Colin Hay did say at a solo concert that he did that the flute riff was taken form the kids song "Kookaburra Sits in the Old Gum Tree" and that lead to Men At Work getting sued so if Colin Hay had've kept his mouth shut Men At Work would not have been sued.
Aye' ..and Jack and Jill went up a Hill, is a rip off', of Stairway To Heaven ...F'in people annoy me so they dae ....anything for money ....better watch you don't drop your guitar, or Pink Floyd might sue you ..ha ha
Unbelievable!! Only a few notes match up. Do the people in the courts not realize that we musicians only have a choice of a few notes to make music with?! There are millions, if not billions, of songs written; many have a few consecutive notes in common.
The awful part of this is that the person who wrote the song died and sold the rights to a publishing company. It is the publishing company who has taken legal action. The person who wrote the tune is not getting paid from the settlement.
Kraft had better sue MAW immediately for usage of the word/product/slogan "vegemite". Oh shit, I just said vegemite, maybe I'll get sued too. This whole thing is a disgrace
"Down Under" is one of my favorite songs. "Kookaburra Sits in the Old Gum Tree" has nothing to do with the distinctive flute riff in "Down Under". I strongly support "Men at Work" on this issue. The court should reconsider its decision!
so the court just denied the appeal. What a shame. My opinion is there is an ever so slight similarity of the two tunes. This is a miscarriage of justice.
Anyone notice that he's playing the riff in the video while sitting in an old gum tree (0:49)? Coincidence? I think not... They knew what they were doing... they just never thougt it would be a problem to sample an old childrens campfire song...
@westonband your acting like its completely impossible to create a like riff in a time span of about 50 years out of the millions and millions of possibilities that have already been copyrighted? How bout you get your head out of your ass for once in your life, dumb ass.
I love how when they put them together they could only play like 2 seconds because they don't match up nor sound the same AT ALL!!! Wow I can't believe they lost this case. So sososososo dumb! I only want to listen to down under more now. Stupid ass lawyers.
Kookabura was used in an episode of Doctor Who. Did the BBC pay royalties? Or are they going to get sued as well? I think if the original author of a song is dies, so should the copyright.
In February 2010, an Australian judge ruled that "Down Under" did contain a flute riff based on "Kookaburra" but stipulated that neither was it necessarily the hook nor a substantial part of the hit song (Colin Hay wrote the song years before the flute riff was added by a later member of the band).[12] In July 2010 a judge ruled that the writer of Kookaburra should be paid 5% of past (since 2002) and future profits.
I AM A PRACTICING MUSICIAN OF 30 YEARS AND I TELL YOU ALL NOW THERE IS NO RESEMBLANCE WHATSOEVER!!- OR IT WOULDA BEEN PICKED UP 31 YEARS AGO, LARRIAKAN ARE DESPERATE FOR A NEW LIMELIGHT. THIS IS THE BIGGEST ROCK AND ROLL SWINDLE AUSTRALIA'S EVER HAD !! AND I WILL PROMOTE THAT FACT, IF THEY WANT TO SUE ME, GOOD LUCK!
i do believe that this so call plagarism was unintentional plus the similarity is hardly there... Even so there are so many songs out there today that contains near similar chord, riff etc... Everyone shoud jus sue each other... bunch of Larrikin morons...
That's Bullshit!!! Nothing in common,no similarities at all!!!... Two "Wonderful & Different" songs.Cheers!(Get a life,to whoever said something like this)
Colin Gay you thief!!!! You stole this from KOOKABURA SITS IN THE OLD GUM TREE!!! You are going to jail!!! Don't worry Graham Russel and Russell Hitchcock of Air Supply will visit you in jail and will sing Lost in Love Air Supply has the last laugh this time!!! Our song Now and Forever shoild have been the number song then not stolen Down Under!!!
Absolutely no similarities -and thats been run through a vocal analyser!-no 2 notes or stanzas match-and the phrasing is entireley dissimilar-the only similarities are the letters D,O,N,U,E,R. in the titles!
To Larrikin Music and Warren Fahey, here's some lyrics for your beloved little tune... "...Kookaburra sits in the old gum tree line him up with a 303 laugh Kookaburra, laugh Kookaburra..BANG!..."
Hope you get what you deserve Fahey you loser.
Men at work should put out a best of CD, I'll buy one to help them out no probs.
Who in the Federal Court of Australia got paid out to rule in the publisher's favour? This sets a dangerous precedent that should be appealed again and again. If this ruling is to be taken seriously, then music, essentially, can no longer be written.
No interest in money here at all. The two riffs are not the same. I doubt that the composer of the original piece mentioned here would see any similarity, & She would certainly not be going to court to sue for royalties.
A Publishing company after more money in my opinion.
The 2 melodies are COMPLETELY different! In any case, isn't there a statute of limitations on this? 'down under' was recorded around 30 years ago! I don't think we will have a music industry eventually, there are only so many combinations of notes.
O flautista da banda australiana Men at Work, Greg Ham, pode ter de vender sua casa para pagar direitos autorais referentes ao hit "Down Under", que foi declarada como plágio. Um tribunal de justiça de Sydney considerou que a música, foi copiada em parte de uma popular canção folk composta em 1934."Kookaburra" escrita pela professora Marion Sinclair há 76 anos, sobre um pássaro nativo da Austrália se tornou uma favorita de países como Nova Zelândia e Canadá. Sinclair morreu em 1988
É uma canção alegre e cômica sobre australianos viajando pelo mundo confiantes das virtudes de seu país e sobre a imposição da cultura norte-americana e européia às belezas naturais de seu país. A canção foi um sucesso de vendas em vários países, incluindo o Reino Unido, onde alcançou o primeiro lugar nas paradas, sendo a única canção deles a entrar nos "Top 20" daquele país. Ela tornou-se um hino extra-oficial para a Austrália para vários movimentos underground ou musicais de seu país.
It would be horrible, if a boomerang accidentally found its way to the private section of the judge that agreed with the charge of plagiarism. Not that I'm for violence. I'm just saying, it would really really hurt.
Undoubtedly Kookaburra was an inspiration for one of the back melodies in this song which is full of iconic Aussie themes.. Was it a rip off worthy of compensation... I think not. Down Under is a great song unto itself.. the key here is -"inspired by" not "stolen from".
