If she didn’t hear it, she wouldn’t approve it.As for the lyrics, I also find them weak. Again, Al's words:
Okay then. I decided – based on my belief that people are basically good – to go through the trouble and considerable expense of actually recording the song. Now, I never do that – never. But because I was really excited about this parody, I decided I would faithfully jump through as many hoops as Gaga deemed necessary.
I was right in the middle of my Australian tour and I didn’t have a whole lot of free time, but I cranked day and night until I had a set of finished lyrics.I don't know his usual turn-around on songs, but that seems fast. I understand sometimes inspiration strikes, but this seems like a slightly distorted photo-copy of the original, with some of the usual Weird Al kookiness (kielbasa, ha!).
I had written, recorded, mixed and mastered 11 of the 12 songs for my new album and was just waiting to come up with that one elusive “big idea” for a parody that I thought I could turn into the lead single and video. I was well aware that “Born This Way” was coming out, and I thought that just might be the pop culture juggernaut I had been waiting for… but after hearing the song, I was reluctant to tackle it. Because it was such an earnest human rights anthem, I thought some people might consider a parody to be in poor taste. Plus, I was really kinda predisposed not to do a Lady Gaga parody anyway because, well, that’s what everybody in the universe was already assuming I would do, and I hate to be so predictable.
But a few weeks later, a parody idea popped into my head, and I thought it had a lot of potential – enough to warrant telling my record label that I’d finally found my next single. Based on my concept, I was reasonably sure that my parody wasn’t really going to offend anybody… but I still decided, as an act of good karma, that I would donate all the money from sales of the song and music video to the Human Rights Campaign.
The Court did find the third factor integral to the analysis, finding that the Court of Appeals erred in holding that, as a matter of law, 2 Live Crew copied excessively from the Orbison original. Souter reasoned that the "amount and substantiality" of the portion used by 2 Live Crew was reasonable in relation to the band's purpose in creating a parody of "Oh, Pretty Woman". The majority reasoned "even if 2 Live Crew's copying of the original's first line of lyrics and characteristic opening bass riff may be said to go to the original's 'heart,' that heart is what most readily conjures up the song for parody, and it is the heart at which parody takes aim." The Supreme Court then looked to the new work as a whole, finding that 2 Live Crew thereafter departed markedly from the Orbison lyrics, producing otherwise distinctive music.posted by hippybear at 12:34 PM on April 20, 2011 [3 favorites]
Looking at the final factor, the Supreme Court found that the Court of Appeals erred in finding a presumption or inference of market harm (such as there had been in Sony). Parodies in general, the Court said, will rarely substitute for the original work, since the two works serve different market functions. While Acuff-Rose found evidence of a potential "derivative" rap market in the very fact that 2 Live Crew recorded a rap parody of "Oh, Pretty Woman" and another rap group sought a license to record a rap derivative, the Court found no evidence that a potential rap market was harmed in any way by 2 Live Crew's parodic rap version. In fact, the Court found that it was unlikely that any artist would find parody a lucrative derivative market, noting that artists "ask for criticism, but only want praise."
The majority reasoned "even if 2 Live Crew's copying of the original's first line of lyrics and characteristic opening bass riff may be said to go to the original's 'heart,' that heart is what most readily conjures up the song for parody, and it is the heart at which parody takes aim." The Supreme Court then looked to the new work as a whole, finding that 2 Live Crew thereafter departed markedly from the Orbison lyrics, producing otherwise distinctive music."This is likely the most glowing review 2 Live Crew has ever received.
Cremaster Cycle? At $100,000 for the DVD set and periodic screenings - no wonder only 1800 or so comments mention it.Other methods exist.
I know this news is disappointing to many of you.Yes, Al. I am really disappointed about not seeing the video to a song I wouldn't have known about if you hadn't just told us about it.
My parodies have always fallen under what the courts call “fair use,” and this one was no different, legally allowing me to record and release it without permission. But it has always been my personal policy to get the consent of the original artist before including my parodies on any album, so of course I will respect Gaga’s wishes.he is engaging in what is politely called "spin?" Again, I point this out as a fan of Yankovic's work.
I know this news is disappointing to many of you.Yes, Al. I am really disappointed about not seeing the video to a song I wouldn't have known about if you hadn't just told us about it."
She said no because she knew Al would be better looking than her. Self-absorbed and ugly to boot.based entirely on a single-source blog post from someone with an image to manage?
