# Avril Lavigne sued for plagiarism



## I_cant_play (Jun 26, 2006)

her new song is supposedly a ripoff of some 70s song so she's basically being sued for plagiarism. I just saw a clip of the song followed by a clip of the "original" on CBC news last night. I was just wondering if anyone saw the same thing and had any opinions. Personally, I think her song is different enough from the older one and they should leave her alone. Yes there are some similarities but if we were always that picky, anyone playing a shuffle blues rhythm should go to jail.


----------



## adamthemute (Jun 18, 2007)

I dunno. From what I saw only one line was the same, with a switched word. There's bound to be similarities in lyrics over a long period of time.

I also kinda doubt someone knowingly ripped them off. Stuff like that always gets discovered if you're popular and they know the risks if you get caught.


----------



## Geek (Jun 5, 2007)

Rock/Pop people are amusing.

Not just Blues, but Jazz musician's too would all be sued.


----------



## J S Moore (Feb 18, 2006)

There are rumours about her. Chantal Kreviazuk claimed in an interview Avril used one of her songs without credit or payment.


----------



## zao_89 (Feb 17, 2006)

J S Moore said:


> There are rumours about her. Chantal Kreviazuk claimed in an interview Avril used one of her songs without credit or payment.


_Last week Canadian songwriter Chantal Kreviazuk told 'Performing Songwriter' magazine that she will never again work withLavigne saying she will "*cross the ethical line and no one says anything. That's why I'll never work with her again. I sent her a song two years ago called 'Contagious,' and I just saw the track listing to this album, and there's a song called 'Contagious' on it-and my name's not on it.*'_


----------



## Guest (Jul 6, 2007)

"_*I sent her a song two years ago called 'Contagious,' and I just saw the track listing to this album, and there's a song called 'Contagious' on it-and my name's not on it.*'"

_Any evidence that they are the same song?!?!

copyright schmopyright... play music... play it loud! PLAY IT ALL THE TIME!


----------



## Lester B. Flat (Feb 21, 2006)

Chantel had better hear the song first before she takes any legal action since you can't copyright a title.


----------



## Starbuck (Jun 15, 2007)

*Anyone a Zep fan?*

I know that there is no comparison whatsoever talent wise, BUT back in the 70's a "heavy Metal" band by the name of Led Zepplin prettymuch ripped off note by note someone by the name of Robert Johnson???? EVERYONE forgave Jimmy Page. As early as the late 80's he STILL did not give proper songwriting credit to Johnson and to this day does not speak much about it. When you look at it, it's not so surprising that Lavigne would so such a thing as her Husband Dereck Whibly (sp?) and his band Sum 41 did much the same thing with a song by Coldplay call the Scientist. Have a listen to Pieces by Sum 41, then listen to Coldplay. I guess to the younger set it's ethically ok to do that... Heck listen to Hip Hop where is it perfectly ok to "sample" someone else's tune. Is it really any worse than all the movie re-makes we are subject to due to lack of new ideas? I'm rambling, I know!


----------



## Guest (Jul 6, 2007)

J S Moore said:


> There are rumours about her. Chantal Kreviazuk claimed in an interview Avril used one of her songs without credit or payment.


In that same CBC newscast about the law suit Kreviazuk said she wouldn't work with her again. Something about how she sits in the room and mopes and does nothing.

Ahh well, it'll all come around and bite her in the end when she can't find writers to write her next platinum album for her.


----------



## hoser (Feb 2, 2006)

Hey (hey)
You (you)
Get off my cloud!

sound familiar?

maybe mick and keith should go after the rubinoos.
rubinoos are just looking for an easy paycheque imo.


----------



## jcon (Apr 28, 2006)

hoser said:


> Hey (hey)
> You (you)
> Get off my cloud!


Exactly what I was thinking!


----------



## hoser (Feb 2, 2006)

jroberts said:


> If you're going to rip somebody off, shouldn't the resulting song at least be good?


are you asking the rubinoos or avril? they're both pretty horrible.