Publishers are greedy opportunistic leeches and snails , many are failed musicians, but most are smart in either Law or Accounting. They know the law well pertaining to the contract they con you into signing for a pittance, they also know how not to account to you. Go to "NAIL THAT SNAIL" by Song Crew Music on YT, hear and see our spoof against these Snails, sung by famous singer/songwriters. Tell your friends, This will become a big story...Be lucky...Django
Oh crikey hell they don't even sound the same at all! OMG this is complete BS! I sure hope somebody gets an ass whoopin' over this. Men At Work are the bomb and don't deserve this! I hope Kookaburra gets a serious beatdown for this and the old gum tree gets chopped down and turned into firewood! Hell yeah mates! LMAO
@directconnection1969 they say if u play Down Under back ull hear it sounds the same , but srsly ! who cares if they sounds the same ?! heaps of ppl have probably done that and its dumb that men at work are getting called out for it wen heaps of ppl have probably already done it , so yeaa i agree with u
@directconnection1969 The one bar in question is clearly identical, the question was only ever whether that was a substantial enough part of the song to claim infringement... and today, the courts threw out M@W's final appeal, so they'll have to cough up.
Oh my god, who CARES!? It's not THAT similar & you're going from a vocal melody sang by a childrens choir to a solo played on an instrument. Let it go. This is absolutely absurd.
NO WAY !!! That section in question is far, far, far, to short to be a legitimate win for Kookabura. They may have one it, but Men At Work should keep fighting, cuz
they use 4 bars of the song tops. I always thought it had to be 8 to 16 bars before a legitimate claim of plagiarism could be made. Keep fighting guys take it to the next level. This song is nothing like you song.
NO WAY !!! That section in question is far, far, far, to short to be a legitimate win for Kookabura. They may have one it, but Men At Work should keep fighting, cuz
they use 4 bars of the song tops. I always thought it had to be 8 to 16 bars before a legitimate claim of plagiarism could be made. Keep fighting guys take it to the next level. This song is nothing like you song.
This tune is a child's song everyone in Australia knows. Men at Work put the riffs in their song as an honorific to an icon of Australia, just like "Vegamite" sandwiches. The flute player in the video IS sitting "in a gum tree", playing the part of the kookaburra. That being said the tune did a lot for Australian tourism to the "land down under" Great song. Silly little publisher cashes in on EMI. George Harrison and "My Sweet Lord" melody lawsuit-- much more resemblance there.
In a completely different, original song and context, a pop/folk/rock flute solo inspired by a children's song that every member of this band and every Australian grows up with, is not plagiarism.
That's how every song and music genre honors and creates a legacy, creatively inspired by previous work.
Watch out, soon they will sue every english speaking school's music class, children and campfires for singing the original "Kookaburra sits in the old gum tree"!
I hear it, but the song is called 'Down Under' and has a small snippet of notes from an Australian children's song. It just seems like they it to express a part Australias culture.
t`s farfetched, I didn`t hear it. How many bands make songs that sometimes sound like the beatles? Many background vocals and tunes from top 40 bands have a Beatles touch. The biggest problem is that many artists can`t sing and playback, not an old hit from Men at Work that makes many people sing.
It`s farfetched, I didn`t hear it. How many bands make songs that sometimes sound like the beatles? Many background vocals and tunes from top 40 bands have a Beatles touch. The biggest problem is that many artists can`t sing and playback, not an old hit from Men at Work that makes many people sing.
I am trying to hear some similarity, but after watching lots of videos, I hear absolutely nothing. I don't get it at all. Might as well have said "Land Down Under" was a rip off of "Mary Had a Little Lamb". And the judge ruled in favor of the plaintiff? LOL.
I am trying to hear some similarity, but after watching lots of videos, I hear absolutely nothing. I don't get it at all. Might as well have said "Land Down Under" was a rip off of "Mary Had a Little Lamb". And the judge ruled in favor of the plaintiff? LOL.
They do sound really alike. My trained ear also identifies that Rihanna "Umbrella" is an obvious rip-off of "Oh canada". Britney Spears also took all her songs from U2.
what a joke. They sound nothing like each other. Men at Work should feel robbed if stump up compo for this nonsense. Just aussie lawyers making a few bucks me thinks! Men now back at work on the bones of their arses to pay of this nonsense LOL!
what a joke. They sound nothing like each other. Men at Work should feel robbed if stump up compo for this nonsense. Just aussie lawyers making a few bucks me thinks!
This is an old story. Corprate douchebags trying to screw the artist. The Men at work riff is played over a different chord progression and the Kookaburra song is so old it should be covered under public domain. It's not like the original author is going to see any profit.
it is the same riff. but wtf. rappers do it all the time, if anyone should be sued they should be. even dave matthews uses children song undertones in his music. I have literally heard rap songs that have ripped of entire songs and put their b.s. lyrics over the top of it and make millions off the sweat and talent of real musicians. men at work may of taken a few notes. They were probably paying homage to australia roots by doing it like that. Big difference here. It's all about the $
I always thought you could use "samples" if their less than 4 seconds or something.
And it's totally dumb, the company obviously just wanted all the money, because this little riff that's the same melody is just 2% of the whole song.... This is just dumb.
Today a judge has ordered Men at work must pay 5% of money earned from the song since 2002 as well as future royalties.
Larrikin Music, which owns the copyright to Kookaburra Sits in the Old Gum Tree, had sought 60% of royalties.
Obviously it could've been worse for Men at Work, but I still feel a sense of injustice for them. Larrikin Music are just bloodsuckers, Dire Straits once sang about "Money for Nothing (and your cheques for free)", that's what Larrikin are getting.
the notes sound the same to me, but what do i know...
anyway, isnt there an expiration on copyright - like 25 or 50 years? i always hear about singers singing from the "standards songbook" and from that i sort of inferred that there was no longer ownership or royalties to pay? i could be wrong....
and of course australia could have different laws.
OMG u have to be kidding. It's been 20 yrs and the music company is just now complaining??? Sounds like the music company is looking for a reason to get money it's not owed and just reaching...They are not the same. Let it go Greed Meisters!
There is a similarity but it's so vague, that if it hadn't been pointed out to me, I wouldn't have known. What might add to the similarity is the fact that the flautist in the clip is sitting in a tree, which doesn't appear to be a gumtree. If the decision goes against the MAW recording, then the proceeds I think should go to the Girl Guides Association in Australia. MONEY GRUBBING !
Omg, this is so stupid! Who exacly is getting the money? I agree with Todezwis. And if you think about it, in like 100 years time, We're gonna have no music, because some retard will sew everyone who tries to make a song, because there notes sound a tiny bit similar to anothers.
