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...)
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.
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.
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
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
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
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.
"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/
Woody would have loved it!
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
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.
.... its freedom of speech but only when you say what I want to hear.....
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 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
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
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.
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."
...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.
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.
Instead of Perot: "Tell me about it."
Should be Perot: "Can I finish?!"
Repeat after me, we are all individuals
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.
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
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.
Typically if I want to save a link to, or the SWF file itself, I'll view the source, do a quick search for ".swf", and then create a hyperlink and save the target. Unless the author went nuts with it, it's pretty easy to find out where the flash file itself (*.swf) is being pulled from. The address is usually in an EMBED or OBJECT tag.
"What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
/)
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.
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)
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
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.
That's what I call staying power.
If you truly have "artistic interests" I would think that you would kno who the hell Woody Guthrie was, what he stood for and what his music means.
Considering that you are posting as AC, I have to assume, however, that you are nothing more than a very large bag of wind...
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
Not quite. In that case, the subject matter being parodied was directly Barbie (at least in part it was demonstrably a direct parody of Barbie). Very clearly and understandbly direct.
In this case, the song is not being parodied, it is being manipulated to parody Kerry and Bush. Since it is not a direct subject of the parody, and only used as a means to parody something else, it is quite possibly not a protected use. The expectation is that if you are going to parody, you have to use your own material to do so.
This same issue came up for a Penny Arcade comic that used Strawberry Shortcake characters to parody American McGee. In that case as in this one, the characters were not being parodied, but used *in* a parody. Though Penny Arcade backed down well before going to court on that comic, it is generally thought they would have lost. Shortly after, they did a comic directly parodying American Greetings for their trouble, and never received notification to take it down (under a claim such as 'defamation of character' or some such) so the lawyers probably acknowledged that as a direct parody and protected speech.
All that said, it *MAY* be possible to show that the song is at least partially directly parodying the orignal song. One segment that comes clear to my mind in this context is the Native American saying 'this land was my land', which does directly parody the spirit and meaning behind the song. There are other places, but if I was going to fight that in their shoes, I would think that would be a good focus point to demonstrate that it is in part a direct, protected parody.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.