Monday, February 18, 2008

"Hey! Hey! You! You!" - The Case of Avril Lavigne

We have been discussing the finer points of copyright in class and, as I hope you see, it is very important and a very real concern in today's technological environment of new media. You have heard the two songs in class and now you can watch / listen to this montage that I found on YouTube. Read the articles posted on Homework Hero and duplicated here and come up with your own opinion. As always, refer to the specific aspects of the case in your response and engage with your peers in discussion. Sharing ideas with the class here will add depth to your own reflection and, ultimately, will make you more successful.

Required Readings for the Copyright Case Study
Jamelia Case Study Reading
Avril Lavigne Plagiarism Case
Avril Denies Plagiarism Case
Avril's Case and the Lawyers
Chantal Says She is Sorry
Chantal Retracts Her Criticism

NEW! Settlement reached in Avril Lavigne 'Girlfriend' lawsuit

Another Great Article with Some Interesting Statistics





THEN...
After you post about the Avril / Rubinoos situation, do some research and find a copyright infringement case that we have not discussed in class. Post it here. It doesn''t have to be music related (but there are a lot of examples here), just something relatively high profile. Be sure to state the facts of the case, provide links (embed YouTube clips for us all to compare), and provide your own opinions based on your specific knowledge of the Copyright Act and the effect that infringement has on both the artist, and on the public as a whole.

  1. Brief posts will not count or be considered, but well thought-out and supported posts will be evaluated using your threaded discussion rubric!
  2. You MUST post a comment on Avril's case as discussed in class and in your readings AND on something else of your own research! References in MLA format are required (try the citation engine at the bottom of Homework Hero).

58 comments:

tanja said...

avril lavigne obviously used this song for inspiration, the hook is basically the same :S not to mention she admitted to using peaches song.. . she clearly uses other people's material to make her's better, but instead of branching off and making it her own.. she just changes the words around and calls it something new


-tanja

ah-leks said...

Avril Lavigne is nothing new or different on the music scene; even if she does carry that title its only self proclaimed, so I'm not even surprised that she is getting all this attention for stealing songs. In the beginning of her career she began bashing celebriies like Britney Spears and Hilary Duff but now she is a sell out just like them.

lessinbeen said...

Avril is clearly lacking creativity these days, however, many artists do this, and it's not limited to music. For example, what did people first say about the works of Claude Monet he pretty much ripped off nature, but really, who cares? those lillies were going to die anyway.

Since when did music become all about the money, why does it matter if somebody loses a few million dollars when they're wallowing in their millions all the while complaining about a few ripped off lyrics. I think that, if Avril Lavigne haden't ripped music off nobody would even remeber the Rubinoos...or whatever. What's the huge issue? "thoses lillies were going to die anyway." ;P

-Hollayy.

tanja said...

what do you mean who cares if she ripped off a few lyrics:S.. that's THEIR song, sometihng they took time to write.. and writing music isn't the easiest thing in the world to do or avril could come up with her own songs instead of ripping everyone else off.

i know i get mad when i say sometihng and then someone else says it the next day... it's just the way it is..nobody likes it when other people use their own stuff

Sonya!AtTheDisco said...

i think hollys right..the rubinoos wont be remembered if i wasnt for her but that doesnt mean shes off the hook. Avril clearly has ripped off peaches song even if she said shes her fan. Maybe it was a tribute?

tanya o said...

being a singer is mostly about writing your own lyrics and melody's. If everyone else takes time to write there own, why can't she? :S

mal =) said...

Avril may have used the song for inspiration, but a litte TOO much inspiration. Ok, i can understand maybe one song that "accidently" sounds similar...but theres more than one case..which seems odd to me =S..She should have maybe stuck to letting other people write her music while she just performs it.

lessinbeen said...

this is what i mean when i say "who cares?"

Have you ever listened to "i want to be your boyfriend"? prior to the other day? or is it the fact that Avril ripped them off that has gotten them recognised by people who weren't exactly around in 1979. How would they even get noticed by us if they weren't ripped off? that song would have disappeared altogether.

ah-leks said...

