Le Tigre Sues Barry Mann To Stop Copyright Threats Over Song, Lights Barry Mann On Fire As Well

from the oooooh-get-him dept

It takes a special kind of hubris to appropriate music and lyrics not just from another artist, but another cultural genre of artists, and then threaten someone else for “stealing” what you’ve “stolen”. Meet Barry Mann. If that name doesn’t sound terribly familiar to you, fear not, as he is known for the 1961 hit song Who Put The Bomp? and other songs from decades ago. And if that song title doesn’t sound familiar, you’ve almost certainly heard the song. To jog your memory, it includes such made up words as “ramalama ding dong”. See, those are called vocables: made up syllables used to effectuate rhythmic form rather than meaning. You can listen to the song below to get an idea of what I’m talking about.

“The Mann”, which is what I’ll be calling him from here on out, is still kicking at 82 and apparently is learning a new hobby: threatening other artists with copyright claims. He and/or his legal representatives apparently sent a cease and desist notice to Le Tigre, a feminist punk band, over a song called Decepticon. See, Decepticon takes a couple of lyrics found in The Mann’s song and repurposes them to become a feminist anthem. For that and one additional reason that we’ll get into later, Le Tigre filed suit for declaratory relief of The Mann’s copyright infringement claim. Here is Decepticon so you can go hear for yourself just how copyright-infringe-y this all isn’t.

Between the suit and the song itself, you should notice a number of things. First off, you may be thinking to yourself that this song sounds decidedly retro for punk music. That’s because the song came out twenty years ago and has long been Le Tigre’s most famous song. Why a lawsuit is only being filed now is an open question. In addition, the use of the lyrics is minimal and the song itself is nothing remotely like The Mann’s song.

Additionally, even if Defendants had a legitimate claim to ownership of the small portion of Bomp lyrics at issue, they nonetheless have no copyright infringement claim against Le Tigre or its licensees because Le Tigre’s transformative use of those lyrics in Deceptacon is an emblematic case of fair use under Section 107 of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 107.

Transformative use? Let’s get into that. You may also have noticed that the lyrics are actually slightly different. For instance, the lyric to start the song is no longer “who put the bomp”, it’s “who took the bomp”.

Deceptacon’s reference to and inversion of the Bomp lyrics at issue delivers a stinging indictment and parody of Bomp, which is clear from a comparison of the songs’ lyrics and sharply contrasting musical styles, as critics have noted over the decades. Bomp, written from a man’s perspective, begins with the statement: “I’d like to thank the guy who wrote the song that made my baby fall in love with me.” Bomp’s singer asks, “Who put the bomp in the bomp bah bomp bah bomp?” and “Who put the ram in the rama lama ding dong?” Deceptacon, by contrast, is a feminist anthem that begins with the proposition that music “is sucking my heart out of my mind” and continues to ask, “Who took the bomp from the bomp-a-lomp-a-lomp?” and “Who took the ram from the rama-lama-ding-dong?” Thus, Le Tigre’s use of the lyrics that appear in Bomp instills those lyrics with a new meaning that is directly at odds with and a clear criticism of the message in Bomp, which is precisely the sort of fair use that Section 107 of the Copyright Act is designed to protect.

But parody and criticism of what? Well, there certainly is the feminist angle to it, yes, and Le Tigre is well known for creating that sort of stinging lyrics within its songs. But not just the feminist critique. