Jonathan Coulton Offers Some Gleeful Turnabout
The TV show Glee may have borrowed Jonathan Coulton's arrangement of "Baby Got Back" without asking him first, but he's got a response of the kind that it'd be hard for the show's makers to criticize without looking churlish. Borrowing it back, and using it to raise money for charity. As CNET puts it, "Coulton has foxily tossed up on iTunes his own version of the song and titled it 'Baby Got Back (In the Style of Glee).' He terms it 'my cover of Glee's cover of my cover.'"
What is Sir Mix-a-lot getting out of all of this?
Yeah I agree. Fox totally ripped off that song in the first place because they knew it would churn up a bunch of Internet chatter about Glee. Have the ratings been down or something?
I see more of a yo dawg story than an underdog story in this.
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
As Capcom showed recently, there are often situations where you have the alternatives of engaging in expensive legal battles, or getting a bunch of free marketing and good publicity out of the situation. The second option is rarely taken, but it's nearly always better, and I applaud people for taking it.
(1)DOCOMEFROM!2~.2'~#1WHILE:1<-"'?.1$.2'~'"':1/.1$.2'~#0"$#65535'"$"'"'&.1$.2'~'#0$#65535'"$#0'~#32767$#1"
Then you didn't read the story. Congrats.
Seriously - I just listened to it on Youtube and it's AWFUL. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCWaN_Tc5wo
The Glee version is only slightly different but equally putrid. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yww4BLjReEk
vs. the original version which is absolutely brilliant. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kY84MRnxVzo
Honestly, Jonathan Coulton's version makes it painfully clear he's one of the white people at the beginning of the Sir Mix-a-lot video...
I am neither a Glee fan or gay. But seriously, someone has real sexual identity issues.
So, you're saying you bought into every artifact of geek fandom until Jonathan fucking Coulton? He's the one who was "one of the last straws"? You were just cool with it all until "Code Monkey"?
You may be in a category of lame all your own.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Absolutely.
If nothing else, this concocted controversy served to introduce a whole new generation to the joys of what hip-hop sounded like when giants walked the Earth.
You are welcome on my lawn.
It has no place in the red, white and blue America !!
I mixed together the red, white and blue once. It came out a *fabulous* shade of lilac!
You, uh, have no idea what you're saying, do you?
The melody is original to Coulton. The words are not. There's more to music than words, genius.
But, of course, all that is beside the point. Artists do covers all the time...that doesn't mean they don't write original material as well. Are you 12? You sound 12.
Not even going into this particular story or his musical ability, I do have issues with you saying he can't create anything on his own - Back Got Back is one of his few covers, and he did it during his Thing a Week project...I don't fault him for wanting to do a cover during a project of releasing a new song every week, and at least he changed the melody and rhythm and what not.
i get the feeling that the person who posted the comment probably doesn't like the idea of mixing colors, either.
What the hell is wrong with you people. Whether or not you like the style of his song is completely fucking irrelevant.
Here is a classic, indisputable, pristine example of the 'big guy' completely steam rolling over the 'little guy'. Any revenge he can extract is a cause that you all would be championing if it was a indie linux dev who had some GPL code stolen or some such.
Stop obfuscating the situation with your shitty opinion on if the song was 'good' or not.
No, that's just letting the likes of Rupert and his ilk bleed society for their own fun and profit with impunity. Someone has to stand up and yank these big dogs back on their leash. So Jonnie C., hats off, publicly humiliating them (if that's even possible), painting them as ass-hats not by name calling but by framing their actions, stealing their thunder and their profit, doing the good thing and the right thing at the same time and making them the butt of their own ass-holiness... I'm inspired and moved by the class and the cleverness. Don't get mad, get even, and still take the high ground while doing it, bravo, well played sir!
Years ago, I thought Code Monkey was funny and sly, and although I'm not that into pop music, it had a good beat and was fun. It's under a CC license, which makes it possible for other people to do versions of it like this.
