User Rating: 0 / 5

Star inactiveStar inactiveStar inactiveStar inactiveStar inactive

Crazy WorldThe news have come out that the alleged owners of the copyright to the lullaby "Soft Kitty" that has been used several times in the TV show "Big Bang Theory", have sued CBS, Warner Brothers and other producers. It would seem that Edith Newlin published the lyrics in 1937 in a book which was registered with the Copyright Office in the same year. The copyright was later on renewed in 1964. As the original publisher dies, the two surviving sisters of the author, claim that they are the sole owners of the copyright.

Now think about it.

Without even considering that copyright (in all its currently-implemented forms) is nothing but distilled BS (see for example our Intellectual Property Compilation), does not strike you as something out of a fairy tale? Or, more precisely, a ridiculous affair altogether?

Here we have two sisters that have done exactly nothing, zilch, nada, zero, bupkus with the lyrics for over 60 years, now suddenly claiming for "compensation"? They could have marketized the lyrics in a myriad of ways, but they did exactly nothing (as we clearly expressed above). Did we say that they did nothing? The only reason why the lyrics are suddenly worth something is because of the success of the TV show… which… again… owes exactly nothing to the lyrics! It is the other way around. If the writers of the show would have chosen a passage from the Necronomicon describing the buggery of cuddly and fluffy animals instead of a lullaby, then that passage would have been equally famous!

It is the sweat and hard labour of the people in the show that made the lyrics worth something.

This is one of the very reasons for which we despise the concept of copyright in any form except when mutually agreed upon among parties.

And if this would not be ridiculous enough, the other question which is worth asking is this; considering that the whole concept of "copyright" is to ultimate benefit "the people", at which point in time "the people" get to benefit from it? 100 years? 200 years? 1000? Who holds the copyright to the bible? And how about the Quran?

That's right!

Expect the descendants of Christ and Muhammad to be suing the Catholic Church and Muslim organizations any time soon. And what about the Black Bible? Shouldn't Satan's descendant hold the copyright? Yes sir! The British Museum will be sued anytime now for publishing the Rosetta Stone without the owner's consent! Sure, why not! Since we are considering ridiculous scenarios, anything is possible!

This is what happens when laws wade into laughable and subjective territories demanding arbitrary rules which are always incomplete, contradictory and nonsensical. What else did you expect from organizations that brought you:

  • An institution of higher learning on floodable and flooding lands.
  • A deuterium extraction plant… in the middle of a desert (yes, it is likely to go boom!).
  • A train rail on permafrost.
  • A 100 year bond… in Euros.
  • Roads to nowhere from nowhere.
  • Drivers licenses.

And many, many more. Just look around and we guarantee that you will find something utterly ridiculous that your government, yes, yours, has done or it is doing right now. Just like the Soft Kitty copyright.

Look, this is not complicated. If the sisters believe that they deserve something, then fair enough. Let them demonstrate how have the two of them helped the show. No demonstration no money! Simple, right?

Not a chance in Hell (© by Satan).

Note: please see the Glossary if you are unfamiliar with certain words.

English French German Italian Portuguese Russian Spanish
FacebookMySpaceTwitterDiggDeliciousStumbleuponGoogle BookmarksRedditNewsvineTechnoratiLinkedinMixxRSS FeedPinterest
Pin It