Now did MOW end up personally have to pay out for this infringement case? Probably signed a contract when they gave their rights up to those crafty lawyers at song bmg. And there was a clause about copyright infringement.
she's crafty she gets around. She's crafty. she's always down. she's crafty. she's got a gripe. she's crafty...and she's just my type - She's crafty by the Beastie Boys. Listen to those LED ZEPPLIN samplings from that song.
It's somewhat similar at one point in the song, but that's it. I don't think it's plagiarism just because a few notes sound the same. I mean it's not like when Vanilla Ice ripped off Queen & David Bowie. Now THAT was way too obvious!
If Larrikin Music was truly serious about all this, then they would provide the sheet music to clear all this up, the fact that they seem to be deliberately not providing it, makes one think that there is something sinister in all this.
absolute bollocks, the sinister money-hungry fiends who own the rights to the 1935 kookaburra song are just trying to rape MAW and their label. as if that little section in the flute solo had anything to do with any of the the main hooks of the song. shame on aussie courts for allowing this bullshit to happen
cant see how this is so bad, I mean alot of big bands today rip of eachother, you can hear the same tunes in many different songs, they dont go out and sue eachother for that, no this is only about making money, money makes man stupid
At best the melody is slightly similar, the way hundreds of songs are. The two songs don't even share the same amount of syllables- sheesh! The example they gave when they superimposed the two songs wasn't even close. Very poor journalism and filthy lawyers. There's only 8 notes in a Western scale anyways, so this doesn't even hold up to common sense.
This is a travesty pure and simple. To my musically trained ear, the 2 melodies sound NOTHING alike. Oh sure, they might share the same notes but good gawd do you want to start analyzing every song ever written for similar riffs? Colin Hay himself has stated the main tune was written on the guitar with the flute added as an afterthought.
I hope they can appeal this decision and someone with a little more common sense (and perhaps musically inclined) rules in their favor.
@Mantechnic Mate, I agree 100% with you and your comments. This is all about greed. Somehow someone has told this publishing snail that the flute riff resembles the Kookaburra song. This 'Tuneless Wonder ' did not find out for himself. He then convinces another 'Tuneless Wonder' i.e 'The Judge' that he has a case for plagiarism. Neither of these idiots could write a tune let alone sing it. Go to "NAIL THAT SNAIL" by Song Crew Music, sung by Ray Dorset/Mungo Jerry. See how we think...
Even if the melodies were exactly the same, which they're not, I think it's ok to take a few notes from a known melody and use it as part an instrumental embellishment, especially when the rest of the song is completely different. I mean, if you started analyzing all the string, brass, and wind arrangements in pop music, you'd probably find pieces of every famous pop song.
Especially when the two songs are some of the best known works relating to Australia, I really don't think it should matter, in fact, I think the similarities in the riff confirm the Australian-ness of Down Under.
It sucks that the presenter was a Kiwi, who is she to get to compare Men at Work to Girl Guides?
Sounds nothing like it at all. How did it take so long for this to come to fruition? Leave Men At Work alone, this is a classic tune and not a rip off of the theme tune to a kiddies TV prog.
Even if it was a copy... Who gives a shit. To me it sounds like 3 notes are the same... How can someone "own" musical notes? People need to stop freakin out about money and start enjoying life (and music).
Yep the world is going down the preverbial because of money. In the end if the song was a dud there would be nothing of it being in the court because quite simply there would be nothing to gain. However because the song was and still is an iconic piece of music that has made millions there is someone who belives that because of something so small and trivial they deserve a large slice of the pie. It is a fact that there is so much more behind this song than just a musical riff.
I'm agree that this case was based on Greed ~ otherwise, why would they brought it up till 20 years later, even when Marion Sinclair was alive, she didnt notice either..
Hear closely about "the flute Riff" since the opening and repeated again before verse 2 and verse 3.
The Flute Riff was construct as: 4-11-4-11 melodies
and then compare it the 1st and 2nd melody lines of Kookaburra songs as: 11-11-1-5-9, it does coincides ~
So what? the M.A.W. still found their original riff as it is, 4-11-4-11 .. you can expect them to be inspired by childhood songs little bit, but it take the whole song to hear and complete it!
Im a musician whose born overseas now live in Australia. Personally I like all of the songs that M.A.W. create. I don't know the Kookaburra song until this case emerged.
Music made from combining rhythm, melody and lyrics together and later riff needed as a topping.
They don't really sound similar even - and realistically if you take the riff of the song it doesn't make a song even a little bit less awesome. This is ridiculous. Men @ Work should just throw the riff at the kookaburra song owner and see how much international or even national success he gets with it - ZERO I IMAGINE. This isn't fair AT ALL. Even if it were (which I don't think it is) a copied tune - it didn't add THAT much to the success of the song.
It's only the sequence of 11 notes. If you divide this by the total number of notes in that song, or the duration of the 11 notes over the entire song, you don't get 60%. Not even 1%.
It's like accusing an author of plagiarism because his 100+ page book contained the sentence "The judge was an old fart whose knowledge of music was.." used in an earlier book.
Anyway, Marion Sinclair gets a big zilch from the proceeds. So what did you mean by "justice is done"?
I can't hear a single similarity! Not one! I don' t have a good sense of musicality though, but I think if you are going to sue someone it has to be obvious enough for a person like me to be able to hear it. I can't believe that judge!
This is the music business. Executives, lawyers, publishers, managers and agents get there filthy money-grabbing hands over everything and leave the creative artists behind.
Hey, we live in a capitalist society, it's the price we pay....
Yes it's corporate greed at it's worst. What the f*ck do judges and lawyers know about music!
Yes the melodic fragments in the flute melody are the same as the old tune but it is over a minor key. It is a quote or homage, if indeed it was deliberate. Jazz players quote from other tunes all the time.
I bet there are thousands of lesser known songs out there that contain melodic fragments that are the same as nursery rhymes, it's gonna happen accidentally.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Its Great to know there is someone else out there with an ear for music..Yes you are dead right...It is in a minor key..Anyone who can't hear the minor key must have their ears painted on..like the judge ...
At the end of the day its all about greed..It should have been thrown out of court as Men at works tune is in a minor key and the Kookaburra is in a Major key...That should have been enough reason not to sue..Larrikin also is tied up with a UK backer i here ummm not so much the lucky country anymore if justice cant be done
OK... So the judge has ruled this on the basis that 11 notes of a flute riff sound similar to a line from a kids song from 70 odd years ago? Well in that case my great grandad wrote a song in1832 called "I don't wanna die with my dick in my hand" which sounds just like Waltzing Matilda...
I'll take the money in large bills please...
For fucks sake someone out this judge as being on the take and do us a favour... I've never heard such shit in all my life!
im confused
XCILE625 4 days ago
Crikey, mate! Good on ya! Slip another shrimp on the barbie fo' ya! I'll 'ave a pint o' Fosters an' a vegemite sandwich mate!
johnny07652 1 month ago
Colin Hay did say at a solo concert that he did that the flute riff was taken form the kids song "Kookaburra Sits in the Old Gum Tree" and that lead to Men At Work getting sued so if Colin Hay had've kept his mouth shut Men At Work would not have been sued.
59771006 3 months ago
Down Under is own by Men at Work
StefanR10 3 months ago
Aye' ..and Jack and Jill went up a Hill, is a rip off', of Stairway To Heaven ...F'in people annoy me so they dae ....anything for money ....better watch you don't drop your guitar, or Pink Floyd might sue you ..ha ha
Revelnoc 4 months ago
Min at work? Fideral court? They're clearly not similar enough for it to be plagiarism.
davidfgranger 4 months ago
@davidfgranger ahahhaa..That's how New Zealanders speak. It's retarded
cryingmushroom47 2 months ago
Unbelievable!! Only a few notes match up. Do the people in the courts not realize that we musicians only have a choice of a few notes to make music with?! There are millions, if not billions, of songs written; many have a few consecutive notes in common.
The awful part of this is that the person who wrote the song died and sold the rights to a publishing company. It is the publishing company who has taken legal action. The person who wrote the tune is not getting paid from the settlement.
PrimalCircus 4 months ago
I wrote it. And Bo Rhap and Jingle Bells. Gimme my royalties!
Barleyteal 4 months ago
im sure the original version...kukaaburra would hit no.1 all over the world for a 400 weeks after listening to it...pffff
powersliding 4 months ago
Kraft had better sue MAW immediately for usage of the word/product/slogan "vegemite". Oh shit, I just said vegemite, maybe I'll get sued too. This whole thing is a disgrace
djs78 4 months ago
The judge also thinks Justin Bieber looks and sounds like Kylie Minogue.
michamechudo 4 months ago
"Down Under" is one of my favorite songs. "Kookaburra Sits in the Old Gum Tree" has nothing to do with the distinctive flute riff in "Down Under". I strongly support "Men at Work" on this issue. The court should reconsider its decision!
tbasnar 4 months ago
What a bunch of crap! Keep fighting the fight boys. I'm behind you 100%. Much love and respect from Toronto Canada!
Stucatz77 4 months ago 2
Sort of close - but NO CIGAR.
This is not justice.
I'm with you, Men At Work !
The court is WRONG in denying your appeal.
Signed,
Native Texan
suze816 4 months ago
so the court just denied the appeal. What a shame. My opinion is there is an ever so slight similarity of the two tunes. This is a miscarriage of justice.
scotfab 4 months ago
It sounds similar, but not enough to be plagiarism.
codyownz2 4 months ago
Greedy humans. Always amazes me.
luckytaco97 4 months ago
Anyone notice that he's playing the riff in the video while sitting in an old gum tree (0:49)? Coincidence? I think not... They knew what they were doing... they just never thougt it would be a problem to sample an old childrens campfire song...
westonband 4 months ago 5
@westonband your acting like its completely impossible to create a like riff in a time span of about 50 years out of the millions and millions of possibilities that have already been copyrighted? How bout you get your head out of your ass for once in your life, dumb ass.
zac724 4 months ago
@westonband learn music you ass you know nowt about music
aspectsdecor 4 months ago
I love how when they put them together they could only play like 2 seconds because they don't match up nor sound the same AT ALL!!! Wow I can't believe they lost this case. So sososososo dumb! I only want to listen to down under more now. Stupid ass lawyers.
cannedgravy 4 months ago
This case wouldn't go anywhere here in the states. The melody doesn't sound close at all.
texasguy11363 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
that is wrong.... they are not even the same
danielflell2 4 months ago
Actually, my music teacher pointed out the use of Kookaburra in Down Under when the song came out, and played the song for us.
pwgabachito 4 months ago
Kookabura was used in an episode of Doctor Who. Did the BBC pay royalties? Or are they going to get sued as well? I think if the original author of a song is dies, so should the copyright.
purplemutantas 6 months ago
So much of music and literature and painting and cinema and poetry and.... have loving references within them. Will greed kill art?
bastardfingers 6 months ago
hahaha men at work is just playing it faster.
clin1392 6 months ago
thats like suing a song for being in the same key
sr19 6 months ago
In February 2010, an Australian judge ruled that "Down Under" did contain a flute riff based on "Kookaburra" but stipulated that neither was it necessarily the hook nor a substantial part of the hit song (Colin Hay wrote the song years before the flute riff was added by a later member of the band).[12] In July 2010 a judge ruled that the writer of Kookaburra should be paid 5% of past (since 2002) and future profits.
twinkie57401 8 months ago
I AM A PRACTICING MUSICIAN OF 30 YEARS AND I TELL YOU ALL NOW THERE IS NO RESEMBLANCE WHATSOEVER!!- OR IT WOULDA BEEN PICKED UP 31 YEARS AGO, LARRIAKAN ARE DESPERATE FOR A NEW LIMELIGHT. THIS IS THE BIGGEST ROCK AND ROLL SWINDLE AUSTRALIA'S EVER HAD !! AND I WILL PROMOTE THAT FACT, IF THEY WANT TO SUE ME, GOOD LUCK!
KARMA WILL SORT THIS OUT!! CHEERS DAVE SLAVE!!
doomedanddisgusting 8 months ago
i do believe that this so call plagarism was unintentional plus the similarity is hardly there... Even so there are so many songs out there today that contains near similar chord, riff etc... Everyone shoud jus sue each other... bunch of Larrikin morons...
weijun16 9 months ago
I can't hear the similarities! Just greed!
Sawlon 9 months ago
That's Bullshit!!! Nothing in common,no similarities at all!!!... Two "Wonderful & Different" songs.Cheers!(Get a life,to whoever said something like this)
XxYoruguaxX 10 months ago
Colin Gay you thief!!!! You stole this from KOOKABURA SITS IN THE OLD GUM TREE!!! You are going to jail!!! Don't worry Graham Russel and Russell Hitchcock of Air Supply will visit you in jail and will sing Lost in Love Air Supply has the last laugh this time!!! Our song Now and Forever shoild have been the number song then not stolen Down Under!!!
Airsupplyband 10 months ago
Absolutely no similarities -and thats been run through a vocal analyser!-no 2 notes or stanzas match-and the phrasing is entireley dissimilar-the only similarities are the letters D,O,N,U,E,R. in the titles!
khemorex 10 months ago
This is stupid! I can't hear any similarities!
