Glee Airs Performance of Jonathan Coulton's "Baby Got Back"

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4
 

So Coulton did his cover of their cover of his cover, now available on itunes with proceeds going to charity

http://www.jonathancoulton.com/2013/01/26/baby-got-back-glee-style/

HardRockSamurai:

Orange12345:
He should release an album where he does all the glee songs

Glee doesn't have any songs.

Actually, it does. They had a couple of original songs somewhere in season 2 but they were such insultingly stupid teenage tripe that they made Rebekka Black's Friday seem the sound of this generation :/

unless JoCo has gallons of mouthwash at hand I wouldn't recommend singing them.

Apparently JoCo is not the only artist Glee has done this too.

there's even a petition going around:
https://www.change.org/petitions/fox-media-and-glee-stop-using-the-work-of-artists-without-crediting-them#share

Even putting my own love for Jonathan Coulton and my indifference towards Glee aside, if this is as clear cut as it ha been made out to look, this is pretty sh*tty behavior on their part.

Writing a new arrangement of an old song isn't just something you do. A cover can be a musical and artistic endeavor in its own right, and you'd expect the people behind Glee (which wouldn't exist if it wasn't for covers) to have some respect for that. I'm not gonna pretend to know anything about the legal matters, but to refuse the man an acknowledgment for an arrangement that was evidently good enough to put in their TV show, that's pretty damn weak.

Starik20X6:

I think it's too late for that. I heard someone at school talking about Harder, Better, Faster, Stronger, so I mentioned to them that I was also a Daft Punk fan. A blank stare, followed by "Who's Daft Punk? Are they the ones who ripped of Kanye West?". Then everything went black, and when I woke up I was in Mexico and wearing nothing but some torn purple shorts I have no memory of putting on.

OMG...I went looking for what you were referring. It's....I have no words. On principal I hate the whole "rapping over someone else's music" thing that mainstream music finds oh so innovative and worthy of praise, but Kanye really killed Daft Punk's music dead. *sigh*

shiajun:

Starik20X6:

I think it's too late for that. I heard someone at school talking about Harder, Better, Faster, Stronger, so I mentioned to them that I was also a Daft Punk fan. A blank stare, followed by "Who's Daft Punk? Are they the ones who ripped of Kanye West?". Then everything went black, and when I woke up I was in Mexico and wearing nothing but some torn purple shorts I have no memory of putting on.

OMG...I went looking for what you were referring. It's....I have no words. On principal I hate the whole "rapping over someone else's music" thing that mainstream music finds oh so innovative and worthy of praise, but Kanye really killed Daft Punk's music dead. *sigh*

Honestly, Kanye's version isn't that bad. There are a lot worse rap-overs in the music industry. It's no masterpiece, but it's not awful.

OT: I fully support everyone selling off unmarked Glee DVDs with the credits removed. They should be happy for the exposure...

NameIsRobertPaulson:

shiajun:

Starik20X6:

I think it's too late for that. I heard someone at school talking about Harder, Better, Faster, Stronger, so I mentioned to them that I was also a Daft Punk fan. A blank stare, followed by "Who's Daft Punk? Are they the ones who ripped of Kanye West?". Then everything went black, and when I woke up I was in Mexico and wearing nothing but some torn purple shorts I have no memory of putting on.

OMG...I went looking for what you were referring. It's....I have no words. On principal I hate the whole "rapping over someone else's music" thing that mainstream music finds oh so innovative and worthy of praise, but Kanye really killed Daft Punk's music dead. *sigh*

Honestly, Kanye's version isn't that bad. There are a lot worse rap-overs in the music industry. It's no masterpiece, but it's not awful.

OT: I fully support everyone selling off unmarked Glee DVDs with the credits removed. They should be happy for the exposure...

I feel that Jaden Yukis version was pretty decent as well.

OT: This is pretty weak of Glee, but J.C. has put up a cover of their cover and is sending all the proceeds until the end of Feb to a pair of charities he is involved with. As of today, his cover of Glees cover of his cover has surpassed well and by far Glees cover of his cover on itunes and is supposed to get released on amazon and something else (forgot what) fairly soon. At least some good has come of this.

BlackStar42:
To quote Yahtzee, There is no middle finger big enough!

Does anyone know if he has any legal grounds to sue?

What review was that in again?

GAunderrated:

BlackStar42:
To quote Yahtzee, There is no middle finger big enough!

Does anyone know if he has any legal grounds to sue?

What review was that in again?

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/3801-Call-of-Juarez-The-Cartel

Around 4:15 in.

> Using the fruits of his efforts without permission.
> Suggest he should be 'happy for the exposure.'
> Refuse to credit appropriately.

Plagiarists talking out of both sides of their mouth and being so shamelessly, condescendingly smarmy that if they were an individual I would feel inclined to mace them with the entire can.

He's getting exposure for this little stunt all right; I learned he's the one who wrote Portal's "Still Alive" and "Want You Gone." The Glee producers are also getting exposure and now everyone knows they steal other peoples' work.

