Teavana, fragrant, natural teas

Saturday, January 10, 2009

Copyright Infringement?

Takes more than the same or similar name. Copyright infringement is the lifting of the same material, whether written or in musical scores without permission. It can follow along the lines of plagiarism; same lyrics, same musical scores can get artists in trouble, even if accidental.

Having the same name of a song for example, not copyright infringement. Example, Chris Daughtry and the Foo Fighters (and a few other bands) have tunes titled, "Home".
Daughtry's "Home" sounds nothing like Dave Grohl's version.
"Home" Foo Fighters

Recent Taylor Hicksian blooper at amazon.com had a sampling of Mr. Hicks' purported single selected off of his upcoming album, current release date set at March 10, 2009. A wee amount of fan furor erupted when another blog insinuated that this sampling of the tune, "What's Right is Right" was pulled due to another band having a tune of the same or similar name. Thing is the songs themselves, in an understatement, vastly different. Of course, along that same train of thought, perhaps Mr. Hicks could be cast in copyright infringement because the title incorporates some of the lyrics of this tune:

Seriously. Check the lyrics in this stanza:
When you oughta not bet.
You keep samin',
When you oughta be a-changin'.
Now what's right is right,
But you ain't been right yet...

I kid, but you get the idea. I have to hand it to that blogger, she certainly knows how to push those buttons.


  1. jerseyirish6:31 PM

    Sunny, When this whole thing started I did a little research. There is no copyright protection for song titles only the contents. Case in point the song title "Home" has been recorded by several artists but very different lyrics, no copyright infringement. I think some folks have nothing better to do than to try and stir up trouble. Just my take on it.


  2. She enjoys watching Hicks' fans get upset over some of the things she posts. Gal's got a grudge against some of the folks in the SP whom she had some issues with on the A.I. board back in 2006, that continue apparently today. They do something to her, she retaliates, it perpetuates.

    Some of the things she's written are funny, she has a knack for satire. I read her blogs to see what she's up to. Can't pass a Lowe's without thinking of one of her sites. lol

    Likely she anticipated a mild furor over the copyright info and just sat back reading and watching reactions - and chuckling. Best thing with her, Irish, don't take her seriously. Too, realize most of her anger directed at Mikki and a few others, don't take anything she writes about Mr. Hicks to heart.