These days its UNCOMMON to have an artist write music by themselves, but I'm not bashing Avril because she can't write her own songs, I'm bashing her because she lied about her "original" image/music and then gave into the hollywood scene, which everyone saw coming anyway.

lessinbeen said...

personally i think everything involving money is a conspiracy, perhaps this is too. how are we to know that this wasn't set up for the rubinoos so they could be noticed one last time?

LBurton24 said...

Although Avril Lavigne clearly got her idea of these songs from the Runinoos, Peaches etc, wouldn't you agree that her version of them is a lot more entertaining and is already more popular than those older songs, despite being much newer? I'm sure we've all taken a general idea from someone else, but put our own spin on it to make it our own. Only problem is we usually cite the work or say where it's from where Avril just stole it without the permission.

I'm not saying I'm defending Avril, or saying I like that type of garbage music..but a few ideas she supposedly took here and there from these other songs shouldnt be too much of a problem. I think the Rubinoos are getting more attention now than they ever have in their "prime". Isn't that the whole purpose of a band? So called fame and attention?

NEW YORK GIANTS 2008 SUPER BOWL CHAMPS(L)

lessinbeen said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
mal =) said...

Why would the rubinoos care to be remembered one last time? They already had their time in the music business when they were younger and performing. I think they were just plain mad to know that one of their songs was being cheated by a young girl who claims to know how to write music when reallllly she uses other people's ideas. Not cool.

tanya o said...

This is 2008, songs are going to vanish and disappear, thats why you come up with new ones, and obviously Avirl cannot so she takes them from others. I'm not saying shes a bad singer, but at least when you "sing" it should be from you own heart.

tanja said...

uhh.. thats not the point:S they had their time and that's great but now it's obviously a different generation so when avril digs deep to uncover old inspiration that's just ridiculous:S the point is that she's a joke:| she rips off other people's stuff and calls it her own.. and even if she didn't write her own songs.. someone else on her team did, so either way one person is to blame and that person is SADDDD.

lessinbeen said...

she imitated but did not rip the WHOLE THING off, "hey hey you you" is just two words lol. then something about a girlfriend. so she ripped a few words and oh noez, syllables. :P i don't think that's worth a few million, i'd pay 10 bucks lol

saara said...

It's true that noone would remember the Rubinoos if it wasn't for Avril, but that doesn't mean that she didn't steal the song. Even though she says "I had never heard this song in my life and their claim is based on 5 words," she might have heard Lushs cover of the song "I wonna be your girlfriend" and used that as her inspiration.

Lavigne writes on her official Web site. "All songs share similar lyrics and emotions. As humans we speak one language." I agree with that, alot of songs are similar in some way but in her case it's clearly not just a slight similarity. The 70's song "I wonna be your boyfriend" and her 2007 hit "Girlfriend" both have the same melody, especially the clap of the drum, it's identical. The hook is also very similar Avril modernized it a bit but it's still obvious that she ripped off the song.

ALEX said...

Avril Lavigne can write music if she really wanted to, why she didnt just write new material i have no idea, but i definatly think she copied that song , girlfriend. and others. if you listen to her eariler music its completly different. why cant you just keep to the orginal!!

jennuhfer said...

Avril said she had never heard of the Rubinoos but it is reasonable to assume that she has heard of Lush. She must have taken the song even if she did not do it intentionally (she did it). Yes, sometimes songs do sound similar but this case is completely different. She has admitted to taking her ideas from other artists so why couldn't she have taken this from the Rubinoos (or Lush)? It just makes sense.

I agree, she is in no way creative and she started out implying she was not going to become a sell-out like many other female artists in the industry but to be honest, to be successful in the industry you have to conform to what people want to see. Which is what she did, and in the process she just happened to rip off a few artists who work hard doing what they are doing.

Brandon said...

Avril's song and The Rubinoos song at first seems fairly different, but there are some similarities that stand out such as the chorus. The chorus has similar rhythm, tempo and lyrics as well. I never thought she copied any other song until I heard the chorus of both songs.

Like jennuhfer said, Avril might have heard of Lush. Since Lush's song was based off of The Rubinoos song, Avril still technically copied from The Rubinoos even if she never heard The Rubinoos' song. The Rubinoos may be getting more publicity, but that is no excuse for the crime she has committed.