----------



## devil6 (Feb 24, 2006)

Youtube vid playing the two songs

Youtube

The chorus has a similarity, but it doesn't sound like a note for note rip off. Pop music is by nature simple and straightforward so at some point songwriters are going to start repeating themselves.


----------



## Wild Bill (May 3, 2006)

*"Exactly the same, only different!"*



devil6 said:


> Youtube vid playing the two songs
> 
> Youtube
> 
> The chorus has a similarity, but it doesn't sound like a note for note rip off. Pop music is by nature simple and straightforward so at some point songwriters are going to start repeating themselves.


The issue here is not one of a song being released and some years later someone writes a new song that is somewhat similar.

Chantal worked directly with Avril for some time, writing and polishing songs. Afterward she sends the girl a tune and never is told its accepted or gets paid for it. 

A short time later out comes Avril's album with striking similarities. THAT's what makes it a ripoff and that's what spawns a lawsuit!

Things like this are very important in artistic industries. Everyone knows that a lawsuit about a movie or book idea or a song lyric or riff can be hard to prove in court and often will only make the lawyers rich. So everyone pays attention when someone claims they were ripped off! It affects reputation and the integrity of a person's word. 

Avril might get away with it but the mere fact it happened might discourage anyone else from sending her a song.


----------



## devil6 (Feb 24, 2006)

Wild Bill said:


> The issue here is not one of a song being released and some years later someone writes a new song that is somewhat similar.
> 
> Chantal worked directly with Avril for some time, writing and polishing songs. Afterward she sends the girl a tune and never is told its accepted or gets paid for it.


Actually the entire issue is just that, the Lawsuit is coming from The Rubinoos, who claim Avril ripped their song off to make one of her hits.

The Chantal issue is something different all together, although it does help to raise question as to Avrils songwriting skills.

Chantal hasn't said anything about the melody and structure being the same, it's just the title. Unless she can prove that Avril did in fact Rip her song off and not give a writing credit all Avril essentially did was take the name. 

Avril's reputation as a song-writer was already sketchy and i doubt that this will help it at all but until i see a recording of the song by Chantal, in my eyes for this particular case Avril hasn't done anything wrong (other than "writing" really bad music).


----------



## noobcake (Mar 8, 2006)

Yeah music lawsuits are incredibly lame, it's kind of obvious that at some point in time someone will write a song quite similar to another, who really cares though? 
This stuff happens all the time, but usually no one really makes a big deal out of it, but looks like that's not the case this time.


----------



## hoser (Feb 2, 2006)

Wild Bill said:


> The issue here is not one of a song being released and some years later someone writes a new song that is somewhat similar.
> 
> Chantal worked directly with Avril for some time, writing and polishing songs. Afterward she sends the girl a tune and never is told its accepted or gets paid for it.
> 
> A short time later out comes Avril's album with striking similarities. THAT's what makes it a ripoff and that's what spawns a lawsuit!


wrong song...and so far the only similarity is the title in that case.


----------



## Soupbone (May 17, 2007)

*ha*

I think the only ones getting ripped off is the people who pay for that crap.

Man o man...They are probably just do it as a publicity stunt and Rubinoos band wnats to start ..god forbid..touring again.


----------



## jane (Apr 26, 2006)

The whole thing w/ the Rubinoos is probably just sheer, dumb, coincidence... I mean, "hey you i want to be your girlfriend" isn't exactly a thoughtful, meaningful lyric... more like something i'd say when i was drunk.

However, I'm curious as to whether Chantal just meant the song title or the song itself... I really respect Chantal as a songwriter and if Avril did use the song w/o permission... well, that's just low.


----------



## Tycho (Jan 3, 2007)

hoser said:


> Hey (hey)
> You (you)
> Get off my cloud!
> 
> ...


I was glad to see you post this. I've been sort of amazed that in all the media talk about this song, no one's picked up on the fact that the main element of the chorus comes from the Stones.

And as far as I know, the Rubinoos wrote their song well after the Ramones song of the same name, which was very well known in punk/New Wave circles at the time.

