SUPREME COURT RULES AGAINST WEBBER, ASTAIRE WIDOW
Matthew B. Tepper
pondered what I'm pondering as follows:
>
>SUPREME COURT RULES AGAINST WEBBER, ASTAIRE WIDOW
>
>The Indian Express
>Tuesday, October 6, 1998
>
>Washington - A sour note for Andrew Lloyd Webber, and a false step for
>the widow of Fred Astaire, as both were dealt blows in separate
>rulings made by the Supreme Court on Monday.
[Remainder of article snipped for space.]
Good! It's about time that Little Lord Plagiarist, and that jockey
woman got their comeuppances! And on the same day, too!
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://www.deltanet.com/~ducky/index.htm
My main music page --- http://www.deltanet.com/~ducky/berlioz.htm
And my science fiction club's home page --- http://www.lasfs.org/
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Dr. Jai Maharaj
The Indian Express
Tuesday, October 6, 1998
Washington - A sour note for Andrew Lloyd Webber, and a false
step for the widow of Fred Astaire, as both were dealt blows
in separate rulings made by the Supreme Court on Monday. In
Lloyd Webber's case, the court refused to head off a lawsuit
that says a melody from his famed musical, "The Phantom of
the Opera," is copied from another songwriter's work.
Astaire's widow, meanwhile, saw the court keep intact a
federal appeals court ruling that threw out her lawsuit
claiming unauthorized use of her famous husband's image in a
dance-instruction videotape.
The court, without comment, turned away Lloyd Webber's
argument that the lawsuit shouldn't go to trial because
songwriter Ray Repp did not show that Lloyd Webber ever heard
his song before writing the "Phantom Song." Lloyd Webber
started writing the song in 1983 and finished it the next
year. Repp, a composer of religious songs, sued Lloyd Webber
in New York in 1990, accusing him of copyright infringement.
The lawsuit said Lloyd Webber copied the melody of Repp's
1978 song "Till You."
Lloyd Webber then filed his own claim and contended that
"Till You" was copied from Lloyd Webber's song "Close Every
Door," first presented in London in 1968. In seeking
dismissal of Repp's lawsuit, Lloyd Webber submitted a
statement from a musicologist who said the disputed phrases
of melody in the "Phantom Song" came from Lloyd Webber's own
songs that predated "Till You." A federal judge dismissed
Repp's lawsuit, but the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
reinstated it. Both lower courts dismissed Lloyd Webber's
counterclaim. The appeals court said that although Repp
presented "little, if any" evidence that Lloyd Webber had
heard his song, the two songs were so "strikingly similar"
that such a conclusion could be reached without direct proof.
In the appeal acted on Monday, Lloyd Webber's lawyers said
that when two songs are similar, someone who sues still must
give some evidence that the other person heard the allegedly
copied song. The case is Lloyd Webber vs. Repp, 97-1881. In
Astaire's case, the justices, without comment, left intact a
federal appeals court ruling that threw out Robyn Astaire's
case against New York-based Best Film & Video Corp. Her
appeal argued that the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
should have sent the case, based on an interpretation of
California law, to the state's Supreme Court. In his long
show business career, Astaire was hailed as one of the
nation's greatest dancers. He died in 1987. His widow sued
Best two years later over its making and distributing an
instruction videotape that included 90 seconds of footage
from two of Astaire's movies.
Best had obtained the legal right to produce five dance
instructional videos using the Fred Astaire Dance Studios
name and licenses, but Mrs. Astaire's lawsuit focused on what
she said was the unauthorized use of the movie excerpts.
Although the case was based on state law, the lawsuit was
filed in federal court under a "diversity of citizenship"
rule. A federal trial judge ruled that the state law
protecting a celebrity's right of publicity had been
violated, but the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
reversed that ruling last year. "Neither the statute nor the
legislative history provides any support for treating Best's
use of the film clips any differently from the use of the
same clips in a documentary about dance in film, a use that
Mrs. Astaire concedes would be exempt from liability," a
three-judge appeals court panel said in its 2-1 decision. The
appeal acted on Monday argued that the California Supreme
Court should be given the opportunity to interpret what the
federal appeals court called a "fairly convoluted statutory
scheme", reports AP.
For educational and open-discussion purposes only.
