According to The Rubinoos, Avril’s song “Girlfriend” is the same as their song “I wanna be your boyfriend”. The Rubinoos claim the lyric, the meter and the rhythm are identical and she that Avril stole the “heart and soul” of their song. Avril states “I had never heard this song in my life”.
Personally, I think the two song sound nothing alike, besides that one line “hey hey, you you…” besides that I see no similarities. In the copyright code it states that you can use 2% of a song without risk of copyright infringement. I am pretty sure four words is only 2%. I think the Rubinoos are being ridiculous for bringing this up. They are probably mad that their career is in the past and Avril Lavigne made a lot of money off that song.
You can’t just claim that someone stole the “heart and sole” of your song. When I look at songs such as break up songs, they all have the same story line! Someone cheats on someone, they’re left alone, still miss their love, want them to come back, etc. Break up songs either talk about how much they want the person back, or how much better off on their own. That is why I think it is absolutely ridiculous to say that someone stole the “heart and soul” of your song. That is like a movie producer saying that another movie stole the “heart and soul” of their movie. Meanwhile, we all know that all romance movies have the same story lines. They have a perfect life together, break up, meet up again later, and realize they’re still in love even if they’re with new people.
After revisiting this issue, my opinion has not changed towards the Rubinoos situation, but I do really wonder about Avril. After watching the videos on Brittany Lennox’s blog, I definitely see similarities in her “Keep holding on” song and My chemical romance’s song. Also defiant similarities between Avril’s “I don’t have to try” song and Peaches “I’m the kinda”. In those situations I definitely would say that Avril copyrighted. Although as far as the Rubinoos I still completely disagree.
Personally, I think the two song sound nothing alike, besides that one line “hey hey, you you…” besides that I see no similarities. In the copyright code it states that you can use 2% of a song without risk of copyright infringement. I am pretty sure four words is only 2%. I think the Rubinoos are being ridiculous for bringing this up. They are probably mad that their career is in the past and Avril Lavigne made a lot of money off that song.
You can’t just claim that someone stole the “heart and sole” of your song. When I look at songs such as break up songs, they all have the same story line! Someone cheats on someone, they’re left alone, still miss their love, want them to come back, etc. Break up songs either talk about how much they want the person back, or how much better off on their own. That is why I think it is absolutely ridiculous to say that someone stole the “heart and soul” of your song. That is like a movie producer saying that another movie stole the “heart and soul” of their movie. Meanwhile, we all know that all romance movies have the same story lines. They have a perfect life together, break up, meet up again later, and realize they’re still in love even if they’re with new people.
After revisiting this issue, my opinion has not changed towards the Rubinoos situation, but I do really wonder about Avril. After watching the videos on Brittany Lennox’s blog, I definitely see similarities in her “Keep holding on” song and My chemical romance’s song. Also defiant similarities between Avril’s “I don’t have to try” song and Peaches “I’m the kinda”. In those situations I definitely would say that Avril copyrighted. Although as far as the Rubinoos I still completely disagree.
Work Cited
Mark Liddell. “Avril Lavigne: Best Damn Thing CD”. Unknown date. Online image. Girls Who Rock. December 22, 2007.
No comments:
Post a Comment