Pacman1ac 10 months ago
Total bullshit!
nsminc 11 months ago
To Larrikin Music and Warren Fahey, here's some lyrics for your beloved little tune... "...Kookaburra sits in the old gum tree line him up with a 303 laugh Kookaburra, laugh Kookaburra..BANG!..."
Hope you get what you deserve Fahey you loser.
Men at work should put out a best of CD, I'll buy one to help them out no probs.
VonTripps 11 months ago
Who in the Federal Court of Australia got paid out to rule in the publisher's favour? This sets a dangerous precedent that should be appealed again and again. If this ruling is to be taken seriously, then music, essentially, can no longer be written.
Vahryk 11 months ago
No interest in money here at all. The two riffs are not the same. I doubt that the composer of the original piece mentioned here would see any similarity, & She would certainly not be going to court to sue for royalties.
A Publishing company after more money in my opinion.
Dog
DogfromBlackburn 1 year ago
it is a bull shit lawsuit. its not even the whole song!!!
lrd95 1 year ago
whoever is sueing is just dumb. all i have to say
J03H1LL 1 year ago
I agree... there is no similarity at all... People (especially lawyers) are sick!
carlettosan 1 year ago
This is rubbish .....how many rock and roll songs sound the similar? .......but they aren't suing any one
ATOMIKDOG23 1 year ago
i dont see the similarity
swimmerboy6 1 year ago
THIS IS TOTAL BULLSHIT!!!! Throw that case out, you fucking dicks. Greedy fucking pricks.
analyzingfunny 1 year ago
Fucking bullshit. Sounds NOTHING like it
bobokk 1 year ago
The 2 melodies are COMPLETELY different! In any case, isn't there a statute of limitations on this? 'down under' was recorded around 30 years ago! I don't think we will have a music industry eventually, there are only so many combinations of notes.
arnaldo35 1 year ago
O flautista da banda australiana Men at Work, Greg Ham, pode ter de vender sua casa para pagar direitos autorais referentes ao hit "Down Under", que foi declarada como plágio. Um tribunal de justiça de Sydney considerou que a música, foi copiada em parte de uma popular canção folk composta em 1934."Kookaburra" escrita pela professora Marion Sinclair há 76 anos, sobre um pássaro nativo da Austrália se tornou uma favorita de países como Nova Zelândia e Canadá. Sinclair morreu em 1988
funkprodigio 1 year ago
É uma canção alegre e cômica sobre australianos viajando pelo mundo confiantes das virtudes de seu país e sobre a imposição da cultura norte-americana e européia às belezas naturais de seu país. A canção foi um sucesso de vendas em vários países, incluindo o Reino Unido, onde alcançou o primeiro lugar nas paradas, sendo a única canção deles a entrar nos "Top 20" daquele país. Ela tornou-se um hino extra-oficial para a Austrália para vários movimentos underground ou musicais de seu país.
funkprodigio 1 year ago
it's not a rip off. it's called inspiration. find something in history that is inspired and that doesn't sound like plagiarism. morons.
dexterdamonkey 1 year ago 2
If i was a lawyer, this is a no win for those against men at work
themooddisorders 1 year ago
blablablakakaka why does it even matter anymore? :|
SpringtimeRosePetals 1 year ago
absolutely ridiculous
BrassKaramazov 1 year ago
I call folk! It is a tribute to Australia
themooddisorders 1 year ago
It would be horrible, if a boomerang accidentally found its way to the private section of the judge that agreed with the charge of plagiarism. Not that I'm for violence. I'm just saying, it would really really hurt.
qigong1001 1 year ago
Undoubtedly Kookaburra was an inspiration for one of the back melodies in this song which is full of iconic Aussie themes.. Was it a rip off worthy of compensation... I think not. Down Under is a great song unto itself.. the key here is -"inspired by" not "stolen from".
KNO3CS 1 year ago
Publishers are greedy opportunistic leeches and snails , many are failed musicians, but most are smart in either Law or Accounting. They know the law well pertaining to the contract they con you into signing for a pittance, they also know how not to account to you. Go to "NAIL THAT SNAIL" by Song Crew Music on YT, hear and see our spoof against these Snails, sung by famous singer/songwriters. Tell your friends, This will become a big story...Be lucky...Django
DjangoWells 1 year ago
why not make an aussie classic even more aussie i say its an improvement to the original kookaburra sits in the old gum tree
TheRandomkid321 1 year ago
The fuck? Is it just me, or do I not hear a single note that sounds the same?
tauwilltriumph 1 year ago
@tauwilltriumph i dindnt when i first heard of this but after a while i started hearing similarity
TheRandomkid321 1 year ago
frekking music industry, always on the lookout for money, that industry is not about music anymore, its about cold hard cash
WimanX 1 year ago
Oh crikey hell they don't even sound the same at all! OMG this is complete BS! I sure hope somebody gets an ass whoopin' over this. Men At Work are the bomb and don't deserve this! I hope Kookaburra gets a serious beatdown for this and the old gum tree gets chopped down and turned into firewood! Hell yeah mates! LMAO
directconnection1969 1 year ago 23
@directconnection1969
"Oh crikey hell they don't even sound the same at all! "
I agree. When they are played next to each other, the notes don't even match. It's pretty obvious they aren't the same
SiriusMined 11 months ago
@directconnection1969 you must be dumb and deaf if you say they dont sound the same at all. Watch tghe other videos about this on youtube to
Sieberliebangbang 10 months ago
@directconnection1969 they say if u play Down Under back ull hear it sounds the same , but srsly ! who cares if they sounds the same ?! heaps of ppl have probably done that and its dumb that men at work are getting called out for it wen heaps of ppl have probably already done it , so yeaa i agree with u
PazzSkittles 6 months ago
@directconnection1969 The one bar in question is clearly identical, the question was only ever whether that was a substantial enough part of the song to claim infringement... and today, the courts threw out M@W's final appeal, so they'll have to cough up.
scottishwildcat 4 months ago
Oh my god, who CARES!? It's not THAT similar & you're going from a vocal melody sang by a childrens choir to a solo played on an instrument. Let it go. This is absolutely absurd.
mandylynndiamond 1 year ago
NO WAY !!! That section in question is far, far, far, to short to be a legitimate win for Kookabura. They may have one it, but Men At Work should keep fighting, cuz
they use 4 bars of the song tops. I always thought it had to be 8 to 16 bars before a legitimate claim of plagiarism could be made. Keep fighting guys take it to the next level. This song is nothing like you song.
drjohnnylove 1 year ago
NO WAY !!! That section in question is far, far, far, to short to be a legitimate win for Kookabura. They may have one it, but Men At Work should keep fighting, cuz
they use 4 bars of the song tops. I always thought it had to be 8 to 16 bars before a legitimate claim of plagiarism could be made. Keep fighting guys take it to the next level. This song is nothing like you song.
drjohnnylove 1 year ago
That's patetic! I hope that record company bankrupt!
