"
and to quote 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."
Insolence. The original copyright notice attached to This Land is Your Land ( and several other Guthries, iirc ) reads as follows:
"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."
Your bullshit about caviar dreams and champagne wishes is poorly placed against a man who loved his fellow americans, loved the free flow of information, mailed lyrics booklets to his listeners and invited them to sing his songs, and died wretchedly in a state hospital of an irreversible degenerative nerve disorder. Learn your history.
One god, one market, one truth, one consumer.
The song is, I believe, part of a book of songs (that I've mentioned before) that Woody himself originally privately published and dedicated to the public domain. If I dug through my stacks for an hour or two I could come up with the actual wording of the dedication, where Woody said something like "I had fun writing them and that's what I wanted to do. You have fun singing them."
After Woody became famous (and thus his songs worth money) Ludlow Music unleashed its lawyers to have them withdrawn from the public domain.
Is this a great country or what?
It's also an often parodied song already. I like the Israeli version myself:
This land is your land
This land is my land
From the Arab border
To the Arab border
From the Arab border
To the Arab border
This land was made for you and me
This "icon of Americana" was also part of what got Woody labled a communist. Go figure.
KFG
This law suit might be a good thing. A court could rule that the current copyright law clearly goes against the wishes of the copyright creator and also clearly is going against the reasons for copyright stated in the Constitution. I think if I was being sued for this sort of thing, I would also try to convince a jury that the song is in the public domain. After call can you find 12 people who can name the author of that song? If they heard it, it was most likely because they sung it in 2nd grade music class. Its clear that even congress seems to think many songs are in the public domain after their singing God Bless America on the steps without paying royalties based on performance with a billion viewers of news programs world wide. Would a reasonable person assume that Happy Birthday is in the public domain?
Three words:
free speech zone
...Rob
The American Dream isn't an SUV and a house in the suburbs; it's Don't Tread On 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."
Just further evidence of how messed up copyright laws are. The person whose rights are allegedly being protected here is the last person who'd want them protected like this.
Amen to that. Woodie Guthrie was all about giving his songs to the people. As many have already posted, he was all for people using his songs however they wanted. Even leaving that aside, however, this is quite obviously parody, and thus protected.
court could rule that the current copyright law clearly goes against the wishes of the copyright creator
The copyright creator is Congress. The creator of the WORK sold his rights -- he's out of the picture. I mean no one cares what Shakespeare thinks about staging his plays; why should we? If Guthrie was willing to sell his rights -- and no one could get 'em otherwise -- then that's the end of his involvement. If authors want to keep a hand in, that's their problem, and they shouldn't sell their rights if that's what they want.
I would also try to convince a jury that the song is in the public domain. After call can you find 12 people who can name the author of that song?
Well, it's not. I suppose a jury could nullify or something, but it's really not in the public domain, and popular belief alone don't make it so. Get that popular belief to change the laws, and then we'll be cooking with gas.
Its clear that even congress seems to think many songs are in the public domain after their singing God Bless America on the steps without paying royalties based on performance with a billion viewers of news programs world wide.
God Bless America IS in the public domain, IIRC, having been written in 1918.
Would a reasonable person assume that Happy Birthday is in the public domain?
Dunno. But they'd be wrong unless they got the laws changed. Which I'd likely support.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
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."
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.
The original message is getting lost because of Woody Guthrie's own play on words. He knew it would be mistaken as a patriotic song---it's a response to Irving Berlin's ``God Bless America'' which he felt was ``jingoistic''. It's his way of thumbing his nose at patriotism.
Also, Woodie Guthrie was a communist so I hardly feel he could be considered anti-government; he was just anti-capitalist. And there's plenty of irony to go around---Irving Berlin and his family barely escaped Soviet persecution of the Jews with their lives. Woodie Guthrie had nothing but contempt for tin pan alley songwriters, feeling they were out of touch with reality and the common man. Tin pan alley song writers got rich because they knew what the common man liked to hear.
I don't idealize people because of their magnificent talent. Guthrie was one of the greatest craftsmen of words this country ever produced, but he was also kind of an arrogant jerk so it's not altogether completely unlikely that he would have disapproved of this lawsuit.
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.
Maybe if he'd been a little more respectful of property rights - including his own - he wouldn't have "died wretchedly in a state hospital". That is, he might have still died (if you're right about "irreversible"), but maybe not so wretchedly, and maybe not in a state hospital.
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
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.
Lincoln is often cheered as one of the greatest Republicans in history. If you do some reading about America's political history you will see the Democrats and Republicans have traded points of view before. If Lincoln were alive today and still held his same ideals he would most likely be a 3rd party candidate, or at least a Democrat. FDR's NEW Deal and Reconstruction programs put him more in line with today's Republican Party than the Democrats. There are many more examples too if you dig around. What does all this mean? The simple answer is that anyone who votes strictly along party lines is a great fool. Political parties have no real stability, only their name.
