Wenn diese Seite nicht korrekt angezeigt wird
gehen Sie bitte zur Originalseite



Men at Work ripped off kid's tune - court | Stuff.co.nz

Men at Work ripped off kid's tune - court

By KIM ARLINGTON - Sydney Morning Herald
Last updated 13:36 04/02/2010
Men at Work, pictured in 1982.
SAME SONG? Men at Work, pictured in 1982.

Relevant offers

Music

Axl Rose trys fans patience Songs about death, dying and killing Ticketek cuts prices for wheelchair users Silent Lucidity Getting famous without getting naked Fans' frenzy over Miley and Justin Finalists for NZ music awards announced Sleigh Bells say 'thanks' to mum Gin Wigmore's cheeky secret Sherman Alexie's Ode to Mix Tapes

Men at Work's No. 1 hit Down Under reproduced a "substantial part" of the children's folk tune Kookaburra Sits In the Old Gum Tree, infringing copyright in the song, a Federal Court judge found today.

Larrikin Music, which owns the copyright to the song Kookaburra, is now entitled to recover damages - potentially a huge sum - from band members and their record company.

Larrikin alleged that the band's famous flute riff came from the children's tune, written in 1934 by school teacher Marion Sinclair.

The court has heard that Ms Sinclair had entered the competition calling for entrants to submit a song in the round, a short story, a poem or a picture that could be used for a Christmas card.

Competition details were printed in a circular and the official Girl Guide magazine Matilda, stating that all material entered would become property of the Girl Guide Association of Victoria.

Larrikin claims it had won a tender for the copyright for Kookaburra from the South Australian Public Trustee in 1990, after Ms Sinclair died.

Legal action was launched by Larrikin's managing director, Norman Lurie, in 2007 after the television show Spicks And Specks raised the alleged similarities.

Larrikin sued songwriters Colin Hay and Ron Strykert and record company EMI seeking backdated royalties and a share of future profits.

Down Under topped the charts in Australia, the US and Britain and is an unofficial anthem for Australians everywhere.

After a hearing in the Federal Court last year, Justice Peter Jacobson delivered judgment today.

"I have come to the view that the 1979 recording and the 1981 recording of Down Under infringe Larrikin's copyright in Kookaburra because both of those recordings reproduce a substantial part of Kookaburra," he said.

"I am also of the view that Larrikin is entitled to recover damages ... for the infringements.

"Nevertheless, I would emphasise that the findings I have made do not amount to a finding that the flute riff is a substantial part of Down Under or that it is the "hook" of the song.

The judge said Larrikin had succeeded in its bid by proving the similarities between the songs.

But he said a Qantas advertisement, which also used a small similar section of the riff, was not in breach of copyright laws.

The parties will meet again on February 25 to discuss the findings and begin discussions about costs.

Ad Feedback

Larrikin's lawyer Adam Simpson said EMI and the band may be forced to hand over as much as 60 per cent of their earnings from the international hit record.

"It's a big win for the underdog," Mr Simpson said outside the court today.

When asked how much Larrikin would be looking for, he replied: "Obviously, the more the better but it depends - anything from what we've claimed, which is between 40 and 60 [per cent], and what they've suggested which is considerably less."

* Listen to the two songs below:

41 comments
Post a comment
harrysnapperorgans   #41   12:10 pm Feb 05 2010

It's a 'musical quote', of a classic aussie song. Crazy court decision. All jazz musicans do the same thing. So did Bach.

Daffy Duck   #40   11:07 am Feb 05 2010

#32 Men at work never denied they lifted the riff; they were only disputing the copyright of it.

Steve Withers   #39   10:42 am Feb 05 2010

The real problem here is that a song written in 1934 is still under copyright. Current copyright laws are - frankly - stupid and can only lead to violations as people synthesize their culture into new creations...only discover someone claims to "own" what has become a cultural artifact.

This problem will get worse as corporations push "business-friendly" politicians and political parties to extend copyright indefinitely.

Roger   #38   09:04 am Feb 05 2010

Only in Australia! Maybe it's an accent thing? Bizarre!

Matt   #37   08:37 am Feb 05 2010

That is a shocking result. I hope they appeal the hell out of it, so they get off it, or at the very least drag the process out for a billion years. Whats next, people with similar voices being up for intellectual property violations

cynic   #36   05:35 am Feb 05 2010

Judge is an idiot. So what's new.

keets   #35   11:09 pm Feb 04 2010

They are clearly two totally different songs. Leave Men At Work alone!!

chester midnight   #34   10:44 pm Feb 04 2010

Shock horror news flash ...

Beethoven sues Brahms over 1st symphony

Nick   #33   10:27 pm Feb 04 2010

What a load of bollocks. They are really pushing it to prove the comparison, and even if it was, there is enough of a difference to say that it was "inspired by" rather than an accurate copy of.

Aileen   #32   10:10 pm Feb 04 2010

Absolutely rubbish,what a stupid decision - the riffs are not similar enough to be seen as a rip-off in my opinion & as for comment #9 "Clap both songs out, if you don't think they are the same" LOL!!! What has rhythm got to do with this? And it is only a section of the song anyway.If we are going to count include small sections of rhythm &/or notes to be effectively copyrighted then music in general is in trouble - no songwriter/composer will be safe. Could rant more but whats the point - hope this decision is appealed & Men at Work win.


Show 1-31 of 41 comments

Post comment


Required

Required. Will not be published.
Registration is not required to post a comment but if you sign in, you will not have to enter your details each time you comment. Registered members also have access to extra features. Create an account now.

I have read and accepted the terms and conditions
These comments are moderated. Your comment, if approved, may not appear immediately. Please direct any queries about comment moderation to the Opinion Editor at blogs@stuff.co.nz
Special offers
Opinion poll

Are you looking forward to the new Kings of Leon album?

Hell yes!

Hell no!

Vote Result

Related story: Date set for new Kings of Leon album

Featured Promotions

Sponsored Content