EntropySink
Entertainment & Artistry => Music => Topic started by: micah on January 25, 2013, 01:23:00 PM
-
http://www.jonathancoulton.com/2013/01/18/baby-got-back-and-glee/
The gist of it is:
Coulton wrote a cover of Baby Got Back several years ago that uses the lyrics of the original song but has an original melody and completely different instrument set. He paid for a license to create his version.
Last night on Glee, they did his cover. His melody and quirky banjo instruments and stuff. But Fox is giving him no credit or royalties because his version was a cover just like their version was a cover. So technically Glee is not covering Coulton, they are both covering Sir Mix-a-lot.
I totally understand that argument, but I dunno, it seems kinda BS to me.
Thoughts?
-
People watch that crap?
-
apparently. I mean, I don't watch it and it seems the ratings are down, but they hover around 7-million viewers every week. Oh, and they have sold a bajillion dollars worth of music on iTunes and the like, including last nights cover of Jonatha Coulton's cover of Baby Got Back.
-
I guess it isn't the worst show but I weep for TV.
As to the actual issue: I honestly don't understand a lot of the laws regarding covers and such. It sounds like a shitty thing to do on Fox's part.
-
I thought music and lyrics could be copyrighted separately (often you see "music and lyrics: awesome guy" or "music: awesome guy, lyrics: awesome girl". For example, most of Elton John's lyrics were written by Bernie something something, but Elton wrote the music. So if the Coulton music was original he should be able to claim copyright on it. Mr. Mix-a-lot should obviously get credit in both cases since the lyrics are his.
-
He's republished his version on iTunes as "my cover of Glee's cover of my cover."
haha
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-57566021-71/man-who-says-glee-ripped-him-off-rips-off-glee-rip-off/?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20
-
well that is just awesome.