I doubt we'll see Mick and Keith do anything about this though; Andrew Loog Oldham owns the rights to all their old stuff. (Remember how he successfully went after the Verve in 1997 for "Bittersweet Symphony"?)


----------



## devil6 (Feb 24, 2006)

jane said:


> However, I'm curious as to whether Chantal just meant the song title or the song itself... I really respect Chantal as a songwriter and if Avril did use the song w/o permission... well, that's just low.




_Kreviazuk told the publication she had given Lavigne a song called Contagious two years ago, and was surprised to see a track with the same name on Lavigne's current disc with a credit to Lavigne and songwriter Evan Taubenfeld.

McBride said Kreviazuk has never even heard the Lavigne track.

"I know, personally, she regrets saying what she said," said McBride, adding the songs are nothing alike. "The interviewer obviously got Chantal on a bad day."_ - Source


----------



## Robboman (Oct 14, 2006)

Tycho said:


> I doubt we'll see Mick and Keith do anything about this though;


Hmm, ya never know.. they were on the opposite end of an issue like this a while back. Before the released the song Anybody Seen My Baby someone realized the chorus sounded just like Constant Craving by KD Lang. I think it was just a coincidence but rather than face lawsuits and bad press, they gave Lang a songwriting credit and cleared it with all the lawyers up front.


----------



## Tycho (Jan 3, 2007)

The thing is, since Mick and Keef no longer own the rights to "Get Off My Cloud", they've got no financial stake in the question of whether someone else has used part of it. That's why they wouldn't do anything.


----------



## Tycho (Jan 3, 2007)

Just wanted to correct something I wrote above. It's not Andrew Loog Oldham who owns the copyright on the early Stones material. It's ABKCO (or whatever the current version of that company is), the company set up by Allen Klein, the Stones' former manager.


----------



## The Nazz Are Blue (May 12, 2006)

Starbuck50 said:


> I know that there is no comparison whatsoever talent wise, BUT back in the 70's a "heavy Metal" band by the name of Led Zepplin prettymuch ripped off note by note someone by the name of Robert Johnson???? EVERYONE forgave Jimmy Page. As early as the late 80's he STILL did not give proper songwriting credit to Johnson and to this day does not speak much about it.


Uh, I'm not aware of any LZ tune that copies Robert Johnson note for note. Maybe they took the words to his songs, but that's different (RJ still deserves credit though).

And everyone did not forgive Page. LZ payed hefty amounts from numerous lawsuits, usually to the old blues guys. I know the Howlin' Wolf estate got a fair chunk after LZ used the words to Killing Floor in The Lemon Song without credit, just to give one example. It's part of the folk/blues tradition (not to mention music in general) to borrow things from other performers, but credit should be given where it's due.

Anyways, this Rubinoos thing is crap. Both songs utterly suck, and nobody's ever heard the 'original' before now. Some no-name washup band just wants the money they never really made in the first place.


----------



## Tycho (Jan 3, 2007)

> Some no-name washup band just wants the money they never really made in the first place.


That has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not they have a legitimate claim.


----------



## Starbuck (Jun 15, 2007)

The Nazz Are Blue said:


> Uh, I'm not aware of any LZ tune that copies Robert Johnson note for note. Maybe they took the words to his songs, but that's different (RJ still deserves credit though).
> 
> 
> Have a listen to Some Old RJ particularly Bring it on Home and you'll hear it. If you want to get technical about it you could call it sampling, but nevertheless...


----------



## The Kicker Of Elves (Jul 20, 2006)

I'm almost ashamed to post this as I couldn't care less about Kreviazuk and Lavigne, but it looks like the former has officially apologized:

http://jam.canoe.ca/Music/2007/07/10/4328173-cp.html

Oh, and the term for "accidental plagiarism" is cryptomnesia.


----------



## Starbuck (Jun 15, 2007)

*Oh Dear*

Just another case of Evil media carefully Editing an interview to make it more interesting... Doesn't matter Avri's music is still lacking... But what can I say? To each his own right? In my day it was Madonna.... And Look she is STILL around.


----------