AlbatrossDude 1 year ago
The two songs are identical...for those who are def and have some kind of deep mental retardement ofc.
Abneverivelz 1 year ago
This tune is a child's song everyone in Australia knows. Men at Work put the riffs in their song as an honorific to an icon of Australia, just like "Vegamite" sandwiches. The flute player in the video IS sitting "in a gum tree", playing the part of the kookaburra. That being said the tune did a lot for Australian tourism to the "land down under" Great song. Silly little publisher cashes in on EMI. George Harrison and "My Sweet Lord" melody lawsuit-- much more resemblance there.
altstrasse 1 year ago
How Pathetic. All about money.
In a completely different, original song and context, a pop/folk/rock flute solo inspired by a children's song that every member of this band and every Australian grows up with, is not plagiarism.
That's how every song and music genre honors and creates a legacy, creatively inspired by previous work.
Watch out, soon they will sue every english speaking school's music class, children and campfires for singing the original "Kookaburra sits in the old gum tree"!
suguspjr 1 year ago
These days it is almost impossible to make songs that don't sound similar to some other by accident.
Jugemon76 1 year ago
I hear it, but the song is called 'Down Under' and has a small snippet of notes from an Australian children's song. It just seems like they it to express a part Australias culture.
animegirl113 1 year ago
Most silly thing I´ve ever heard - even if some notes might be similar, the two songs doesn´t sound alike at all. To hell with greed!!!
MsGullig 1 year ago
Total garbage against Men At Work. What bullshit.
RapIsDeadly 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is a fucking disgrace.
nickstirling 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
did you hear of something called 'inspiration'? .. greedy bastards like the fagots at Larrikin Music should try it sometime.
ThemTheyHeShe 1 year ago
it's all about money...
DonMoskito 1 year ago
I just can't hear the similarity, and I tried many times... And Men at Work had to pay?
k21160 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
t`s farfetched, I didn`t hear it. How many bands make songs that sometimes sound like the beatles? Many background vocals and tunes from top 40 bands have a Beatles touch. The biggest problem is that many artists can`t sing and playback, not an old hit from Men at Work that makes many people sing.
Fizzualice 1 year ago
It`s farfetched, I didn`t hear it. How many bands make songs that sometimes sound like the beatles? Many background vocals and tunes from top 40 bands have a Beatles touch. The biggest problem is that many artists can`t sing and playback, not an old hit from Men at Work that makes many people sing.
Fizzualice 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I am trying to hear some similarity, but after watching lots of videos, I hear absolutely nothing. I don't get it at all. Might as well have said "Land Down Under" was a rip off of "Mary Had a Little Lamb". And the judge ruled in favor of the plaintiff? LOL.
JediFight 1 year ago
I am trying to hear some similarity, but after watching lots of videos, I hear absolutely nothing. I don't get it at all. Might as well have said "Land Down Under" was a rip off of "Mary Had a Little Lamb". And the judge ruled in favor of the plaintiff? LOL.
JediFight 1 year ago
They do sound really alike. My trained ear also identifies that Rihanna "Umbrella" is an obvious rip-off of "Oh canada". Britney Spears also took all her songs from U2.
Friikki111 1 year ago
you gotta be kidding me.....ridiculous...nice try,,,
ChrisAlvy 1 year ago
This is complete bullshit. There is a brief little reference to the children's song that is not an essential part of the song. The law is an ass!
1967PONTIACGTO 1 year ago
absolutely ridiculous - we're talking about ONE BAR of the children's song that sounds similar - the rest of it is completely different
TheBass2themax 1 year ago
what a joke. They sound nothing like each other. Men at Work should feel robbed if stump up compo for this nonsense. Just aussie lawyers making a few bucks me thinks! Men now back at work on the bones of their arses to pay of this nonsense LOL!
fuchsiasteve1 1 year ago
what a joke. They sound nothing like each other. Men at Work should feel robbed if stump up compo for this nonsense. Just aussie lawyers making a few bucks me thinks!
fuchsiasteve1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
LMAO the flute player is sitting in an old Gum Tree!
Kinda hard to argue they did not use that riff when they gave a nod to it in the video.
Wallyworld30 1 year ago
LMAO the flute player is sitting in an old Gum Tree!
Kinda hard to argue they did not use that riff when they gave a nod to it in the video.
Wallyworld30 1 year ago
This is an old story. Corprate douchebags trying to screw the artist. The Men at work riff is played over a different chord progression and the Kookaburra song is so old it should be covered under public domain. It's not like the original author is going to see any profit.
alaincharnier1971 1 year ago
there are close to 7 billion people on the planet. two people coming up with similar riffs is not impossible. this is stupid.
hardforatard 1 year ago
Fail.
A7B7 1 year ago
why did they wait 25 years to collect royalties? why no law suit back in the 80's when the song was huge? why now?
audrapriscilla 1 year ago
"Who can it be now,
looking for cash, and how!"
groove420 1 year ago
I'm sorry - I just don't hear the similarity at all sounds like two different tunes all together. MAW got ripped off.
therealrapantaleo 1 year ago
it is the same riff. but wtf. rappers do it all the time, if anyone should be sued they should be. even dave matthews uses children song undertones in his music. I have literally heard rap songs that have ripped of entire songs and put their b.s. lyrics over the top of it and make millions off the sweat and talent of real musicians. men at work may of taken a few notes. They were probably paying homage to australia roots by doing it like that. Big difference here. It's all about the $
lustlovr23 1 year ago
Garbage. not even close.
Sage80 1 year ago
It seems a bit of a stretch, but the lawsuit was successful.
mazsenior 1 year ago
You gotta be kidding.
They sound nothing alike.
If they're so similar why it took this long to figure it out.
nscottish 1 year ago
I always thought you could use "samples" if their less than 4 seconds or something.
And it's totally dumb, the company obviously just wanted all the money, because this little riff that's the same melody is just 2% of the whole song.... This is just dumb.
MrChameleon95 1 year ago
Today a judge has ordered Men at work must pay 5% of money earned from the song since 2002 as well as future royalties.