DavidParker said...

I agree with what Holly said, that one line is approximately 3 seconds long, I'm not entirely sure on copyright laws, but personally, I don't think I'd really care if one line of my song was used.

And also, how can everyone put the blame on Avril alone, I can almost guarantee you, she didn't write that song alone.

Personally, I'm not a fan of Avril, I could care less whether or not her career fails or not, all I'm saying is, we can't hate and jump to conclusions before we know as much as we can possibly learn about this situation

-DP

Nickie said...

Okay, I won't deny that I like Avril, so my response is bound to have SOME sort of bias, but as I see it, The Copywrite Law states that you can use 10% or 30 seconds of a song, so I personally see her as not guilty because she didn't break the Copyright Law. But, then again, she DID make the song more famous (in my opinion, anyway) than the Rubinoo's song 'I Wanna Be Your Boyfriend', so therefore she IS guilty. Like I said, I like Avril, and I like her singing, but from the songs I've heard from her that sound a HECK of alot similar to other singer's/band's songs makes me just a liiiiitle bit...annoyed! Like Alex said, she had good original stuff, why didn't she keep it like that? I hate to say it, and I'm ashamed to say it, but she plagarized, and the evedence is all there...

Janee=] said...

Ok, Well, My first response. And everyone else has said nothing in which I'm thinking, which is good.

I'm torn in this debate. On one side, I can see what mainly everyone else means, Avril clearly used the same rhythm line, and the same lyrics, however there is no legitimate prove that she knowingly violated the copyright law. On the other side, it is law, and she did break it, even if it was in the subconscious.
However, for the one line, it definitely wasn't a whole 10%, unless you put the lines together when there used repeatedly.
It's hard to judge, and I'm not a judge... so it's harder.

- The one, the Only, Jane =]

Yllza said...

I would have to agree with Tanja, the hook is basically the same. Avril should have never made the statement that she’s never heard the song before because I believe she either heard it from the Rubinoos or lush. Maybe she subconsciously knew it already but consciously doesn’t remember hearing it :S she plagiarized and that’s wrong she should have given a little bit of credit to the others.

jennuhfer said...

Agreed, it may not have been ten whole seconds but it seems as though the entire duration of the song the beat of the drum is almost identical which has already been stated.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEsokso8Bf8&feature=related

The Rubinoos' version is more melodic but it surely is not just a coincidence that the songs sound so much alike.

Kayce said...

“Lavigne has said she’d never heard the Rubinoos song, while her manager, Terry McBride, has said he consulted a musicologist who found no similarities between the songs.”Don’t you think that a musicologist, someone whom studies similarities in music would have said yeah, there are similarities between the two songs, if there were? Instead of saying there are none? And okay, let’s not forget that Avril did not write this song alone in the first place! She may be correct as to never hearing the song, maybe Luke had heard the song before and that’s how it happend. The only similarities that even caught The Rubinoos attention was the “hey, hey, you, you”, which are a use of common and widely used lyrics!

-Kayce

tashaa said...

http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1564324/20070709/lavigne_avril.jhtml

this website has an article that talks about avril lavigne and the rubinoos issue with copyright. it states that avril isn't their only target for riipping off their songs. i think both of them are doing wrong. avril lavigne admitted to copying peaches song, her song keep holding on and my chemical romance's song the black parade have a very close intro, different instruments and a different tempo, but otherwise they sound the same. so she's done it before, why wouldn't she do it again? she copies songs because she's not talented enough to keep coming up with her own stuff. girlfriend and the rubinoo's song i wanna be your boyfriend aren't entirely the same, but "hey, hey, you, you I wanna be your girlfriend" is the same lyric from lush's cover of "i wanna be your girlfriend" the music sounds similar, and when you can play the two songs together and the words still fit like that person did on youtube, then clearly it's copied.

Brandon said...

Here's a couple of images of the song in waveform. I'm not a great analyzer, but perhaps someone else can make better use of these.

Avril's Song
Rubinoos' Song

Unfortunately, I had to horizontally scale the images because photobucket has restrictions. I don't think that will make much of a difference though. The waves in Avril's songs appear to have much higher amplitudes than the waves in The Rubinoos' song.