The original Sir Mix-a-lot version of Baby Got Back has some interesting things to say about race and body image, and the video was funny in spots, but I thought Coulton's version was a hilariously silly juxtoposition of style with substance. Coulton goes up another notch in my estimation.
Fox rips him off without credit and produces a Glee skit that's funny ... for exactly the same reasons Coulton's song was funny. That's pathetic.
And then Coulton comes back with this very graceful response. Game, set, and match to Coulton.
Find free books.
I never realised just how similarly all geeks thought until I noticed how similar and shallow their cultural tastes are.
Why are you assuming that "all geeks" are Coulton fans, or have even heard of him?
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
The melody is original to Coulton. The words are not
Actually, some of the words were original to Coulton too, Glee used his version of the lyrics as well.
I've heard Coulton's version once. Or at least, about half of it, before I got bored. What I did not doubt was that he knew exactly how he was coming across. I figured it was a joke. Joke's not as funny if you only do half the song though.
I've always felt the best done cover in the same concept (not the same song) was Dynamite Hack.
William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
Seriously - I just listened to it on Youtube and it's AWFUL. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCWaN_Tc5wo
The Glee version is only slightly different but equally putrid. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yww4BLjReEk
vs. the original version which is absolutely brilliant. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kY84MRnxVzo
The Coulton version is a joke. I think you missed the joke.
Find free books.
Since when do plutocrats care about looking churlish?
Ooh, moderator points! Five more idjits go to Minus One Hell!
Delendae sunt RIAA, MPAA et Windoze
I have to call foul here. First of all, Jonathon Coulton previously had permission to perform the "Baby Got Back" song. Second, if a melody is important to the creation of what could be considered a "unique work", the original rap song had no discernible melody, except for a bass track that you could probably reproduce with your mouth no matter how unmusical you are. Jonathon Coulton created a unique melody to "Baby Got Back" and he changed one line to say "Johnny C's in trouble," referring to himself of course.
Now anyone creating a cover of "Baby Got Back"---and make no mistake Glee and Fox have hordes of talented musicians to choose from. See how "Piano Guy" just pops up out of nowhere? --- could create a new version with a unique melody that is different and distinct from Jonathan Coulton's version. Are you familiar with the "Jeopardy" Theme Song? Ever hear it used in a cartoon, but it's not the original tune. Notes go down, instead of up, and it's only vaguely familiar? Fox, in this case, used EXACTLY the same melody as JoCo, down to the note.
Lastly, JoCo's version has a different tempo than "Baby Got Back". There's a reason it's over 5 minutes long, when the original song is like 3 minutes something. The Glee version, while they could have sped up the tempo, or slowed down the tempo, is exactly the same.
Now I won't go into possible "duck" samples, or questioning the exact same use of the banjo, but Glee's version of "Baby Got Back" isn't a cover of the original Sir Mix-a-Lot's version, it's practically a note-for-note copy of JoCo's cover: same melody, same tempo, same words that JoCo changed referencing himself, and using exactly the same instruments and general feel of the song.
Fox has some giant balls on this one. I don't know why they bothered to change the vocals at all, personally, if they're going to steal the entire song in the first place.
-D
Just because it's a joke, doesn't mean it can't be a REALLY BAD one.
...so I have to say it.
DMCA takedown notices from Fox for this version AND Jonathan Coulton's first version in 3...2...1...
I'm making a note here - huge success.
"With patience a ruler may be persuaded, and a soft tongue will break a bone."
But I spent the weekend trying to figure out why my Xbox suddenly quit communicating with my TV. Turns out that Microsoft pushed a new version of HDCP(a cracked encryption methodology) to encode NETFLIX in some weird attempt to protect all media all the time. Of course, this entire action makes no sense at all. It doesn't protect content from being pirated, and it doesn't make anyone's life any easier(mine, Microsoft's, or Netflix's). It was simply some idiots idea. That idiot worked for a major movie company. He required it in the contract with Netflix/Microsoft. They obliged because it was a minor issue.