Larrikin Music, which owns the copyright to Kookaburra Sits in the Old Gum Tree, had sought 60% of royalties.
Obviously it could've been worse for Men at Work, but I still feel a sense of injustice for them. Larrikin Music are just bloodsuckers, Dire Straits once sang about "Money for Nothing (and your cheques for free)", that's what Larrikin are getting.
standenberg 1 year ago
@standenberg - That judge can kiss 5% of my ass!
MilkyLicker3587 1 year ago
i"m not hearing it
nusakara 1 year ago
the notes sound the same to me, but what do i know...
anyway, isnt there an expiration on copyright - like 25 or 50 years? i always hear about singers singing from the "standards songbook" and from that i sort of inferred that there was no longer ownership or royalties to pay? i could be wrong....
and of course australia could have different laws.
PS - BRING BACK THE FLUTE!!!
freaaa1 1 year ago
i was gonna say this case was bulllshit but yeah that flute riff is the same. took me a while to find what was similar.
rappers seem invincible to this kinda stuff though
mkho 1 year ago
OMG u have to be kidding. It's been 20 yrs and the music company is just now complaining??? Sounds like the music company is looking for a reason to get money it's not owed and just reaching...They are not the same. Let it go Greed Meisters!
myycuda 1 year ago
There is a similarity but it's so vague, that if it hadn't been pointed out to me, I wouldn't have known. What might add to the similarity is the fact that the flautist in the clip is sitting in a tree, which doesn't appear to be a gumtree. If the decision goes against the MAW recording, then the proceeds I think should go to the Girl Guides Association in Australia. MONEY GRUBBING !
kanakaken 1 year ago
this is the stupidest thing ever.
viscountalpha 1 year ago 10
Omg, this is so stupid! Who exacly is getting the money? I agree with Todezwis. And if you think about it, in like 100 years time, We're gonna have no music, because some retard will sew everyone who tries to make a song, because there notes sound a tiny bit similar to anothers.
scottmccall95 1 year ago
give em a fuckin break the key and tempo are both off!
thebeatlefreak9 1 year ago
not even close!
muppetsforever 1 year ago
Now did MOW end up personally have to pay out for this infringement case? Probably signed a contract when they gave their rights up to those crafty lawyers at song bmg. And there was a clause about copyright infringement.
mikeknight4u 1 year ago
@mikeknight4u
she's crafty she gets around. She's crafty. she's always down. she's crafty. she's got a gripe. she's crafty...and she's just my type - She's crafty by the Beastie Boys. Listen to those LED ZEPPLIN samplings from that song.
mikeknight4u 1 year ago
It's somewhat similar at one point in the song, but that's it. I don't think it's plagiarism just because a few notes sound the same. I mean it's not like when Vanilla Ice ripped off Queen & David Bowie. Now THAT was way too obvious!
CartoonAddict2 1 year ago
what a load of shit! yea similar in a POINT but not even completely at all! stop trying to rip of hits of there money!
DimebagRIPCFH 1 year ago
Sounds nothing like it!
Tomblebooze 1 year ago 2
lol is it a coincidence that he is in the tree doing the rift lol
pipper3rowdy 1 year ago
If Larrikin Music was truly serious about all this, then they would provide the sheet music to clear all this up, the fact that they seem to be deliberately not providing it, makes one think that there is something sinister in all this.
dreamaussie 1 year ago
money. greed
FraterAeternus93 1 year ago
absolute bollocks, the sinister money-hungry fiends who own the rights to the 1935 kookaburra song are just trying to rape MAW and their label. as if that little section in the flute solo had anything to do with any of the the main hooks of the song. shame on aussie courts for allowing this bullshit to happen
kayjay1269 1 year ago
I can't hear the kookaburra song in the riff... sorry
MichelleMorgan22 1 year ago
I come from a land down under /a fishy court case i wonder/can you hear the thunder/ of lawyers hooves for a bung(er)
steevenfrost 1 year ago
change 2 notes and wallah you can call it your own rif!
FisherPykel 1 year ago
cant see how this is so bad, I mean alot of big bands today rip of eachother, you can hear the same tunes in many different songs, they dont go out and sue eachother for that, no this is only about making money, money makes man stupid
lonewolf202 1 year ago
I am a musical fucking genius and I know that Kookabura song is 1. dumb as shit. 2. sounds nothing like L.D.U. Case closed
bass08053 1 year ago
At best the melody is slightly similar, the way hundreds of songs are. The two songs don't even share the same amount of syllables- sheesh! The example they gave when they superimposed the two songs wasn't even close. Very poor journalism and filthy lawyers. There's only 8 notes in a Western scale anyways, so this doesn't even hold up to common sense.
audiotrax2000 1 year ago
I'll take Emaj7 MooseLand.
owenpwestman 1 year ago
Kookaburra sits in the old gum tree
Merry, merry king of the bush is he
Laugh Kookaburra Laugh kookaburra shove it up your ass!
nessnes64 1 year ago
This is a travesty pure and simple. To my musically trained ear, the 2 melodies sound NOTHING alike. Oh sure, they might share the same notes but good gawd do you want to start analyzing every song ever written for similar riffs? Colin Hay himself has stated the main tune was written on the guitar with the flute added as an afterthought.
I hope they can appeal this decision and someone with a little more common sense (and perhaps musically inclined) rules in their favor.
Mantechnic 1 year ago 26
Im using what you said as a quote for a school project.
Hope you dont mind. :)
teejar12 1 year ago
@Mantechnic Mate, I agree 100% with you and your comments. This is all about greed. Somehow someone has told this publishing snail that the flute riff resembles the Kookaburra song. This 'Tuneless Wonder ' did not find out for himself. He then convinces another 'Tuneless Wonder' i.e 'The Judge' that he has a case for plagiarism. Neither of these idiots could write a tune let alone sing it. Go to "NAIL THAT SNAIL" by Song Crew Music, sung by Ray Dorset/Mungo Jerry. See how we think...
DjangoWells 1 year ago
Even if the melodies were exactly the same, which they're not, I think it's ok to take a few notes from a known melody and use it as part an instrumental embellishment, especially when the rest of the song is completely different. I mean, if you started analyzing all the string, brass, and wind arrangements in pop music, you'd probably find pieces of every famous pop song.
tochrism 1 year ago
Especially when the two songs are some of the best known works relating to Australia, I really don't think it should matter, in fact, I think the similarities in the riff confirm the Australian-ness of Down Under.