Janee=] said...

My secound post, SECOUND.
Well, after listening to both songs, for a large amount of time, it seems that the songs are wayyyy too alike. Not just the lyrics, but the instruments are sharing the same qualties. Theres no way this could be coincidence. So yeah, my first blog was for her... kind, but now I guess I'm a little against.
Also, if I have to listen to that song again, I'm pulling for hair out.

niicole said...

i agree with jane, that this subject leans both ways.
because both songs have "hey, hey, you, you..." this could be copied, or it could be a coincidence. also, they both have the same meaning, but avril's version just has a more up-beat tempo and a couple extra new lyrics. so on that note i can understand why they would have held a lawsuit against her.
but then again, i think the rubinoo's would be thankful if she used their song as an inspiration, even if it was a little too much 'inspiration.'
considering she is a top seller in this day and age, and by her using their song as 'inspiration' she brought apart of the rubinoo's back, when most people had never even heard of the rubinoos.

BRIARs media blog said...

nicole i totally agree with you, but she should have done her research and made sure she wasn't copying anyone else and ask the Rubinoos for permission. Lush did it, so Avril Lavigne has no excuse.

Brandon said...

I disagree with you, Nicole. The Rubinoos may be gaining popularity, but they probably feel very angry since they were not even credited. If Avril really did copy The Rubinoos, it is disrespectful to them even if it does have a positive effect as well. People tend to focus on the negative so it's unlikely that The Rubinoos would be thankful for someone copying their hard work.

Below is a page that shows a bunch of copyright infringement cases with the popular video game company, Nintendo. One that really stands out is the "Donkey Kong" issue they which was thought to be way too similar to the movie, "King Kong".

Nintendo Copyright Infringement Cases

*~.Kaydie.~* said...

Okay, So I've been listening to the Rubinoo's and Avril all weekend, and i honestly say if i heard either of those songs on the radio, and they stick in my head, i curse media.
they are so alike, in so many different ways. I heard one, i think of the other.
It Drove Me nuts.
So I think i'm against Avril on this one.
My Cousins even thought the Rubinoo's were just a remix on Avril. took me hours to set them straight.
But Anyways. Yes.
I Say, Avril = 0
Rubinoo's = 1

Taylor mac said...

yee yo so like avrils career is going down hill the whole ill be punk and skateboard n punch shit is Old! in this case i would say yes she stole that chorus she may not have realized it but they sound to similar, but it doesnt matter nobody knows the rubinoos? or whatever and in 5 years avril wont be remember'dd

kelsey =] said...

Yeah I definitely agree with nicole and briar. If Avril was going to use someone else's song for inspiration she should have asked them for permission. When we use someone else's information in an essay or paper we always have to cite our work so it should be the same for her because no one wants something they worked hard on stolen and published by someone else. But I also do agree that probably no one had even heard of the rubinoos until this whole thing happened so she did give them a lot of publicity.

But, I don't get why she's copying songs now, her original one's were fine and she didn't copy any of them.

lauren! said...

“I had never heard this song in my life.” This is a direct quote from Avril herself referring to the Rubinoo’s “I Want to be Your Boyfriend”. So why are we immediately assuming that she’s lying? Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think any of us hung out with Avril prior to “Girlfriend” being written to witness her listening to “I want to be Your Boyfriend”. So how do we really know? No way can any of us give her the benefit of the doubt. We’d much rather believe that she’s lying and say that she did steal the idea from the Rubinoos just so we can sit back and watch her suffer through copyright laws.

“I want to be your boyfriend” was a huge hit in 1978, six years before Avril was even born. So why is it so hard to believe that she never heard this song before? “Careless Whisper” by Wham!, “Separate Lives” by Phil Collins and “Broken Wings” by Mr. Mister were 3 major hits of 1985 which was six years before I was born and I’ve never heard any of them. Does that mean I’m lying too?

And even if she had heard the Rubinoo’s song before, or possibly the Lush version..there’s definitely not enough proof for her to be found guilty. Like Kayce said, if there was enough evidence, clearly the professional musicologist who was involved would have found something.