Irony
noun
1 - the use of words to convey a meaning that is the opposite of its literal meaning (ex: "be happy with the exposure" while expending effort to provide no exposure)
5 - an outcome of events contrary to what was, or might have been, expected (ex: providing exposure unintentionally via media coverage of fan outrage about having not provided said exposure)

Hope this ends up going in Coulton's favor in the end. Or, at the very least, not turn out well for FOX.

Jonathan Coulton showed up at John Hodgman's live podcast on Saturday night in San Francisco. John started singing Coulton's version of "Baby Got Back" and Coulton appeared on stage behind him. Hodgman paid him a couple bucks while muttering, "He should be happy for the exposure." Needless to say, the crowd erupted. It was awesome.

I dont usually post stuff like this but this is just so in-your-face insultingly arrogant by Fox Network.

Fox damns piracy - "It started of course with music. Pirated CDs, the first currency of Black Market bartering" http://youtu.be/00Tz1f29YJo?t=47s

Fox continues to pirate other peoples songs for their own shows: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03_Lcnk6SzE - they were too lazy to even edit out the "quack" so instead they just used the track with the center sound killed.

The producers from the show, Glee, even had the audacity to respond to Jonathan Coultrons inqueries about the song "that I should be happy for the exposure (even though they do not credit me, and have not even publicly acknowledged that it's my version - so you know, it's kind of SECRET exposure)"

Double standards like this is why some people hate you, Fox

I don't watch Glee, but is it always so...

Well, SMUG.

I think there's a simple solution -- JoCo ought to do an entire album, a "best of" Glee, using all their arrangements, maybe stealing the actual audio verbatim in a few cases, not credit them, and put that bad boy up on iTunes. Name the album a synonym for "glee" just to be cute.

Not Matt:
................... Motherf***ers.
I would love to scream and shout at curse. But if I said what was really on my mind the MODs would ban me. So just imagine me giving the glee writers a finger. A finger the size of a medium size elephant

Got you covered:

image

I heard their version and laughed. Cheeky bastards!
Coulton came up with the backing track and rhythm himself, he just used the lyrics and they copied it. If they had a different rhythm it'd be fine.
Well it is Glee... you can't expect it to be too intelligent.

Mcoffey:
Wow, what first class cock-knockers those people are. Fuck them.

Between your comment and your Avatar I doubt the internet has anything more perfect.

@OP: This infuriates me. This could have been a moment for them to be awesome and instead they went full cock weasel.

I bet he wouldn't have even asked for money :/...

Cloudwolf616:
I like Glee........

Little heads up, you might get a warning for your post being too small.

Also, you like Glee, what does that have to do with the fact that they stole a song without permission and are being very smug about it? The whole "be happy for the exposure" sounds like the biggest kick to the balls I have ever seen. Like someone pointed out in this thread, if they simply asked, he probably would have been happy to let them cover the song, but they didn't, now I hope they pay for it.

Quaxar:
Woah.

On an unrelated note, I'm now working on a show called Squee, where a group of ragtag high school kids painstakingly repaint classical works of art.
I take it not crediting Glee is going to be fine as well?

What a coincidence, I just happen to be pitching my original show "Pee" where a diverse selection of secondary school children defecate over pictures and mechandise of Fox TV shows. I'm not going to credit Fox, but I'm sure they'll be glad of the exposure.

Ok, I don't know what else to add to this hatefest, other than the makers of Glee and the suits at FOX can all go fornicate themselves with rusty spikes. I've hated them since the pilot episode butchered Jouney's "Don't Stop Believin'" when the 2010 World Series San Francisco Giants used it as their theme song, and thsi shit makes me hate them even more!
nerd...Rage... RISIIIINNNGG!!! GRRRRRRAAAAAAAARRRRRRGH!!! HULK SMASH PUNY GLEEKS!!!

Sarah LeBoeuf:
[snip]

The stupid (and counter intuitive) thing about this is that the person most likely to have violated copyright is not Glee but Coulton.

Coulton paid a compulsory license for his cover version, via the Harry Fox Agency. So Coulton has no protection under the Copyright Act.

Coulton agreed to;

Section 115, Copyright Act:
not change the basic melody or fundamental character of the work, and shall not be subject to protection as a derivative work under this title, except with the express consent of the copyright owner

Also, in theory, Sir Mix A Lot (the original artist) could sue Coulton claiming that Coulton's version is not a direct copy and so is not covered by the statutory licience Coulton purchased.

That is how fubar'ed the copyright system has got....

TechNoFear:

Sarah LeBoeuf:
[snip]

The stupid (and counter intuitive) thing about this is that the person most likely to have violated copyright is not Glee but Coulton.

Coulton paid a compulsory license for his cover version, via the Harry Fox Agency. So Coulton has no protection under the Copyright Act.

Coulton agreed to;

Section 115, Copyright Act:
not change the basic melody or fundamental character of the work, and shall not be subject to protection as a derivative work under this title, except with the express consent of the copyright owner

Also, in theory, Sir Mix A Lot (the original artist) could sue Coulton claiming that Coulton's version is not a direct copy and so is not covered by the statutory licience Coulton purchased.

That is how fubar'ed the copyright system has got....

That's fucked up; that he could get in trouble for NOT copying Sir Mix A Lot's melody.

Hopefully the original artist has character, unlike Fox, and wouldn't stoop nearly as low.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here