Source -
http://www.expressindia.com/news/27900020.htm
Jai Maharaj
Latest world news at:
http://www.flex.com/~jai/topnews.html
Om Shanti
Dr. Jai Maharaj
ducky兀deltanet.com (Matthew B. Tepper) wrote:
>
> In article <law-031...@news.mantra.com>,
> Dr. Jai Maharaj pondered what I'm pondering as follows:
>> SUPREME COURT RULES AGAINST WEBBER, ASTAIRE WIDOW
>> Washington - A sour note for Andrew Lloyd Webber, and
>> a false step for the widow of Fred Astaire, as both were
>> dealt blows in separate rulings made by the Supreme Court
> Good! It's about time that Little Lord Plagiarist, and
> that jockey woman got their comeuppances! And on the
A near-verbatim comment from a music
superstar on this topic: "My God, we
all share each others' thoughts one way
or other . . . the real product is our
delivery and no one can copy that . . ."
My response was that one day we will
have a public domain reference work of
all possible ideas and thoughts expressed
in all languages, arranged in all forms.
Thinkers will be treated as owners of certain
intellectual and other property before then.
Jai Maharaj
About 40,000 links to posts by yours truly at:
http://www.flex.com/~jai
Om Shanti
Seattle367
Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote
>The Indian Express
>Tuesday, October 6, 1998
>
> A federal judge dismissed
>Repp's lawsuit, but the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
>reinstated it. Both lower courts dismissed Lloyd Webber's
>counterclaim. The appeals court said that although Repp
>presented "little, if any" evidence that Lloyd Webber had
>heard his song, the two songs were so "strikingly similar"
>that such a conclusion could be reached without direct proof.
>In the appeal acted on Monday, Lloyd Webber's lawyers said
>that when two songs are similar, someone who sues still must
>give some evidence that the other person heard the allegedly
>copied song.
Much as I detest Webber and his music, I actually feel bad for the guy in
this instance, because he happens to be right. Unless the plaintiff can
prove that Webber actually heard or had reasonable access to the other
writer's song, the case should not be allowed to proceed.
What is ironic is that Phantom is such a blatant rip-off of so many other
songs and materials that he should get caught on one where he may actually
be innocent. Surprised that Lerner and Loewe never sued him for ripping off
"Come To Me Bend To Me" from Brigadoon, which Webber barbarizes in Music of
the Night. Not to mention ripping off Puccini, but he's public domain
anyway.
---Seattle367
Mark D. Lew
<frede...@email.msn.com> wrote:
> ... Not to mention ripping off Puccini, but he's public domain
> anyway.
... except for Turandot, which is protected in the United States through
the end of 2001 (and longer in some other countries, I think).
mdl
Seattle367
Mark D. Lew wrote :
>
>> ... Not to mention ripping off Puccini, but he's public domain
>> anyway.
>
>... except for Turandot, which is protected in the United States through
>the end of 2001 (and longer in some other countries, I think).
>
>mdl
Actually, yes and no. Turnadot, which premiered in 1926, would have
copyright protection through 2001 in the United States. However, outside the
United States, the rule of thumb has generally been the life of the author,
plus fifty years, which would mean that all of Puccini's works would have
gone into p.d. in 1974. However, some countries extended protection to 70
years, and still more are trying to extend it even further.
But what Webber ripped off was from La Fanciulla del West (1910), which
would have went into the public domain in 1985 in the United States. I
believe Phantom premiered in 1986 or 1987, so Webber timed it just right.
---seattle367
Matthew B. Tepper
If you are referring to "Music of the Night," the famous line Webber
swiped from _Fanciulla_ is preceded by a couple of lines swiped from the
Norwegian Rhapsody #2 by Swensen. However, there is a more serious
theft to consider: The big tune of "Jesus Christ, Superstar," is
cribbed from Frank Loesser's "How to Succeed in Business Without Really
Trying" (where J. Pierpont Finch sings , "Rosemary! Rosemary!"). And
*that* work is DEFINITELY still in copyright!
Seattle367
Matthew B. Tepper wrote :
>> >
>If you are referring to "Music of the Night," the famous line Webber
>swiped from _Fanciulla_ is preceded by a couple of lines swiped from the
>Norwegian Rhapsody #2 by Swensen. However, there is a more serious
>theft to consider: The big tune of "Jesus Christ, Superstar," is
>cribbed from Frank Loesser's "How to Succeed in Business Without Really
>Trying" (where J. Pierpont Finch sings , "Rosemary! Rosemary!"). And
>*that* work is DEFINITELY still in copyright!
>
>--
>
be for everyone to name all of the songs that Webber has ripped off over the
years. How this guy is celebrated is beyond me. I thought I had heard it all
until I actually saw ASPECTS OF LOVE on Broadway (I had comps), and running
throughout the show was the Carvel Ice Cream theme.
