Are song titles copyright?

alyssum

This is a made up example to illustrate

Neil Diamond wrote Forever in Blue Jeans. Can I write Forever in Blue Genes?

Diamond's chorus begins "Forever in Blue Jeans babe" Can mine be "Forever in Blue Genes babe"

Different tune of course

Robbo

Surely you mean "Reverend Bluejeans"?

coylemj

The 'Eat it' parody of 'Beat it' comes to mind.......

Lbeard

coylemj wrote: »

The 'Eat it' parody of 'Beat it' comes to mind.......

Under American law, parody is fair use - you can take a popular song change the lyrics for the purpose of parody. But the original artist has the option to sue for degradation of the work. You can use their copyrighted work for parody, but if the parody degrades the value of the original work, the artist has a case.

Robbo

Lbeard wrote: »

Under American law, parody is fair use - you can take a popular song change the lyrics for the purpose of parody. But the original artist has the option to sue for degradation of the work. You can use their copyrighted work for parody, but if the parody degrades the value of the original work, the artist has a case.

Interestingly, Weird Al always asks for permission (where possible) from the original artists.

AnonoBoy

Robbo wrote: »

Interestingly, Weird Al always asks for permission (where possible) from the original artists.

Nirvana sometimes used to take to the stage to his version of Smells Like Teen Spirit because they liked it so much.

Lbeard

Robbo wrote: »

Interestingly, Weird Al always asks for permission (where possible) from the original artists.

Big labels and artists can shut you down pretty quickly if you don't play ball with them. Jay Z had the plug pulled pretty quickly on the girl who did a parody Newport State of Mind.

The original owner of the work, can just be awkward.

The American fair use is for the purposes of political or satirical use. That's a political campaign taking a well known melody and putting some lyrics of meaning to it.

alyssum

Lbeard wrote: »

Under American law, parody is fair use - you can take a popular song change the lyrics for the purpose of parody. But the original artist has the option to sue for degradation of the work. You can use their copyrighted work for parody, but if the parody degrades the value of the original work, the artist has a case.

What if its not parody but completely different except likeness in title

Grolschevik

alyssum wrote: »

What if its not parody but completely different except likeness in title

So: different tune, different lyrics, similar title? No issue whatsoever.

saltyjack silverblade

As long as tune and lyrics are different the title can be the exact same. I think 13 different artists have recorded songs called "Hold on".

NoQuarter

It would depend on originality. You wouldnt be able to copyright titles that are to generic.

alyssum

NoQuarter wrote: »

It would depend on originality. You wouldnt be able to copyright titles that are to generic.

so generic as forever in blue jeans or forever in blue genes or both?

so in theory i could call it forever in blue genes

alyssum

Robbo wrote: »

Surely you mean "Reverend Bluejeans"?

i saw that clip did not know about it before

NoQuarter

alyssum wrote: »

so generic as forever in blue jeans or forever in blue genes or both?

so in theory i could call it forever in blue genes

That would be for a judge to decide. There is a lot of case law on what is considered "original" or not. It basically has to do with the amount of skill and the amount of creativity involved. So nobody here can really tell you what you can copyright or what you cant, all it would be is an opinion.

You can kind of gauge it though. "Blue Jeans" would probably be too generic. "Forever in Blue Jeans" is a lot less generic, especially considering if both were a song. If one was a song and one was a perfume its easier to spot the difference.
"forever in blue jeans whilst sipping magaritas in the banana republic" may be able to claim copyright!