Why do I mention that on a comment about Jonathan Coulton getting ripped off by Glee? Media companies are giant corporations who see the law as something to be abused only to protect themselves. It doesn't have to make sense or even be consistent. If the situation was reversed, he would be sued. In this situation, he has no recourse. It will never make sense if you try to think about it from the perspective of a rational and reasonable individual.
This will, unfortunately, always be the way of things. Unless lawmakers suddenly have some reason to drastically restructure the legal system to protect sanity, reason, and the individual over the monetary interests of their most important supporters we will never have a 'fair' system. Considering that no state in the history of the world has been able to avoid the egalitarianism and quid pro quo nature of Mandarin-type social levels, I doubt we will be able to achieve such a drastic technocratic change any time soon.
I much prefer the Gilbert and Sullivan version.
You are missing a few things.
First, Coulton didn't just cover it. He modified it greatly so that the end result, while still obviously a version of the original song, was nonetheless a new work in its own right.
Second, Glee is a TV show, and TV shows must license the synchronization rights to use a song. Period.
Third, in addition to not licensing the song, the show didn't even bother to credit him. That's just plain old douchebaggery.
Not quite: people say they actually ripped his melody off. Directly. Using waveform reduction.
That may give him legal ground.
Also, with that kind of logic you can try and cover Rising Sun by the Animals using their arrangement, or a lot of things by Zeppelin (yes, even Stairway), because the original authors are long dead and gone.
Some of us don't even read comic books ... yes, I said it.
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
An article from Fox was showing up in Google News, but no longer exists on the Fox website?
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://fox8.com/2013/01/26/singer-glee-ripped-off-my-cover-song/
I thought weird al yankovic nailed the white person wannabe song White and Nerdy!
You mean this? ;)
https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/379702_4641480150047_2035344130_n.jpg
Or even better Amish Paradise
Apparently he didn't actually have permission. He had a mechanical license, which by definition, does not allow the creation of works that differ melodically from the original. So there are two ways the courts could interpret this:
In the first interpretation, he has no case. In the second interpretation (which IMO is more likely), he could ostensibly get money out of Fox, but only at the risk of getting then sued by Universal for his prior releases as revenge for having deprived them of royalties from Fox. Sadly, it's probably a no-win.
The best he could hope for is to get an activist judge and go for a Lanham Act case against Fox, but it would be unlikely to hold up on appeal, if Dastar v. Fox is any indication of the court's current leanings.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Slight correction. He had a compulsory mechanical license, which by definition, does not allow....
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
To stream major studio content over digital output (DVI/HDMI) requires HDCP. If you don't have it, it'll drop to non-HD. If you have VGA, it'll do it even though VGA doesn't do HDCP. If you have a laptop and the video is on the internal display (not being output on a connector at all) it'll do it even if you don't have HDCP.
Weird? Yes. But the major studios require this. On all platforms with all services. It happens on Blu-ray. It happens on Netflix. It happens on PC. It happens on Xbox 360. It happens on Apple TV.
TV content (which comprises a large amount of Netflix' streaming library) doesn't require this, as it doesn't come from movie studios. The studios knew people would not like this, and would seek out any platform it isn't true on. So that's why they require it on all content.
If you have digital output without HDCP and try to play content that requires HDCP, it cannot output it at higher than 540p. I think it just goes right down to 480P.
I just double checked this with my Mac using Netflix and it will not stream Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol in HD whether I have HDCP. Netflix says "available in HD on your TV". Non-studio content, like Portlandia for example (a TV show) says "Available in HD" and it streams in HD whether I have HDCP or not.
So it looks like for PC/Mac, Netflix doesn't do HD at all for major studio content, regardless of VGA, HDMI and HDCP. That content is only "Available in HD on your TV", not your computer.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
Well crafted marketing ploys tend to avoid having companies look like corporate jerks ripping off an individual. If this is a ploy by Fox then they really are clueless.
There really is such a thing as bad publicity.