Family Guy Song Didn't Infringe On Pinocchio Song

from the when-you-wish-upon-a-star... dept

Tue, Mar 17th 2009 1:30am — Mike Masnick

It's another victory for fair use, as a judge has sided with the producers of the animated series Family Guy in a lawsuit over whether the song When You Wish Upon A Star was infringed by a parody song. The judge sided with Family Guy, noting that the song was used for humorous intent, and the "wholesome" association between the original and the movie Pinocchio made the song ripe for parody. This isn't the first time Family Guy has won lawsuits from people who are apparently unaware of the legal acceptance of parody... Somehow, it's unlikely to be the last time either.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: fair use, family guy

18 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Falindraun, 17 Mar 2009 @ 2:04am

C'Mon Disney
::Rolls eyes and smacks Disney in the face::

C'mon guys, don't be stupid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Vidiot (profile), 17 Mar 2009 @ 4:53am
  
  Re: C'Mon Disney
  Actually, it doesn't belong to Disney, much to their chagrin. In terms of Disney-associated themes, it's "the one that got away"...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - John Doe (profile), 9 Oct 2009 @ 6:04am
    
    Re: Re: C'Mon Disney
    Actually, "Whe You Wish Upon a Star" IS owned by the Disney Corporation. THAT's why it's Disney trademarked anthem and opens each film made.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Mar 2009 @ 2:37am

Satire is the best form of liable...err...i mean-Flattery ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Matt T., 17 Mar 2009 @ 4:31am

Title?
Aww, Mike, you didn't tell us the name of the song in question. For those who are wondering, it was "When you wish upon a Jew"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
andBeans, 17 Mar 2009 @ 4:51am

Wasn't that song in one of the "banned" episodes anyway? Sheesh...is Disney hard-up for money, too?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Comboman, 17 Mar 2009 @ 5:02am

Victory?
Hardly a victory. All this means is that corporations with deep enough pockets to afford good lawyers (i.e. Fox) can utilize their fair use rights. The rest must either comply with cease-and-desist letters or lose their life savings fighting it in court.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Mar 2009 @ 5:16am

Obvious
They need some sort of obvious test for this type of crap. If it is obvious that Disney should not have filed, they should be fined 10xs the amount in damages that they would have claimed and forced to pay that to to several different non-profit charities.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- hegemon13, 17 Mar 2009 @ 5:49am
  
  Re: Obvious
  There is. It's called a "frivolous lawsuit." Clearly, this was, but it may not have been declared on by the judge. I think, in this case, the plaintiff party (not Disney, actually) should have to pay all legal fees with interest, plus reimburse the defendant for their time, and pay for any damages. Damages, for an individual, could be time missed from work or business, lost employment, etc. Not sure if it would apply to a corporation. These kinds of bully lawsuits need to be checked. Hard.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Mar 2009 @ 5:20am

Boy, if Disney was mad about that I sure hope they didn't watch "South Park" last week.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DS78, 17 Mar 2009 @ 6:37am
  
  Re:
  This is exactly what I thought when I watched that episode. I smell a lawsuit brewin....
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Liam, 17 Mar 2009 @ 5:39am

blah
you guys need to keep up, it's already been stated that disney do not own the song, therefore they did not sue, the owner of the song did.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DS78, 17 Mar 2009 @ 6:36am
  
  Re: blah
  This is exactly what I thought when I watched that episode. I smell a lawsuit brewin....
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
David, 17 Mar 2009 @ 5:53am

Hysterical
As a jewish person, I have to say that this is one of the funniest of the Family Guys ever. I almost crapped my pants when I heard this song. For those of us with no sense of humor, GROW UP!

This was parody at its best! Thank you Family Guy for again going where others (except South Park) are too chicken feces to go!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lucretious, 17 Mar 2009 @ 6:07am

Seth McFarland = Win.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Rob R., 17 Mar 2009 @ 7:49am
  
  Seth MacFarland = Win
  
  The guy deserves to have his name spelled right : )
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Derek Kerton (profile), 17 Mar 2009 @ 3:59pm
    
    Re: unless
    ...unless the mis-spelling was parody.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gene Cavanaugh, 18 Mar 2009 @ 12:10pm

Pinnochio song
Right on, Michael, though IMO, the real problem is the ridiculous times allowed for copyright (though you can sort of understand; politicians depend on campaign funds, and therefore have to sell their souls to big business or get out of politics).
If we had campaign finance reform, I'll bet one change would be shortening the length of time for a copyright; say, to 10 - 20 years; and there goes the copyright involved!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]