viscountalpha: I thought fair use did NOT include advertisments. Even if they changed the lyrics, parody isn't allowed.
Mein Fuhrer I Can Walk: GoldieBlox re-wrote the lyrics. It was a parody of the original, and therefore protected.
JuggleGeek: The point GoldieBlox was trying to make was "buy our product". And you aren't allowed to use someones song to do that without their permission. Fair Use is not the same as "We want to make money".
cwheelie: The Beastie Boys = The Adam Sandler of music
LemSkroob: Mein Fuhrer I Can Walk: GoldieBlox re-wrote the lyrics. It was a parody of the original, and therefore protected.But it wasn't parody. Parody is to make fun of something for the sake of making fun of it. GoldieBlox took the song and used it to sell a product.
Theaetetus: viscountalpha: I thought fair use did NOT include advertisments. Even if they changed the lyrics, parody isn't allowed.Not so... From 17 USC 107:In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include-(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.It's one factor, but it's not dispositive, particularly if the other three factors tilt the other way.Mein Fuhrer I Can Walk: GoldieBlox re-wrote the lyrics. It was a parody of the original, and therefore protected.The mere fact that the lyrics were rewritten doesn't make something a parody. For example, many satirical works use rewritten lyrics, but aren't protected.In this case, I'd tend to lean towards unprotected satire. Specifically, they weren't making fun of the Beastie Boys or the song Girls, but were rather making a satirical point about other toys for girls that are pink and useless:Girls, you think you know what we wantGirls, pink and pretty's it's girlsJust like the fifties it's girlsYou like to buy us pink toysAnd everything else is for boysAnd you can always get us dollsAnd we'll grow up like them, falseetc.
impaler: drumhellar: left something like $20 million to the college with the requirement that it be spent on eugenics researchDoes the research have to be cost effective, and can it just study the effects of eugenics?The university should setup a non-profit with 99% overhead. Have the nonprofit produce a study on the effects of eugenics in the 20th century, employing 2 graduate history students - cost $20 million. Their university's nonprofit now has $20 million, ear-mark free.I'm not a lawyer or anything, but I'm pretty sure this is totally legal. Have them contact me for details.
ArcadianRefugee: Theaetetus: LemSkroob: Mein Fuhrer I Can Walk: GoldieBlox re-wrote the lyrics. It was a parody of the original, and therefore protected.But it wasn't parody. Parody is to make fun of something for the sake of making fun of it. GoldieBlox took the song and used it to sell a product.For Fair Use, the distinction lies in whether you're making fun of the infringed work, or targeting something else. For example, when Weird Al did "I'm Fat", he was making fun of obesity, not Michael Jackson, so it technically was satire, not parody, and not protected. However, when he did "I Perform This Way" and "Smells like Nirvana", he was making fun of Lady Gaga and Nirvana, respectively, so they were parodies, and would be protected.This is why he always gets permission before he copies a song, incidentally.Actually, no.
Gonz: Thank You Black Jesus!: The beastie boys were genuinely terrible.Can I ask a question: How old are you? Or, more importantly, how old were you in 1989?
drumhellar: trappedspirit: Adam Yauch's will prohibited the use of Beastie Boys songs in advertisementsCan a will even do that? I think rights will be transferred one way or another to living people. You might suggest, but I don't think we let people reach out from the grave like that.Wills absolutely can do that. It becomes a problem when somebody leaves a sum of cash to an organization with the provisions that it be spent on something specific, and something changes where the organization can't or won't spend do that task....For example, Charles Goethe (one of the founders of Sacramento State College, now California State University Sacramento) left something like $20 million to the college with the requirement that it be spent on eugenics research. Of course, eugenics isn't considered science anymore by anyone, and is a taboo topic for a public college to study, so that money is just sitting in an account, unspent and collecting interest (which also cannot be spent).
durbnpoisn: Thank You Black Jesus!: The beastie boys were genuinely terrible.Really?You're entitled to your opinion and all. But those dudes were groundbreaking on a number of levels. And plus, they were funny as hell to boot.
Rusty Shackleford: Stop saying "Legos", or I shall bring suit for Jimmy-Rustling.
durbnpoisn: Cinsidering that Yauch expressly forbid usage of their music in his will, I'm glad this lawsuit settled away.In related news... I cannot believe how quickly artists are selling out their music for ads nowadays. It used to be that a song in an ad had been around for a generation or so before ads started using it. Now we see ads using songs, unaltered even, that are still on the mainstream charts!
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Feb 26 2017 19:21:47
Runtime: 0.202 sec (202 ms)