[News] Lawsuit: Warner does NOT own "Happy Birthday to You"
- Thread starter DarkAudit
- Start date
That would make sense.
It's an essential disconnect between individuals who lose in court, and large companies. If you lose in court as an individual for ANYTHING outside of small claims court (and sometimes then too), your life is probably ruined. Possibly permanently if it's a criminal offense. Even small companies fall prey to this, as the penalties/liabilities are often enough to make them go under.
Large companies though? When's the last time you heard of one going under due to lawsuit? Enron maybe, but I think the stock price did it before the court got to it, but I'm really REALLY unsure.
A more interesting penalty for a corporation would be for ALL of its patents and copyrights and such to be put into the public domain by the courts. That would be a truly horrific penalty for abusing them. That I'd like to see. The reason that's different than currently, is that even if the company goes down, its methods of abuse (IP/trademarks/etc) live on with whomever buys them. Make the asset itself go away.
Wow, I didn't think such a simple song would be copyrighted in the first place. I always thought it was just some simple melody everybody sang.
Now... how does this apply to previous rulings regarding use of this song? For instance, say a guy in the 80's used it without paying for the rights... does this override his case and entitle him to compensation?
Ask a Lawyer. I'm not one.
Also something to be considered: other countries where they're enforcing this? e.g. Canada?
Other countries only enforce it for trade reasons with us: If we tell them it's not enforceable, they won't enforce it.
Those who feel wronged can sue, but they would have to prove that 1) Summy's company and the Warner Music Group were acting in bad faith and 2) that the plaintiff's specific use didn't infringe on the limited piano arrangment that Summy and Warner did have rights to.
Given that Warner has been charging royalties of about 2 million a year for nearly 20 years, and Summy a similar sum for the previous hundred years, there's a very high likelihood of follow-up suits.
Given that Warner has been charging royalties of about 2 million a year for nearly 20 years, and Summy a similar sum for the previous hundred years, there's a very high likelihood of follow-up suits.