Free Happy Birthday Song

Video Details

10
Hit Votes

Views: 327
Comments: 17
Favorited: 3

Add to Favorites	Report Content	Blog Video
Add to Channels	Suggest to Friends

Description:

The traditional "Happy Birthday" song is actually copyrighted, owned by Time-Warner, and they consider singing it on this site to be a "public performance" more...

Added:

Apr 8, 08 By: kenrg

Subscribers:

274

Tags:

happy birthday unhappy birthday screw you time-warner kenrg copyright

Category:

Video Blogs

URL:

Embed:

Options

Comments & Responses

Post Comment

Posted Apr 18, 08 by Mudhooks
In Canada, we can sing it and write it to our heart's content... Here, the copyright ran out in 1985... Take THAT, Time Warner.

Posted Apr 19, 08 by Mudhooks
Calling it "back bacon" (or pea meal bacon) instead of "Canadian bacon" gives you instant entry at any Canadian border crossing... just don't tell anyone that.

Posted Apr 19, 08 by kenrg
That's it! From now on, all my birthday parties will be held in the Great White North!!! Back bacon and beer for Everybody!

Posted Apr 13, 08 by PreacherWithParrots
When I read this I was sure it was directed personally to me before I saw the other comments and other Birthday songs. I thought why didn't he just send me a message. Maybe he thinks I'm an old Battleaxe, (That was the B word of choice in the 1930's more...

Posted Apr 19, 08 by Mudhooks
Ah... "Calling the motion ''wholly without merit, both factually and legally,'' the judge, Denny Chin of United States District Court, said that a person would have to be ''COMPLETELY DENSE' [my caps]' not to realize the cover was a joke, and that trademark more...

Posted Apr 19, 08 by Mudhooks
In fact, I am surprised that Warner, like Fox's attempt to claim "fair and balanced" is a copyrighted (by them) term, Warner hasn't tried to claim the rights to the term "Happy Birthday to you"...

Whatever happened to that lawsuit against Al Franken.... more...

Posted Apr 19, 08 by Mudhooks
It indicates a certain pettiness (Surely NOT!?) on the part of Warner not to do so... I mean how much could they POSSIBLY be making off it?

Posted Apr 13, 08 by kenrg
Very true about the positive PR Time-Warner could garner by giving the song to the public domain thirty years early.

I'm not sure about the Marilyn Monroe question - It's very interesting. I don't know who owned the song back in '62.

Thanks for stopping more...

Posted Apr 9, 08 by DoctorMetropolis
The erotic implications of screwing Time/Warner are indeed intriquing, and I will search for the hottest video they make and do unmentionables with it. I do realise that they may come after me for digitally enjoying myself using a product they created more...

Posted Apr 9, 08 by kenrg
The first thing that comes to mind for me is a certain Carly Simon album from the mid-70s... But I'm weird like that.

Posted Apr 9, 08 by 30andout
The confidentiality clause in my contract with a certain (unnamed) internet provider prohibits me from discussing details regarding any comments purported to be the expressed opinion of any its customers and/or employees.

Posted Apr 9, 08 by kenrg
I'll take that into consideration.

Posted Apr 9, 08 by 30andout
Time Warner being my cable and internet provider, my rendition of the original song wouldn't actually be taken "off premises". In fact, maybe all collaborations should be routed through me, to avoid any copyright issues. (And to mask any mangling more...done more...

Posted Apr 9, 08 by 30andout
That question can best be answered when we at Time Warner have completed our purchase of Live Universe/LiveVideo.

Posted Apr 9, 08 by kenrg
Now did YOU actually post that comment, or did somebody at Time-Warner post it using your account? How do I know your entire account is nothing but a shill for Time-Warner?

Posted Apr 9, 08 by resonantchaos
HAHAH great video Ken. Informative and anti-establishment in one! Had no idea that Happy Birthday was copyrighted in terms of singing it on YouTube or LiveVideo. Sad, very sad.

Posted Apr 9, 08 by kenrg
In reality, I doubt they would press a case against a vlogger, but the truth is that they could. Stupid but amazing. Thanks!