As far as I'm concerned, I'd have been happier if the case were fully litigated with a precedent set, and damages against Warner Music being as disproportionate as what the music industry wants against random file sharers.
Unclear. What is clear is that Warner/Chappell don't have a valid copyright claim, but due to the history of the song/lyrics/tune other claimants could come forward and claim to own the copyright.
Happy Birthday will DEFINITELY be in the public domain in 2030, because claims of ownership seem to end in 1935, however as the Warner/Chappell claim has been debunked it might be public domain as early as 2022.
Keep in mind that "unknown owner" and "public domain" aren't the same thing. At the moment Happy Birthday isn't old enough to be public domain, there just may not be a known or established owner, so it could be "de facto public domain."
In concede that. And I'd love to say "that could never happen" but if they want to keep Mickey Mouse out of the public domain then they need to extend the 1928 copyright yet again...
In the out of court settlement, Warner agrees to allowing a judge to declare the song to be in the public domain, however, the judge will have to agree to it.
"the settlement stipulates a proposed final judgment and order that would declare the song to be in the public domain" ... "An agreement to have a judge declare the song in the public domain is no doubt unusual and will likely command some attention by the judge on review"
Why is Warner suddenly graciously agreeing to this, you may wonder: "By agreeing to the settlement, Warners avoids going to trial to determine whether it should be punished for collecting licensing money for many decades"
> Last week, in announcing its quarterly earnings, Warner Music Group partly blamed an operating loss on expenses related to the "Happy Birthday" settlement.
Good for them. Well deserved!
Warner Music has clearly been wearing The Wrong Trousers.
Included in that loss may be all future revenues that could be attributed to the 'Happy Birthday' song though, in the form of a write-off of the value of the asset.
Well if the wrote it off they actually might end up making more money on it because depending on the original asset value it can reduce their taxable income to nothing.
Not only is her biting commentary on the insanity in copyright law succinct and direct, her musical analysis of the differences between the original "Good Morning To All" and the modern "Happy Birthday" is very surprising.
Did you know the song modulates to 4/4 time for one measure? Even though the song is always notated as never leaving 3/4?
Listen to the bit after she says '4' - it sounds syncopated in her counting. (Actually - 'syncopated' might not be the correct word - what I mean is that the '1' ceases to sound like the start of the phrase)
It may have a fermata in addition to the extra beat. The quarter-note (3/4) timing seems very rushed compared to how the song is currently sung in modern culture.
I'm quite sure the other measures are in 3/4 time. Here's[1] a fairly typical notation (first from google image search). The previous measure would be the descending D-B-G quarter notes with the lyrics "birthday dear" (two beats for "birthday", one for "dear").
The next bar, which is notated in that image as a F-E legato slur only notates the E as a quarter note. If that was played as it is notated, the part where you say the person's name would sound very rushed. We probably started holding the E to allow time for longer names, and it just stuck.
(I find it interesting that this image doesn't even include a fermata[2] on the E; it includes the triplets on "hap-py" which is not in the original, but rushes the name.)
Also, there is a slight syncopation-like effect when she says "4" - that's the triplet effect where three notes are played in the time of two (in this case a dotted-eighth + sixteenth taking (2/3 + 1/3) of a quarter note in time). That's after the extra beat.
Excellent, now we'll finally be able to legally sing a song that everybody has already been singing for almost 100 years. It's a good thing we got this in under the wire before the next Mickey Mouse extension.
$14M? They got off too easy.