---Seattle367
Peter A. Klein
<frede...@email.msn.com> wrote:
>What is ironic is that Phantom is such a blatant rip-off of so many other
>songs and materials that he should get caught on one where he may actually
>be innocent. Surprised that Lerner and Loewe never sued him for ripping off
>"Come To Me Bend To Me" from Brigadoon, which Webber barbarizes in Music of
>the Night.
Maybe because the melodies the two songs only coincide for one
bar--four notes of Lloyd Webber's, six notes of Lowe's. And even
there, the meter and rhythm is not the same, only the basic shape of
two descending intervals that outline a tonic-dominant
progression--the most basic chord progression in music.
After that, the songs are completely different. The melodies are
completely different. Lowe's verse goes quickly into minor and uses
fairly rich harmonies, whild Lloyd Webber's stays in simple I - V and
(later) IV - I progressions until the bridge.
The first few bricks you see are similar, but there are many other
bricks, and the houses built with them are completely different.
Sorry, but Sir Andy's innocent on that one.
>Not to mention ripping off Puccini, but he's public domain
>anyway.
No argument there! :-)
---
- Peter - : -----==3== --- ---
(remove the two letters "x" in : | | | | | | | |
my address to reply) : @| @| @| @| @| @| @| @|
Mark D. Lew
<frede...@email.msn.com> wrote:
> Actually, yes and no. Turnadot, which premiered in 1926, would have
> copyright protection through 2001 in the United States. However, outside the
> United States, the rule of thumb has generally been the life of the author,
> plus fifty years, which would mean that all of Puccini's works would have
> gone into p.d. in 1974. However, some countries extended protection to 70
> years, and still more are trying to extend it even further.
I heard that in Spain it's now 80 years from the death of the author, and
that France is trying for something even longer. That's just second-hand
info to me though, so I can't confirm it.
All this is relevant only with respect to disputes about the tune alone.
The opera as a whole remains protected almost everywhere in Europe, because
one of the librettists lived into the 1950s. (And Schicchi and Suor are by
Forzano, who didn't die until 1970.)
mdl
Christina West
"Seattle367" <frede...@email.msn.com> wrote:
> Right you are....I think a fascinating thread to post on RATM one day would
> be for everyone to name all of the songs that Webber has ripped off over the
> years.
It's important to distinguish between what might be described as
'common currency' and actual plagiarism, of course; rather like the
case of 'Amami, Alfredo'.
For example, although the first few notes of 'Memory' are the same as
Ravel's 'Bolero', they don't SOUND in any way similar.
But the 'Fanciulla' ripoff is breathtaking! - I actually heard this
one backwards, having known 'The Music of the Night' before hearing
'Fanciulla' complete, and it just smacked me in the face.
> How this guy is celebrated is beyond me.
He has a gift for promotion and publicity, a 'feel' for what the
general public wants from a musical, a flair for producing
theatrically effective shows, a knack for finding talented artists to
perform in them, and lots of money.
--
Christina West
xina on IRC
Email: xi...@argonet.co.uk
Web: www.argonet.co.uk/users/xina/
diva
> Seattle367 wrote:
> >
> > Mark D. Lew wrote :
> > >
> > >> ... Not to mention ripping off Puccini, but he's public domain
> > >> anyway.
Did Webber expropriate a few lines from Paganini's Rachmaninoff
composition? Didn't Tschaikowsy employ Mozart in "Mozartiana"?
--
Diva
It's Not What's Eating You
It's What You're Eating
Clovis Lark
Seattle367 <frede...@email.msn.com> wrote:
>
>Mark D. Lew wrote :
>>
>>> ... Not to mention ripping off Puccini, but he's public domain
>>> anyway.
>>
>>the end of 2001 (and longer in some other countries, I think).
>>
>>mdl
>
>copyright protection through 2001 in the United States. However, outside the
>United States, the rule of thumb has generally been the life of the author,
>plus fifty years, which would mean that all of Puccini's works would have
>gone into p.d. in 1974. However, some countries extended protection to 70
>years, and still more are trying to extend it even further.
>would have went into the public domain in 1985 in the United States. I
>believe Phantom premiered in 1986 or 1987, so Webber timed it just right.
Please refer to the GATT agreement on copyright and the Berne Convention
of 1973.
>
>---seattle367
>
>
Clovis Lark
paulsy <pau...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>Detest!!!!!!.
>Really, do you hate the man and his music that much?
>Why?
In my case, I really do detest the man and his brother and both their
music making. I'm no fan of Broadway, but it isn't difficult to see the
loss of quality in show scores since this musical cabbage came along.
