An example of when Copyright law doesn't protect the artist

Remember that episode where Alanis Morrisette's record company lawyer sued chef because he asked credits after they stole his song "Stinky Britches"?
 
South Park, man. South Park...

Honestly didn't feel much sympathy for 'Rebecca F' (whoever she is), she came across as arrogant, self-obsessed and a bit childish...''wacky costumes that kill the environment''..reeeally?

"That means today, rights really are a “privilege” reserved only for the few. "
 
I think this may be fairly accurate. In more ways than one.
 
In this "story", of course, we only get one side of the story. I would be interesting to hear Gaga's side as well for a more balanced perspective. 
 
Yes, there is a risk if you file a lawsuit against someone that they will counter sue you if they have legal standing to do so. Sometimes that's not even needed.... they counter sue hoping for a settlement. Point made. You lose twice.
 
 

I do not have access to the case presented by Lady F., but the precedent she cites is here:
http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca7/11-1708/11-1708-2012-08-20.pdf
 
The gist of the argument in that case seems to be that having the opportunity to copy something can be used as very strong evidence that the work was not independently created. Independent creation is an absolute defense. If I can prove that I wrote a novel by myself with no possibility of having seen another word for word identical novel, I cannot be found to have violated its copyright. Access can also be used as evidence to prove that copying has occurred if the works are sufficiently similar. But to accept that infringement has occurred it is not only necessary to show that it might have been copied, but that the portion of the work that was copied is sufficiently unique and important in its expression to be protected by the copyright. I cannot find anything in that opinion that relies on a test of whether an "ordinary observer" could or could not tell that the song lyrics were illegally copied. I think the reasoning by the court in this case leaves the possibility that the West song may have been influenced or inspired by hearing the plaintiff's song, but that the similarity of the material does not constitute infringement. 
 
The problem is that if the courts enforce copyright against an accused infringer just because he could have heard a similar song to the one he wrote, the world will be a lot worse for the regular humans who try to write original songs. Given the enormous numbers of songs in the world with valid copyright to which most of us may have access, it is far more likely that a songwriter will find he is being sued by a professional rights organization or publisher than the other way around. If access to the similar song plus a vague or partial similarity of tone, use of common phrases, story line, types of characters etc. proved infringement, a lawyer could probably haul hundreds of thousands of songs into court. 
 
As for summary judgement, there is nothing new or unique to big corporations or small plaintiffs using that to avoid an expensive trial in which the facts are not in significant dispute, and the decision just requires legal interpretation. It is a decision that is subject to appeal.
 
I do not know anything about why Gagga is suing Rebecca. The options to sue someone for the injury you receive from responding to their lawsuit are limited. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malicious_prosecution It seems to be a heavy handed response unless the original suit was clearly an attempted shake down or unless Gagga et. al. are trying to discourage other people from using their legal rights to pursue what they believe is a justified infringement action against her or her publisher. It is probably a very bad move from a public relations standpoint, and lends itself to cries of legal thuggery.  
 

Well, the monkeys can sue all they want - I am QUITE sure Shakespeare is on, and in, solid ground.
 
Bob Bone
 

RE: This is a clear reminder that there is no protection (copyright) for example; ideas, chord progressions, so-called; tend-setting styles / sounds and words i.e Juda(s) rapped/or sang repeatedly.... seriously, a lot of major artists do the same thing, the word 'Shine' is another example; it only takes just one word to make a hook!
 
Anyone can take an interesting idea/style along with a few words (or just one word). Label's are famous for keeping up with trends (styles) and such, that's life in what has been known for decades to be 'the' music business {sigh}! 

So, instead of following a trend it's best to be-one-self and actually set-the-trend and release it officially under one's own trademark (R) or registered LLC label; at the very least there is undisputed evidence however, still of course no way to stop others from utilizing that trend.
 
By not following other styles, by not listening to others; this actually frees one-self (mind) to be them-self along with an end to song writer's block = relieved of all the so-called limits one puts on them-self because in regards to 'art' there are no limits. Hey, where's the intro, the verse, the bridge?, No, the whole song goes like this...  ||: La' La' La' La' :|| RPT 500 times. {an extreme example}

Aww heck, just wail away like a drunken donkey if all I care lol, no need to make any sense at all..... yes, just let yourself go, be yourself, free the spirit and capture that vibe faithfully.

slartabartfast
The problem is that if the courts enforce copyright against an accused infringer just because he could have heard a similar song to the one he wrote, the world will be a lot worse for the regular humans who try to write original songs. 

You mean, like George Harrison (My Sweet Lord),  or Men At Work (Down Under)?
 
The case made against both the above "infringers" was that they had heard the original sometime in their past, even if they couldn't recall hearing it, and that they subconsciously recalled it and copied it...

I've listened to both songs and really can't see that Gaga's version is anything like the original.
 
Case closed, where's my fee?