It sucks that the presenter was a Kiwi, who is she to get to compare Men at Work to Girl Guides?
yakk999 1 year ago
this is some right bs
gunne123 1 year ago
Sounds nothing like it at all. How did it take so long for this to come to fruition? Leave Men At Work alone, this is a classic tune and not a rip off of the theme tune to a kiddies TV prog.
coracleman 1 year ago
I now own the C cord.
Simple as.
Im gunna start suing.
MooseLandVids 2 years ago
@MooseLandVids - I'll see your C chord and raise you the C note.
Now everyone owes me royalties - the descendants of the great composers, all the blues masters families, and pretty much every song ever written.
Mantechnic 1 year ago
they're about as similar as two thing that are in no way similar at all!
solarizer 2 years ago
they aren't similar at all
Muzza93X 2 years ago
I think if it took 20 years before anyone noticed then it wasn't obvious either to the mob who sued MAW nor to MAW when they wrote it.
RCbeastly 2 years ago
whoever is sewing men at work is a pathetic money sniffer.
polarhercules 2 years ago
Well, what a waste of time... it's a kid's song and the guy that claims his money is stupid
Yasha920 2 years ago
Even if it was a copy... Who gives a shit. To me it sounds like 3 notes are the same... How can someone "own" musical notes? People need to stop freakin out about money and start enjoying life (and music).
83uoykcuf 2 years ago
I dont think it was a rip off, you can make different songs sound the same if you try hard enough.
Greed is the basis for this law suit.
roac7777 2 years ago
Yep the world is going down the preverbial because of money. In the end if the song was a dud there would be nothing of it being in the court because quite simply there would be nothing to gain. However because the song was and still is an iconic piece of music that has made millions there is someone who belives that because of something so small and trivial they deserve a large slice of the pie. It is a fact that there is so much more behind this song than just a musical riff.
cruze2005 2 years ago
Yes we live in a world where if someone trips over a matchstick they want to sue someone.
Dog eat dog world.
roac7777 2 years ago
I'm agree that this case was based on Greed ~ otherwise, why would they brought it up till 20 years later, even when Marion Sinclair was alive, she didnt notice either..
thonza78 2 years ago 6
Hear closely about "the flute Riff" since the opening and repeated again before verse 2 and verse 3.
The Flute Riff was construct as: 4-11-4-11 melodies
and then compare it the 1st and 2nd melody lines of Kookaburra songs as: 11-11-1-5-9, it does coincides ~
So what? the M.A.W. still found their original riff as it is, 4-11-4-11 .. you can expect them to be inspired by childhood songs little bit, but it take the whole song to hear and complete it!
thonza78 2 years ago
The Kookaburra isn't laughing anymore ..
Im a musician whose born overseas now live in Australia. Personally I like all of the songs that M.A.W. create. I don't know the Kookaburra song until this case emerged.
Music made from combining rhythm, melody and lyrics together and later riff needed as a topping.
thonza78 2 years ago
They don't really sound similar even - and realistically if you take the riff of the song it doesn't make a song even a little bit less awesome. This is ridiculous. Men @ Work should just throw the riff at the kookaburra song owner and see how much international or even national success he gets with it - ZERO I IMAGINE. This isn't fair AT ALL. Even if it were (which I don't think it is) a copied tune - it didn't add THAT much to the success of the song.
NickyzTreatz 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I guess I'm the only smart and sensible one, since all I hear is the Kookaburra song when listening to Down Under. It's pretty much idential.
The judge was right, all the nay-sayers are blinded by ignorance and poor listening skills.
If someone came into your house and stole something of yours, you'd go after them as well.
Justice is done.
cheatshot26 2 years ago
Comment removed
tmmss 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It's only the sequence of 11 notes. If you divide this by the total number of notes in that song, or the duration of the 11 notes over the entire song, you don't get 60%. Not even 1%.
It's like accusing an author of plagiarism because his 100+ page book contained the sentence "The judge was an old fart whose knowledge of music was.." used in an earlier book.
Anyway, Marion Sinclair gets a big zilch from the proceeds. So what did you mean by "justice is done"?
disainit 2 years ago
I can't hear a single similarity! Not one! I don' t have a good sense of musicality though, but I think if you are going to sue someone it has to be obvious enough for a person like me to be able to hear it. I can't believe that judge!
vleermuizenfan 2 years ago 2
Australia is always looking for cultural identities, and here are two uniquely Australian songs,and one happens to have influenced the other.
However Larrikin and this dumb-ass judge have completely tarnished the reputation of the Australian music industry.
As an Aussie musician living overseas, I am embarassed by it.
snailhairdune 2 years ago 10
This is the music business. Executives, lawyers, publishers, managers and agents get there filthy money-grabbing hands over everything and leave the creative artists behind.
Hey, we live in a capitalist society, it's the price we pay....
snailhairdune 2 years ago 6
Yes it's corporate greed at it's worst. What the f*ck do judges and lawyers know about music!
Yes the melodic fragments in the flute melody are the same as the old tune but it is over a minor key. It is a quote or homage, if indeed it was deliberate. Jazz players quote from other tunes all the time.
I bet there are thousands of lesser known songs out there that contain melodic fragments that are the same as nursery rhymes, it's gonna happen accidentally.
snailhairdune 2 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Its Great to know there is someone else out there with an ear for music..Yes you are dead right...It is in a minor key..Anyone who can't hear the minor key must have their ears painted on..like the judge ...
rocker4864 2 years ago
Oh come on!!!! Artists nowadays use riffs all the time!! You really can't compare the song men at work wrote with this children's song!!
Christos79 2 years ago 5
At the end of the day its all about greed..It should have been thrown out of court as Men at works tune is in a minor key and the Kookaburra is in a Major key...That should have been enough reason not to sue..Larrikin also is tied up with a UK backer i here ummm not so much the lucky country anymore if justice cant be done
92rickenbacker 2 years ago 2
OK... So the judge has ruled this on the basis that 11 notes of a flute riff sound similar to a line from a kids song from 70 odd years ago? Well in that case my great grandad wrote a song in1832 called "I don't wanna die with my dick in my hand" which sounds just like Waltzing Matilda...
I'll take the money in large bills please...
For fucks sake someone out this judge as being on the take and do us a favour... I've never heard such shit in all my life!
Fucking greedy corporate bastards
theguru4315 2 years ago 2
They do sound similar, if not alike, but (this is rather important); what happened to inspiration?
can we now claim royalties for something that inspires someone?
I think that is an issue that hasn't been taken into consideration at all.
Onordland 2 years ago 17
LOL What people do for money... Unreal, 1 of my fav. songs ever.
They are so similar that i sure am gonna buy that children CD. Hilarious.
Doggystyletoday 2 years ago