(My record company needs 8 weeks of advance notice to confirm an album release date – so in order to be as timely as possible, I almost always have to lock in the date before I’ve even started writing the lead single.)His recording timeline straight up assumed that she would give him permission - how is that fair to Gaga at all?
In late 2010, a classmate of Black and music-video client of Ark Music Factory, a Los Angeles label, told her about the company.[11] Black's mother paid $4,000 for Ark Music to produce her daughter's music videoWho doesn't know some high school girl whose parents were paying all kinds of money to get a "modeling portfolio" or demo reel or what-have-you? At least Black grew up in Anaheim - it was pretty sad when small-town kids would get suckered in by these riches-to-riches stories.
After putting my Lady Gaga parody on YouTube this morning – and announcing that it wouldn’t be on my next album because Gaga didn’t approve it – there was a huge outpouring of disappointment from the Internet.So now that the farmer and the cowman are friends, the rest of us should put aside our differences and focus on the real enemy. And I think we all know who that is.
Apparently the fact that she didn’t approve it was news to Lady Gaga herself!
Gaga’s manager has now admitted that he never forwarded my parody to Gaga – she had no idea at all. Even though we assumed that Gaga herself was the one making the decision (because, well, that’s what we were TOLD), he apparently made the decision completely on his own.
He’s sorry.
And Gaga loves the song.
I’m thrilled on many levels to hear this, because 1) I truly respect and admire Gaga as an artist and it pained me to think of her as having less than a great sense of humor, and 2) it means I GET TO PUT OUT MY ALBUM!
Hey! The Strokes are awesome!Eponysterical!
posted by Lovecraft In Brooklyn at 4:39 PM on April 20 [1 favorite +] [!]
at this point someone has to take the blame, and better some flunky like the manager than Gaga, who is invested in looking authentic.And the way you do that is by establishing that your image and reputation are out of your control?
Better than looking like a humorless asshole who can't stand Weird Al parodying your srs bzns anthem and persona, I reckon.Sure, but the point was about authenticity. I'd say being humorless is more authentic than having a manager who allows persona-affecting-shit to blow up in her face. It would seem in this case that the manager is the humorless asshole here.
That doesn't follow. If they're both adults and yadda yadda free agency, etc. then there's nothing douchey about him writing the entry to reflect his interests. Inventing some counter-narrative doesn't matter; his actions would not have been "douchey" if you apply the same standard to both Gaga and Al. In that case, neither would be a bad actor.You don't have to be "materially wrong about the facts" to be a douche. That's ridiculous. He asked someone permission to so something, then when he got a no response he flipped out. That's not actually being classy or polite, that's being a passive aggressive twerp. He could have done the song without permission, or he could have not done the song. Asking permission, not getting it, then whining about it isn't the same thing.
For Al to be "douchey," he'd have to be materially wrong about the facts.
Well, you know, if that is the case, then Ms Gaga needs to fire whomever she has working as her manager, because according to more recent news reports about this situation, Gaga says she never heard the song and never gave disapproval for it. So she's employing someone who claims to speak for her but who does so without actually knowing what her wishes may be and who is actively doing the opposite of what Gaga claims she would do if she were the one being consulted.That's just not realistic. If you are, as Jay-Z says "not a business-man… a business, man" then you have to let people make decisions for you. Sometimes not the same decisions you would make and sometimes you can correct them. You can't manage every aspect yourself. Also he could just be taking a fall to make her look good.
Note to self: If I'm ever really famous and have managers and handlers, fire any of them who pull this kind of shit on my behalf. -- hippybear
I had written, recorded, mixed and mastered 11 of the 12 songs for my new album and was just waiting to come up with that one elusive “big idea” for a parody that I thought I could turn into the lead single and video.and
I was very excited now, because I knew that the second I got the official blessing from Lady Gaga, I could lock in an official release date for my album and announce it to the world. (My record company needs 8 weeks of advance notice to confirm an album release date – so in order to be as timely as possible, I almost always have to lock in the date before I’ve even started writing the lead single.)It's not like the album won't happen without the Born This Way parody. It's more like, he tries to plan his albums with a parody of whatever the HUGE single is close to the time of its release so he can be timely (always important for a pop-culture parodist) and to help give his release a boost. Without that parody, he'd have to work to find a new lead single.
« Older The Thinking Atheist: 'Nothing More To Talk About'... | British photojournalist and fi... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by everichon at 11:05 AM on April 20, 2011 [16 favorites]