Yes he cribs and plagerizes (and those are the best tunes in his shows).
J-L, the cellist and male counterpart to Ofrah Harnoy, goes to
Switzerland to decry the 20th century with such incompetence that Charles
Rosen has little difficulty making chum out of him in the NYRB in May
98. Both have done so much to turn what "art" they touch into the
musical equivalent of beanie babies.
> >Paul > >>
>>Much as I detest Webber and his music, I actually feel bad for the guy in
>>this instance, because he happens to be right. Unless the plaintiff can
>>prove that Webber actually heard or had reasonable access to the other
>>writer's song, the case should not be allowed to proceed.
>>
>>What is ironic is that Phantom is such a blatant rip-off of so many other
>>songs and materials that he should get caught on one where he may actually
>>be innocent. Surprised that Lerner and Loewe never sued him for ripping off
>>"Come To Me Bend To Me" from Brigadoon, which Webber barbarizes in Music of
>>the Night. Not to mention ripping off Puccini, but he's public domain
>>anyway.
>>
>>---Seattle367
>>
>>
>
dtritter
>
> In article <0FD23B91F2351273.91FC000E...@library-proxy.airnews.net>,> paulsy <pau...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
> >Detest!!!!!!.> >Really, do you hate the man and his music that much?
> >Why?
>
> In my case, I really do detest the man and his brother and both their
> music making. I'm no fan of Broadway, but it isn't difficult to see the> loss of quality in show scores since this musical cabbage came along.> Yes he cribs and plagerizes (and those are the best tunes in his shows).> J-L, the cellist and male counterpart to Ofrah Harnoy, goes to
> Switzerland to decry the 20th century with such incompetence that Charles> Rosen has little difficulty making chum out of him in the NYRB in May> 98. Both have done so much to turn what "art" they touch into the> musical equivalent of beanie babies.
>
yeah! and that's on their good days.
i think it's in "goodbye, columbus," that the heroine's brother bonds
with the hero by declaring his love for classical music, "I've got all
of mantovani's records."
dft
Clovis Lark
He does and ain't it the truth that ALW can't even stand up to that master
of dreck.
A clear sign that ALW knows his work is crap is the amount of scenic
spectacle he endorses to cover up his noise.
BerdeTal
Hey everybody, help me out on this one!
I remember hearing somewhere that a court actually found ALW guilty of
plagiarizing from Fanciulla and ordered a royalty paid to the Puccini estate. I
guess that would have been in London or somewhere other than the U.S. Is this a
myth, an "Urban Legend?"
BTW, I don't know Phantom, and am managing to live a decent life anyway, but
which music was taken from Fanciulla (one of my favorites)? What chutzpah these
people have!
William Berger
Ed Rosen
>
>
>i think it's in "goodbye, columbus," that the heroine's brother bonds
>with the hero by declaring his love for classical music, "I've got all
>of mantovani's records."
>
>
>dft
On the same theme, it is said that President Eisenhower's idea of
classical music began and ended with Guy Lombardo!!
Ed
Matthew B. Tepper
Yep, Ol' Ike couldn't deal with all them arias and barcarolles!
Seattle367
paulsy wrote :
>Detest!!!!!!.
>Really, do you hate the man and his music that much?
>Why?
>
>
Well, one should always be careful about saying you detest the man as a
result of detesting his so-called art (although he is a rather pompous Tory
jerk), but I will limit my remarks to his music. Yes, I really do detest him
that much. I think he had some marginally clever and original ideas when he
first started out, although, overall, I think Joseph and JC Superstar are
extremely over-hyped. The music in his first few shows is generally what I
would call schlock/rock, and, as you have already read, this man never heard
a piece of music he didn't like enough to want to rip it off. EVITA is
probably his most interesting show, although that may have had more to do
with Hal Prince's brilliant staging than anything contained in the music (I
will admit that I do like the "Another Hallway" song from that show). But
after that its all dreadful....CATS, PHANTOM, STARLIGHT EXPRESS, ASPECTS OF
LOVE, and, ugh! worst of all, SUNSET BLVD., hackneyed ideas, spectacle
parading as theatre, musical plagarism (or borrowing, if you want to be
generous), you name it.
Having said that, last time I was in London, I did go see the revised BY
JEEVES. Not great music, but a pleasant, diverting show. Probably had more
to do with Aykbourn than Webber, and most of it was written twenty years
ago.
