This week’s post will be centered in legal liabilities within the entertainment industry and the world. I believe it is of crucial importance to quote and refer our resources when we write and create any type of material. From books to music to schoolwork, we always need to be original and deliver proper credit to the people who said or thought concepts we are using for our new thesis.
The first article I encountered in my search for legal liabilities within this year was Adrian Jacob’s lawsuit for copyright infringement against J.K. Rowling. Jacob, who died in 1987, but was represented by family members, wrote the children book series “Willy the Wizard”, which were claimed to be very similar to his counterpart’s series “Harry Potter”.
The lawsuit was filed in a court of London and the PR representing the family stated it would be a lawsuit worth millions of dollars. The suit more specifically accused “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire” to have identical elements stolen from “Willy the Wizard: Livid Land”. Yet, Judge Shira Sheindlin from the United States court said “The contrast between the total concept and feel of the works is so stark that any serious comparison of the two strains credulity" (Guardian UK). She clarified the absurdity of the claim and favored Rowling.
I believe this case was not only absurd, like Judge Sheindlin implied, but also was a waste of time given to the passing of time that took the suit to take place after the publishing date of the Harry Potter sequel. “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire” was published in 2000, Jacob’s book was written before 1982, and yet the suit was made last year. Furthermore, Rowling’s books have already acquired amazing success including 7 blockbusters in Hollywood, which have grossed millions one at a time. Even if she had plagiarized a page or half a book, the fans of Harry Potter are so vast that the public acclaim would be overwhelmingly shielding against the faulty lawsuit. Not only has Rowling written a book 600 pages long which surpasses Jacob’s 36 pager, but she has created an entire world book after book, which has built a worldwide franchise.
http://www.csmonitor.com/Books/chapter-and-verse/2010/0218/J.K.-Rowling-faces-another-plagiarism-suit
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/jan/07/harry-potter-plagiarism-case-us-court
The second article I encountered was NME’s accusation against Lady Gaga in copying Madonna’s “Express Yourself” with her hit “Born this Way”. Infuriated, she said in return the only element she had transcended was the song’s beat rhythm or to be more exact:
“What a completely ridiculous thing to even question me about… If you put the songs next to each other, side-by-side, the only similarities are the chord progression. It's the same one that's been in disco music for the last 50 years. Just because I’m the first f***ing artist in 25 years to think of putting it on Top 40 radio, it doesn’t mean I’m a plagiarist, it means that I’m f***ing smart. Sorry.” (USMagazine.com).
In my opinion, I also think this accusation (which has not been taken into a law suit yet) is not relevant. “Born this way” is not similar neither in lyrics nor in style, it is only similar in tempo. Thus, I find ridiculous they accuse her of copyright infringement just because they relate in their support for the LGBT community, and not in tangible evidence that “Born this Way” is literally a copy of “Express Yourself”. Even the videos if you check them on YouTube differ drastically. While Gaga’s video resembles an orgy from the point of view of a drug addict (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wV1FrqwZyKw), Madonna’s video resembles a classic piece that illustrates entrapment and confusion, not perverted sex (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsVcUzP_O_8). Ultimately, I would say the beats in both songs are similar, but Madonna’s has way more congas and an 80’s style than Gaga’s. From a tangible standpoint, I do believe NME is out of place in accusing Miss Germanotta of copyright infringement.
http://www.usmagazine.com/moviestvmusic/news/lady-gaga-calls-madonna-plagiarism-charges-retarded-2011204
My third and last search of the day was the famous lawsuit filed in Germany from the University of Bayreuth against defense minister Karl-Theodor Freiherr Zu Guttenberg. Although it is a case not pertaining to the entertainment industry, I am bringing it to this blog because I consider certain politicians such a George W. Bush and Sarah Palin to be celebrities of gossip and publicity money makers. Just as such, I believe in Germany Mr. Guttenberg to be the same. He was “shooting star” of conservatism driven by the public force to become Germany’s future chancellor. The 39-year-old baron, as they call him, excelled the expectations of his fellow Germans:
“In less than two years as defense minister, Guttenberg pushed through the most drastic reform of Germany's armed forces since the second world war. Most notably, he successfully fought for a plan to end conscription, part of an effort to slim down the German military and make it better adapted to an era in which it faces growing demands to deploy overseas.” (Hellen Pidd, Guardian UK).
However, one lawsuit, one accusation accompanied by massive press was all that Guttenberg needed to cease power. Bayreuth University accused him of plagiarizing his PHD thesis and although it is not considered in the US a felony or IP transgression, it was enough because of the media to shoot him down. This was aggravated when he testified in public, “I was always prepared to fight but I have reached the limits of my powers” and “I did not deliberately cheat, but made serious errors”.
Quite opposite in this case, I am in favor with the University of Bayreuth because of the nature of the case and the background of the accuser. I believe Mr. Guttenberg should have never agreed in public he did some errors in his thesis. He did not only feed a destructive force such as the media, but also directed his journey as a politician onto having to resign or he would lose faith from the people. Also, I believe this time the accuser was a scholarly source with a lot of background concerning law and education. If you are fighting against a scholastic institution and the media at the same time in a country like Germany, an individual like Mr. Guttenberg no matter how much power acquired will almost always fail. I believe he only plagiarized by not focusing and taking care of accrediting his sources; it wasn’t a voluntary action. However, it was his position in Germany’s society, which weakened his possibilities in winning a case against a force like the media who is specialized in destructive spin when it come to informing citizens.
http://articles.cnn.com/2011-03-01/world/germany.politics_1_defense-minister-plagiarism-scandal-guttenberg?_s=PM:WORLD
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/01/german-defence-minister-resigns-plagiarism
No comments:
Post a Comment