I believe we’re grasping at straws here. Even though the lyrics “Hey! Hey! You! You!” are the same, the songs have totally different messages. The Rubinoo’s say

“Hey, you, I wanna be your boyfriend,
trying to say I wanna be your number one”

expressing their excitement and “aw” towards a particular woman. However, Avril goes on to sing

“I don’t like your girlfriend!
No way! No way! I think you need a new one
Hey! Hey! You! You! I could be your girlfriend”

stating how much she dislikes a man’s particular gf and how she can do so much better. Personally, I get completely different impressions from each song.

Last but not least, if you were to ask me about the Rubinoo’s a few weeks ago, my response would have been “huh?” Now, after discussing the Avril Copyright Law and listening to the Rubinoo’s music for the VERY FIRST time, I know who they are. Thanks to this little issue, both Avril and the Rubinoo’s have received more media attention. Simply google “Rubinoos” and up comes numerous links discussing the latest scandal. Coincidence or not?

Sonya!AtTheDisco said...

i totally agree with all the like 1000000000 words lauren says. Its obvioulsy not a coincidence that avril's song and the rubinoos's song are the same.

"We are not so naive as to chalk it up to some sort of cosmic coincidence," Dunbar said. "The lyric, the meter, the rhythm - they're identical."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/09/AR2007070901127.html
(check this out to read more)

Mr. A. Puley said...

Here is a case that Lauren (props!) brought up in class....

Miley Cyrus versus Corey Hart

Click Here to Visit a Blog featuring clips from both songs

Question is....
Did she have permission
And....
Is her's better?

This site seems to think so...
Miley Cyrus - See You Again

Mr. A. Puley said...

Another Miley Cyrus site:

Click Here to Listen to "See You Again" with Lyrics

Mr. A. Puley said...

YouTube Clip....

Click Here to Watch a YouTube Mash-up

Kayce said...

Okay, first off...The Rubinoos' song "I Wanna Be Your Boyfriend" sounds an awful lot like The Rolling Stones' song "Get off My Cloud". The Rubinoos has even been blamed before for the same situation that Avril's in just instead with The Rolling Stones. The Rubinoos' song seems like a rip-off of The Rolling Stones' song...the song that The Rubinoos' said that "they" wrote, and the same song that they're blaming Avril for copyright infringement. So Avril could completely be honest when she says that she's never heard of the Rubinoos or their song. Maybe she was a "inspired" from The Rolling Stones....just like The Rubinoos...for the exact same song! I don’t see how everyone can be 100% in agreement with The Rubinoos, when they possibly are guilt of copyright infringement, and not for a different song, but song that they’re saying Avril stole from them. People need to look further into things before they go off and completely bash someone.

- kayce

briar. said...

ok so maybe its the rolling stones that should be in court with avril lavinge. but wether its the rolling stones or the rubinoos it doesnt change the fact that she may have copyrighted a song.

jessica12312 said...

So far, I'll agree with everyone who has stated that it seems like a reasonable excuse for Avril to point out that she has never heard the Rubinoo's original song "I Wanna Be Your Boyfriend", whether it's because of the song's release date in relation to Avril's birth date etc. this piece of information has been used towards Avril's defense. I do not, however, believe she is telling the truth about this. I've done some extra research on Avril and the Rubinoos before "Girlfriend" was even released in an attempt to find how the connection between these two songs may have come about.

Avril Lavigne was born on Sept. 27th, 1984. Her first Album began in the year 2000 in Manhattan when she was 16, and her first album "Let Go" was released on June 4th, 2002. The #1 hit on this album, "Complicated" was rated Top 100 and it received 5 Grammy's, MTV Music Awards and MTV European Music Awards. Her newest album "The Best Damn Thing" was released on April 18, 2007.

The Rubinoo's were in 1970 and were together till 1989. They also rejoined in 1999. Their album "Back to the Drawing Board" was released in 1979 with the single "I Wanna Be Your Boyfriend". Their single received heavy airplay in England and Europe, however, not in America. Their song eventually came up in the U.S. when the Rubinoo's, in support of this album, were the opening act for Elvis Costello on his "Armed Forces" Tour.

