The only reason Coulton is getting publicity is that he can get media outlets to listen to him. FOX refuses to acknowledge the arrangement, in part because it would acknowledge either outright theft or at least the violation of the Creative Commons non-commercial license Coulton assigned to his work.
Perhaps Coulton and Creative Commons could join forces on this, but it likely won't stop FOX from perpetrating the kind of intellectual property theft they usually sic their lawyers on without a second thought. David >________________________________ > From: Melissa P <[email protected]> >To: [email protected] >Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 12:02 PM >Subject: RE: [TV orNotTV] Re: Glee vs. Jonathan Coulton > > >That wasn’t my point. > >My points: Coulton is getting publicity for his work that he otherwise >wouldn’t have gotten. > >And – perhaps if Fox were required to pay Mr. Coulton, it wouldn’t have used >his arrangement. And Coulton wouldn’t have gotten any publicity (which is >probably worth more than the few pennies he would have gotten from iTunes, >etc.). >From:[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf >Of Joe Coughlin >Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 10:32 AM >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: [TV orNotTV] Re: Glee vs. Jonathan Coulton > >So only good arrangements shouldn't be stolen? Weak sauce. >And let's put this song in the context in which it was written. In 2005, >Jonathan Coulton challenged himself to put out a song a week in a project he >called "Thing-A-Week" (go figure). "Baby Got Back" was just one of 4 or 5 >covers over the 52 weeks. During this time, he came up with some of his best >songs like "RE: Your Brains", "Shop Vac", "Code Monkey" and "You Ruined >Everything". > >So yeah, it's an unfortunately remnant of "white guys doing ironic rap >covers", but if his creativity is anything like mine, you sometimes have to >scribble the pen that's not writing a bit on a pad in order for the creativity >to flow. That was the challenge of "Thing a Week". > >On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Melissa P <[email protected]> wrote: >From the Wired piece: > >“The most frustrating thing is the completely silent nature of their approach >to this ‘exposure bonus’ for me. The thing I would wish for most is a frank >and open and public discussion with them about what they have done, what they >believe they have done and what their actual policy is on this kind of thing. >And I don’t know if I’m going to get that,” said Coulton. > >Well, isn’t that what’s now happening? > >Maybe I’d have more sympathy for Mr. Coulton if his arrangement didn’t suck. >But it does. > >I’ve said this before about other musical re-arrangements that make no sense: >Just because you can do it doesn’t mean you should. > > > >From:[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf >Of David Bruggeman >Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 12:14 AM >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: [TV orNotTV] Re: Glee vs. Jonathan Coulton > >Per WIRED, Coulton does not appear to be the first to have this happen, just >the first that more than a few people know about. > >http://www.wired.com/underwire/2013/01/jonathan-coulton-glee-song/ > >David > >> >>________________________________ >> >>From:M-D November <[email protected]> >>To: [email protected] >>Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 11:36 PM >>Subject: [TV orNotTV] Re: Glee vs. Jonathan Coulton >> >>JoCo has said in interviews that he probably doesn't have a legal leg to >>stand on re: copyright because of license he had to take to cover the song, >>but if it can be proven* that Glee lifted the audio wholesale and just >>removed the original vocal, then Coulton may be in for a big payday. >> >>*It may already have been proven - a number of Coulton's fans have performed >>analyses on both tracks and found the waveforms - especially on the portion >>featuring the expletive-covering duck quack, to be nearly identical. >> >>On Friday, January 25, 2013 4:46:48 PM UTC-5, Kevin M. (RPCV) wrote: >>It is official. Glee took Coulton's arrangement and aired it, and is >>now selling it on iTunes. >> >>Coulton will be able to retire young. >> >>https://itunes.apple.com/us/ album/baby-got-back-glee-cast- >>version/id592420108?i= 592420188&ign-mpt=uo%3D4 >> >>The comments on iTunes and on Glee's Twitter feed are amusing. >> >>On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Kevin M. <[email protected]> wrote: >>> All conjecture at this point... no way to know if the song he found a >>> recording of is to be used on Glee, but somebody wants him to think it >>> is, and it is identical to his arrangement. >>> >>> http://www.jonathancoulton. com/2013/01/18/baby-got-back- and-glee/ >>> -- >>> Kevin M. (RPCV) >> >> >> >>-- >>Kevin M. (RPCV) >>-- >>-- >>TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! >>You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>Groups "TV or Not TV" group. >>To post to this group, send email to [email protected] >>To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>[email protected] >>For more options, visit this group at >>http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en >> >> >> >-- >-- >TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! >You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >Groups "TV or Not TV" group. >To post to this group, send email to [email protected] >To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >[email protected] >For more options, visit this group at >http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en > > >-- >-- >TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! >You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >Groups "TV or Not TV" group. >To post to this group, send email to [email protected] >To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >[email protected] >For more options, visit this group at >http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en > > > > > >-- >+++++++++++++++ >Joe Coughlin >http://www.twitter.com/inturnaround >-- >-- >TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! >You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >Groups "TV or Not TV" group. >To post to this group, send email to [email protected] >To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >[email protected] >For more options, visit this group at >http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en > > -- >-- >TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! >You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >Groups "TV or Not TV" group. >To post to this group, send email to [email protected] >To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >[email protected] >For more options, visit this group at >http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en > > > > > -- -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