---Seattle367
Tim Gowen
<frede...@email.msn.com> writes
>How this guy is celebrated is beyond me. I thought I had heard it all
>until I actually saw ASPECTS OF LOVE on Broadway (I had comps), and running
>throughout the show was the Carvel Ice Cream theme.
I'm not a defender of ALW in the field of plagiarism, not since the
Jurassic Park/Vaults of Heaven and Sunset Boulevard/Rachmaninov Piano
Concerto 2 examples, but do you honestly believe that a British composer
wantonly and with malice aforethought stole a jingle from an
advertisement - and an American one at that?
Tim
--
"Und die frauline mit der glockenspiel | change
und die bastenholde--verboten! Und die | nospam to
Apfelstrudel mit der liedergrand- Gezundheit!" | equipoise
- Stalag 17 | to reply
****** The RATM FAQ http://www.juglans.demon.co.uk/Tim/Tim.htm ******
Seattle367
Tim Gowen wrote
>I'm not a defender of ALW in the field of plagiarism, not since the
>Jurassic Park/Vaults of Heaven and Sunset Boulevard/Rachmaninov Piano
>Concerto 2 examples, but do you honestly believe that a British composer
>wantonly and with malice aforethought stole a jingle from an
>advertisement - and an American one at that?
>
In a word, "Yes." My understanding is that Webber spent a lot of time in New
York after Phantom opened there, and that he and Sarah had an apartment in
Trump Towers. I don't think it is beyond the realm of credibility that many
nights, while he was toiling at his desk, trying desperately to come up with
yet another hackneyed musical, and Sarah was on the bed chomping on bon-bons
and watching late night television, that, between the talk shows and
infomercials, that the insidious Carvel Ice Cream ad, which used to run
constantly in New York, was heard more than once in the Webber household. I
doubt if Andrew dropped his pen, said "Voila," there it is, my next rip-off,
because I don't think he operates that way. But I have little doubt that the
melody seeped its way into his sub-conscience and found its way into ASPECTS
OF LOVE.
Hey, even if it didn't happen that way, it is still a lousy melody, and
nothing that he should be proud of if he did, in fact, come up with it on
his own.
---Seattle367
james jorden
> I remember hearing somewhere that a court actually found ALW guilty of
> plagiarizing from Fanciulla and ordered a royalty paid to the Puccini estate.
Urban legend. The "theme" from FANCIULLA supposedly "plagiarized" is
actually only a brief phrase from the bridge section of the little waltz
the miners hum toward the end of act one of FANCIULLA: really, it's a
pastiche of 19th century pop music as Puccini writes it and therefore
not so strange that Lloyd Webber would use something similarly treacly
for the revoltingly sentimental score for PHANTOM.
To my ears, most Lloyd Webber sounds like imitation Rachmaninoff adapted
for voices like some 1940s operetta film -- that is, like the Claude
Rains/Nelson Eddy/Suzannah Foster PHANTOM OF THE OPERA...
--
james jorden
jjo...@ix.netcom.com
latest opera gossip from parterre box:
http://www.anaserve.com/~parterre/lacieca.htm
Mark D. Lew
> BerdeTal wrote:
>
> > I remember hearing somewhere that a court actually found ALW guilty of
> > plagiarizing from Fanciulla and ordered a royalty paid to the Puccini
estate.
>
> Urban legend. The "theme" from FANCIULLA supposedly "plagiarized" is
> actually only a brief phrase from the bridge section of the little waltz
> the miners hum toward the end of act one of FANCIULLA: really, it's a
> pastiche of 19th century pop music as Puccini writes it and therefore
> not so strange that Lloyd Webber would use something similarly treacly
> for the revoltingly sentimental score for PHANTOM.
Perhaps BerdeTal's source is confusing this with the "Avalon" case.
"Avalon" is a 1920 pop song by Vincent Rose, popularized by Al Jolson,
which bore a striking resemblance to part of "E lucevan le stelle".
Puccini brought suit in U.S. court and won a $25,000 settlement from the
publisher (Remick, I think). Terms of the settlement allowed Remick to
continue publishing the song, and thanks to the publicity generated by the
case, Puccini and Remick both came out ahead.
mdl
paulsy
Really, do you hate the man and his music that much?
Why?
Paul
>
David Scott Marley
a brief phrase. The melodies of "Music in the Night" and the big act one
waltz from Fanciulla are just about the same for a significant chunk of
time. I just about fell out of my chair when I heard Phantom; there's
nothing subtle about it. Later we played the passages from the CDs, one
right after the other, just to check on our perceptions, and the similarity
is jawdropping: the melody and harmony both are very close.