The remake of their song "I Wanna Be Your Boyfriend" was preformed by Lush (re-entitled "I Wanna Be your Girlfriend" under authorization)on their CD Topolino, which was released on May 26th, 1998.

So, from this information we now know that Avril would have been much to young to probably have heard or remembered the Rubinoo's "I Wanna be Your Boyfriend" when it was originally released since Avril was born 5 years after. It is, however, extremely possible for Avril to have heard Lush's "I Wanna Be Your Girlfriend" seeing that Avril would have been 14 when the song was released. She got her first record deal 2 years later.

I still believe however that Avril may have heard the Rubinoo's song, and during a present date. When the Rubinoo's reunited in 1999, when Avril was 15, the Rubinoos began to release albums again, including the 63-song retrospective "Everything You Always Wanted to Know About the Rubinoos" which was released and preformed in 2007, the same year Avril's CD "The Best Damn Thing" was released. "Girlfriend" may have already been created by the time the Rubinoos released this new CD, but the replaying of "I Wanna be Your Boyfriend" so close to when Avril released her song may have caught the attention of some people.

She may have not heard this song, but I believe it is 100% possible that Avril has heard either Lush's or the Rubinoo's version. I don't believe
Avril can use "not hearing the song before" as a valid excuse because of what I have learned based off of this information.

Here are the links to my information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rubinoos
http://music.aol.com/song/i-wanna-be-your-girlfriend/2168163

Sorry this is so long, had a lot to say. Will be posting again.

-jessica

Noori.G said...

Avril Lavigne definently stole that song from the Rooben"Whos".The day Puley showed us thos songs was the day i first heard both of those songs.I might not like any of dem song but clearly when i heard the Avrils verse nd then the Rooben"what evers" they were FREAKEN IDENTICAL MANNNN!Avril should through some cash toward the Rooben"who evers" cuz after i heard that Hey Hey you you stuff, it was very catchy. Nice job Avril ;)!!!

-NOORI(YOU KNO WHO IT IZ)

Nickie said...

To be honest, my oppinion hasn't changed from the last post I made, but, thanx to Lauren, and her, as Sonya said, "all the like 1000000000" she wrote, has changed my oppinion a little, for the better of Avril. Like she said, they have completely different messages! One thing that I have convinced myself of is that Avril may have heard that particular song by Lush, and thought she may be able to change it around to have a different meaning, but, like I said before, she didn't EXACTLY break the Copyright Law! Oh man, I am so confused now... Is she guilty? Is she innocent? But more importantly...when will she be available again?? ~_^

]ΛvΛЯіччΛ said...

Avril Lavigne's song "girlfriend" was definitely not 100% her own. Whether it be conciously or subconciously and whether it be from The Rubinoos' song "I wanna be your boyfriend," Lush's "I wanna be your girlfriend", the rolling stones' "get off my cloud" or any other song out there that's similar to these songs (cuz people keep finding songs that are) Avril Lavigne and/or Luke (Avril's songwriting partner) had to have gotten inspiration from somewhere. The reason for this is because Avril Lavigne's "girlfriend " and the Rubinoos "I wanna be your boyfriend" are waaay too similar..too similar to be considered a coincidence. OK maybe the lyrics "hey, hey you you" can't be considered to have been plaigarized because not only are they "common and widely used lyrics", but those words aren't more than 30 sec. of the song either (30 sec. is less than 10%of the song). The tempo is also a little different; Avril's song is faster. However, the rhythm through more than 30 sec. of both songs is identical!! Entertainment lawyer Dave Steinberg says that "copyright infringement is really about the melody and or the lyrics." That means that Avrils's song breaks copyright law.

Plus, this lawsuit doesn't come as a shocker cuz Avril's been accused of copying before. Chantal Kreviazuk claimed that she "sent a song called "Contagious" to Lavigne. A song with the same title appears on Lavigne's latest CD" with no credit given to Kreviazuk.

Sympatico MSN. Songwriters Who Accused Lavigne of Ripping off Song Now Say She's 'exonerated'. 15 Jan. 2008. http://music.sympatico.msn.ca/Bell.Sympatico.CMS/Print.aspx?type=feed&lang....
CTV.ca. Lavigne Lawsuit Has Limited Chances: Lawyer. 5 July 2007.
CTV.ca. Avril Lavigne Hit with Lawsuit over 'Girlfriend'. 4 July 2007.

