More plagiarism from Glee


31 Responses to “More plagiarism from Glee”

  1. curiousrobot says:

    Their first episode (the only one I really watched) ripped off Petra Hayden’s cover of Journey’s “Don’t Stop Believing.” I thought that’s just what the show did.

    • BookGuy says:

      I know Petra Hayden’s cover, but I don’t watch the show.  Did they rip off the whole arrangement, or did they just do an acapella version of the song?

      • Kris N says:

        It was really just an a capella version of the song, which is especially apparent when you get to the chorus, since Petra’s version is very unique/quirky and Glee pretty much played it straight. Maybe there are some similarities, but nothing on the level of these latest incidents.

  2. Øyvind says:

    plagiarized by glee? never mind victimless crimes. this is a crime where everyone loses.

  3. That_Anonymous_Coward says:

    Why is everyone surprised?
    Copyright old exists for corporations to make money from the work of others, and only corporations can hold them.

    • Gerald Mander says:

      Common Law copyright dictates that the creator of a work owns the copyright. Creators can sell or lease their copyrights, however, and that’s what many do, in exchange for the big machine of promotion and distirbutuion. Are the corporations greedy cheats? Sure. Is anyone forcing the creators to assign their copyrights? No.

      • That_Anonymous_Coward says:

        You might have missed my tongue stuck squarely in my cheek… the mask makes that hard.

        If DJ Earwig had done a cover of a song from Glee, Fox would have chased him to the ends of the earth to get their due.  They would have tried to sue him, even if the law was on his side, because they have a larger war chest they would win.

        The system is unbalanced and Fox who loves to scream about people ‘stealing’ their copyrighted content is caught once again having no respect for others copyrighted material that they take to profit from.

  4. azaner says:

    When money is being made off intellectual property by its owner, CD often suggests that the property should be free for anyone to use.  Yet when money is being made by the free use of someone else’s intellectual property, CD often suggests that it’s plagiarism.  One could be forgiven for concluding from this mixed data that far from presenting a consistent position on IP issues, CD is, in fact, just “for” any perceived underdog and “against” anyone making money, no matter which side of the equation they’re on.

    That said, I hate Glee.  

  5. Ultra Fem says:

    Plagiarists crying about plagiarism? PLEASE!

    • Gerald Mander says:

      Coulton paid the Harry Fox agency for the right to do a cover version of Baby’s Got Back. Earworm mashes up existing works to create new ones. Glee used the Coulton & Earworm pieces nearly identically and did not credit, pay, or in any away acknowledge them. There’s only one plagiarist here.

      •  Is it really a new work, or is it a derivative of an existing work? I think the rights holders would be able to use the arrangement if they hold the rights to both works. It’s a sticky situation though.

    • Plagiarism is misrepresenting someone else’s work as your own. Coulton and Earworm credited the original writers and performers. Not plagiarism. Glee using someone’s original arrangement or mashup and not crediting it makes it appear that it was their work. Plagiarism.

    • Antinous / Moderator says:

      Idiots who haven’t bothered to read the post commenting?  PLEASE!

  6. Gerald Mander says:

    Cory, since you’ve written extensively on the benefits of being able to repurpose existing media (and encouraged others to do so with your own work), I’m curious where you stand on this. You seem to be dinging Glee for it. For you, is it an issue of authorship, or credit, or money, or something else?

    • Cory’s all about the Creative Commons, which is heavy on the attribution, and enables the creator to choose how their work is used.

    • That_Anonymous_Coward says:

      Pretty sure Cory is standing in the ‘THIS SUCKS’ line right now.
      Each artist gets to make their own decision where they stand.
      Had they asked or attributed I’d like to hope both of them would have been flattered and worked out something rewarding them in exposure to a much wider audience.

      The fact that Fox is making bank off of wholly lifted content, that they are then placing THEIR copyright on is going to make things even more messy.  How long until ContentID claims DJ Earwig “STOLE” Fox’s property and ends up shutting down his channel?

      Fans of Glee, there are a few it seems, will most likely never hear DJ Earwig or Jonathan Coulton, and if they do it will be assumed that they just lifted it from Fox.  Fox stole the work, they are stealing the credit for the work, and if unchecked they will erase the originals and usurp them.

      They helped rob us of having a public domain, we need to stop them from stealing more of our culture to make a buck.

  7. This whole thing confuses me. Somebody who sung a song they didn’t write is mad because someone else sang the same song and it sound sort of the same. Why not just write your own songs and stop worrying about it? 

    • bbdrvr says:

      *sigh* Coulton created an entirely new, original arrangement for the “Baby Got Back” lyrics.  He had permission to do this, and the result was an enjoyable piece of parody. Glee used Coulton’s original arrangement, complete with changed lyrics, without contacting or crediting him. Why is it so difficult for some people to see how wrong this is?

    • thembot says:

      One of the greatest things about current Internet culture is the open yet respectful remixing and reinterpreting of work purely for the love of said work.  Parody songs, remixes, fanfiction, fanart… an incredible culture of transformative work is being developed that often widens the scope and meaning of the original cultural offerings.  But one of the most important parts of this movement is CREDIT, and people being acknowledged for the contributions they have made.  If a huge company like Fox thinks it can just take someone’s hard work (and yes, original work) because the online creator does not have the same kind of copyright/legal protection as a corporate artist, then the organic and innovative online artistic culture will wither.  THAT’S why this is important.

    •  sounds ‘sort of the same?’

      Dude, this is the two songs, played at the same time:

      they even used his line, ‘Johnny C’s in trouble’ (the original says Mix-a-lot), and the character singing the song on the show is named….Adam!

      Seriously, shift the brain into gear.

Leave a Reply