I don't know how to classify Bush Jr. Honestly, he scares the crap out of me. His attempts to force the government to define love, an uneducated (and religious based) ban on stem cell research that is choking Americas participation in modern medicine, his staff and other government appointments, and the many questionable ties to corporate interests and the many executive decisions that favor them, all force me to question his commitment to humanity. During his first run for office he billed himself as a compassionate conservative. If the last 4 years have shown anything, it's that his definition of 'compassionate' is seriously flawed.
I'm still unsure of what the true definition of conservative is. What are we losing that people are so concerned about saving. I know it's not the environment. To me, conservatives are afraid of change, or at least rapid change. Everyone I've met has quoted some nonsense about a return to 'the good old days' while the time they reminisce about was 'good' only to white, middle class males.
Neither party is better or worse than the other. To beleive otherwise demonstrates how fooled the American public is when it comes to choosing the lesser of 2 evils to govern us all.
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)
Written permission this is not.
n d
The song was written in 1940.[1] Guthrie died in 1967.[2] Because copyright registration -- and that's what this is -- only lasted 28 years, it had to be re-registered. Registration could only be done within 6 months of the expiration date, IIRC. That would mean it was re-registered by Guthrie's heirs in 1968 and not Guthrie.
He also didn't give up or license away his rights to the song for more than 28 years -- copyright law didn't let him. After the initial term, all rights reverted to him or his heirs. His heirs renewed it. Maybe not what he would have wanted, but it was their choice.
The upshot is: lay off Guthrie, and stick it to his progeny.
IANAL...y.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Land_is_Your_La
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woody_Guthrie
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
(1) Woody can be heard singing the "private property" verse on the Smithsonian Folkways release, "This Land Is Your Land: The Asch Recordings, Vol. 1". It's track #14.
(2) The irony of the Native American singing "This land was my land," with the response line, "But now it's our land," is sharp and poignant commentary on the original song, easily qualifying it as a parody. It's an angle I've thought of when hearing Woody claim the land for many, many years.
No, those old Disney cartoons should be in the public domain, and Mickey Mouse should remain a trademark of Disney Corp. [I.e. you should be able to distribute the old Disney cartoons verbatim, but not able to make your own Mickey Mouse cartoon or distribute edited versions of the old cartoons.]
Disney didn't distribute Fahrenheit 9/11 because they have a policy not to publish political movies (this has been different in past decades).
I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
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.
"Woody himself originally privately published and dedicated to the public domain."
"Ludlow Music unleashed its lawyers to have them withdrawn from the public domain."
If that's true that's theft and stealing from _everyone_ too.
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
One time he slipped up
I don't think he (Weird Al) slipped up, Coolio's people didn't tell him that they had given permission to Weird Al.
"And to be perfectly honest, a vote for Nader might as well be a vote for Bush, since those who would even consider voting for him are all traditional Democratic-base voters"
I voted for Nader last time and my state's tally still came out clearly in favor of Gore. All I did was stand up and be counted. If Nader hadn't run, I would have voted for Bush.
I'll vote Nader again without helping Bush because there's no way in hell that Kerry will lose MA.
Nader isn't the spoiler. It's the other two.
I love Guthrie's work. "This Land is Your Land" is another piece of our collective cultural heratige authored by a person belonging to a group - liberals and socialists - often treated as unpatriotic outsiders.
Who can forget other such people? For example, Emma Lazarus. Author of the infamous "Give me your tired, your poor..." lines, she was an avowed supporter of socialist tax policies, and spent her efforts trying to increase government support of the poor and be a voice for women's rights.
Or how about Katherine Lee Bates, author of "America The Beautiful"? She wrote about the beautiful and spacious skies while living with her same-sex partner, Katherine Coman (an economist who wrote the first significant published work on the economy of the old west). After Coman died, Bates wrote an entire volume of poetry - Yellow Clover - dedicated to their love. Bates was not only a lesbian, feminist, and social justice fighter, but a strident anti-imperialist.
Speaking of strident anti-Imperialists, lets not forget author Mark Twain. Twain's political works (heavily censored at the time), especially concerning the war in the Phillipines, were amazingly harsh; he actually suggested a new flag for the Phillipines: our normal flag, but with the white stripes replaced by black, and the stars replaced by skull and cross bones.
What about the pledge of allegience? It was written in 1892 by Francis Bellamy. Bellamy, a former preacher, was kicked out of his church for trying to work politics into his sermons, even claiming that Jesus was a socialist. Despite being a priest, In Bellamy's version of the pledge there was no "under god" (it didn't even specify "the flag of the United States of America", only "my flag"). Instead, what he originally wanted to add (but was afraid to, if he wanted it to be published) was to have the pledge add "equality" to the list of things being pledged "for all".
I could keep going, but you get the picture. It's nice to see someone mention the versus of "This Land is Your Land" that rarely get sung because socialism is almost a dirty word in this country.
SILENCE BLATHERING TOADIES! We are your new masters.