Matt said...

Avril Stated that she copied the Peaches song....so that might lead to her copying the song by the Rubinoos and possibly copying the intro off of My Chemical Romance, because she's already used to copying someone elses song. maybe had she asked the Rubinoos for permission. They probably would have given it to her for a small fee...which i'm sure she could have come up with.

Noori.G said...

St8t up this girls career is baised on stealing other peoples style,lyrics nd instrumentals man. I totally forgot about the other videos Puley showed us lol:P. She has to start actually building her own style and writing her own music before stuff gets out of hand.Shes living off of other peoples work from the past nd trying to put her lil twist in it.I gotta give it to her tho. I was checken her sales, the gurl has some serious fans cuz she sold alot of albums. The gurl has money in da bank.But remeber, Vinella Ice was on top of the world also...for a SECOND. Hey Avril, learn from the Ice Ice baby him-self ;)

-You already kno;)

References:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let_Go_(Avril_Lavigne_album)
http://youtube.com/watch?v=FZxrMb4Cilw
http://youtube.com/watch?v=nLpQp4__OXE

]ΛvΛЯіччΛ said...

If The Rubinoos thought they had a strong enough case against Avril and really felt strongly about their song being copied, they wouldn't have ended up exonerating Avril. At first Dunbar said that "the lyrics, the meter, the rhythm they're identical." Later, Dunbar and Gangwer stated, "We are satisfied that any similarities between the two songs resulted from Avril and Luke's use of certain common and widely used lyrics." In the 2nd statement, the Rubinoos don't even mention the fact that the rhythm is STILL THE SAME! So it seems that the Rubinoos' goal wasn't to get Avril to pay for plagiarizing, but something else. Maybe they thought this was a great way to get some publicity and a chance for them to be discovered or rediscovered. So even if the Rubinoos have exonerated Avril, the case was settled out of court, so this doesn't mean that Avril didn't REALLY plagiarize.

Basically, I think that Avril is guilty of plagiarism, but i have a feeling that the Rubinoos' intentions of accusing avril of plagiarizing weren't so right either.

ABC News. Avril Lavigne Denies Plagiarism Claim.
Sympatico MSN. Songwriters Who Accused Lavigne of Ripping off Song Now Say She's 'exonerated'. 15 Jan. 2008. http://music.sympatico.msn.ca/Bell.Sympatico.CMS/Print.aspx?type=feed&lang....

kelsey =] said...

I do like Avril Lavigne and I understand where people are coming from when they say they don't think she's guilty, but i still think that she is guilty of plagiarism. It even says in an article "Yet music industry experts say the Rubinoos might have a case."

okay yeah so the rubinoos maybe copyrighted from the rolling stones and no one said anything to them about it, but like briar said it doesn't change anything Avril still did wrong just like they might have done so it doesn't make her the bigger person. "All songs share similar lyrics and emotions. As humans we speak one language." I definitely agree with what she says here but the rhythm and the hook are the same.

I completely agree with javariyya it seems like the rubinoos were definitely trying to get some extra publicity because before no one even knew who they were.

]ΛvΛЯіччΛ said...

Another music-related copyright infringement case is one filed against Beyonce Knowles. Jennifer Armour of Minneapolis claims that Beyonce illegally used lyrics from her song "Got a Little Bit of Love for You" in her own hit "Baby Boy." Beyonce has been found not guilty. Visit the folling sites for full information.
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory?id=3685558
http://www.undercover.com.au/News-Story.aspx?id=3762
http://www.aceshowbiz.com/news/view/00013249.html

Visit the following sites to listen to both songs involved in this case.
Beyonce's "Baby Boy:"
http://youtube.com/watch?v=qTLLoHVzSBo
(will post link to Jennifer Armour's song "Got a Little Bit of Love for You" once i find it)

jessica12312 said...

There is no doubt in my mind that the Rubinoos took this case to their advantage to reel in another shot of stardom, but in the same respect I understand that they had the right to accuse Avril based off of the factors that we've all discussed, so really they ended up getting the respect that they deserved for the stolen song, with an extra cherry on top.

