Men At Work Musician Found Dead; Ridiculous Copyright Ruling Against Band Blamed

from the copyright-victims dept

While the iiNet case has been nothing but good news for copyright in Australia, over the past few years, at nearly the same time, there's been an important copyright case concerning fair use that has been nothing but an ugly splotch on Australian copyright law: the fight over whether or not the band Men at Work infringed on the copyright of an old Australian folk song, Kookaburra. The details of the case were really stunning once you looked at them. The Men at Work song clearly had a very brief flute line that paid homage to the folk song, but was an entirely different song on its own. Furthermore, the lawsuit came many decades after the song, "Down Under," had been a huge hit. At best, the case should have been dumped for the delay in bringing it. Even more ridiculous, the holder of the copyright, Larrikan Music, didn't even notice the supposed infringement itself, until an exec heard about it on a TV trivia show.

Still, bizarrely, the Australian courts repeatedly ruled in favor of Larrikan. When Australia's High Court refused to hear the appeal, the awful appeals court ruling stood, saying that the song infringed, and 5% of its royalties belonged to Larrikan.

As a bunch of people are sending in, it appears that this story has a truly tragic ending, as Men at Work band member Greg Ham has been found dead -- with multiple stories suggesting that this particular case and the ruling completely destroyed his life:

"I'm terribly disappointed that that's the way I'm going to be remembered - for copying something..."

Other reports say that he was so distraught over the ruling, he went back to using heroin and abusing alcohol. While he clearly had issues to deal with beyond this, it does appear that the ruling helped push him over the edge. That's really quite tragic.

Filed Under: australia, fair use, kookaburra, men at work
Companies: larrikan music

Men At Work Ordered To Pay 5% Of Earnings On 'Down Under' Over Copyright Claim

from the kookaburra-this dept

Last summer we were among those amazed at the claim from a music publisher that the popular 80's song, "Down Under," by the band, Men at Work, supposedly infringed on a popular Australian folk tune, Kookaburra, that was written back in the 1930s. The publisher who sued, Larrikin, had only taken possession of the copyright on the folk tune in 2000, and didn't even notice the similarity until a TV quiz show pointed it out. You would think that this, alone, should make any copyright claim null and void. But... not to the Australian courts, who first ruled that the song infringed earlier this year and now (thanks to sinsi for pointing this out) have said that the band needs to pay Larrikin 5% of its royalties from 2002 onward. The only "good" news is that Larrikin had asked for 60%, even though the use of Kookaburra is limited to a little flute solo, and is clearly an homage to the song. Also, since the royalties only start in 2002, well after the song has faded from popularity, it may limit what Larrikin gets. Still, the whole lawsuit, and the fact that this was found to be infringing, is a bit of a travesty.

Filed Under: australia, copyright, down under, kookaburra, men at work
Companies: larrikan music

Australian Court Says Men At Work's 'Down Under' Infringes On Folk Song; Only Took Decades To Notice

from the copyright-gone-mad dept

Well, apparently not all Australian courts are sensible when it comes to copyright rulings. While we recently wrote about the wonderful iiNet decision, in the comments, someone pointed to a bad decision made on the same day. It's a case we wrote about last year involving the famous song Down Under by the band Men at Work -- a big hit back in the 1980s. But in 2007, after seeing a joke on a TV trivia program about that song's similarities to an old Australian folk song, the publisher who held the copyright on the folk song sued. Yes, this was decades after the song was popular, and the publisher, Larrikan Music didn't notice any similarities at all. It seems like this should be an open-and-shut case. The "use" was minor, at best, and didn't do any damage to the market for the original song, "Kookaburra," which is popular among schoolkids, apparently. There's simply no harm done and anyone with an ounce of common sense should see that.

But... that's not what the court found. It's ruled that Men at Work infringed on Kookaburra, and now the band members and their record label need to pay up -- potentially huge sums. It's difficult to see how this makes sense under any sort of copyright regime.

Filed Under: australia, copyright, down under, kookaburra, men at work
Companies: larrikan music