Noori.G said...

If i were the Rooben"whos" i would be up Avrils a** right now for cash money. The only reason she made money is cuz that damn line is catchey("Hey hey you you...").O yea the catchey line she basiclly stole from them.Therefore in my opinon, the reason for her sucess is cuz of the Rooben"whos".

Final conclusion: Avril is guilty f stealing the song "Girlfriend" from the Rooben"whoevers" lol :P


-They already kno ;)

Yllza said...

I’m going to have to agree with Jessica I also believe the Rubinoos took this case to their advantage of having another shot of freedom. If it wasn’t for Avril I would have never known the Rubinoos and nor would other people. This case they held against Avril did bring them fame no doubt about that but that still doesn’t get Avril off the hook. It was still wrong that she plagiarized their song. If she got permission we would never be having this discussion !!!

said...

I think Avril Lavigne did plagiarized most of the song like the tempo, rhythm and the main part of the lyrics which is the chorus. Not only this, she did some what of a image theft as her whole identity, and you can see that when you watch the third youtube clip that mr.puley posted. It doesn't matter if Rubinoos accused her of plagiarizing to become famous or get more attention, just by listening to parts of both songs, you can tell she used the same song but changed a few words. Another thing, yes she does have a different meaning to the song but then why the same beat and rhythm? She did plagiarize and at the same time she didn’t. Like another student in this class mentioned before, the law states that you are allowed to copy 30 seconds or 10% of a song and that’s exactly what Avril did. She is famous, and rich, but she’s famous because she used another artist lyrics, beats and ideas. I guess I agree with some of the girls that posted a comment about how Avril copied the song but made it sound better so people in 2008 would still listen to it. Also, I never heard of the Rubinoos until NOW! So maybe this was an advantage for both Avril and the Rubinoos because they both came on the stage again. Even if Avril was accused of plagiarizing, she still sold many albums and made a lot of money off this song. It bothered people in the beginning that she copied the song but in a month or two after being accused, people dropped it and were still her fan and listened to this song without thinking about her copying the Rubinoos. Some people say she plagiarized, some say it was an inspiration, and others say it was coincidence. But at the end of the day, no one really cares if she plagiarized or stole the song. She’s famous and rich, and I guess that’s just how it’s going to be no matter if she continues to use other artists words, beats or rhythms.

~*~harp<3~*~

Kayce said...

I'm not saying that Avril copied the Rolling Stones either. I'm making a point that if you honestly get all of the songs that say "Hey,you" in the lyrics, then what are they going to try and find out who copied who? No, those words are honestly so common, everyone says it at least 10 times a day, why would it be hard to think to put them in a song of yours? It wouldn't. And melodies and rythms are similar in a ton of songs, not because they copied someone, but because they have similar taste in music and they both created seperate but simlar melodies. It's just like how inventions get thought up by way more than one person on a regular basis, they didn't copy eachother..they just had the same idea. And same with school projects...look at how many of you have the same idea as to what you think, you're not copying eachother, it's your personal preference on a situation, just like it can be a personal preference in music, books, looks, personality, etc.

- Kayce

Matt Dean said...

My thoughts towards this have still not changed i still think that even though she copied a couple of sentences/lyrics from the Rubinoo's(Proper Spelling Noori..lol), and the beat sounds the same but a little faster/ upbeat and that's what caused Tommy to look more into the lyrics/ beat of the song. The "Hey Hey You You" part is what most people focus on when they should focus more on the beat....(i listened to it too much sir...ThankYou...) the Drums and the drums and the guitar sound the same except faster and a little bit more added on to the riffs. Now that more and more artists make things up for guitar riffs they start to sound alike from another song because there's only so many note/chord combinations that work in harmony and they do kinda sound the same after it has been used a few times in combination with another riff just played higher up on the frets,and same with drum beats there's only so many that work.

forbzy said...

I would say Avril Lavigne used this song for a little more inspiration. There is clear similarities between the two songs and for Avril to deny ever hearing the song I think is ridiculous. This isn't the only song Avril has been accused of stealing just the most evident.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0d2z-dWZmE&feature=related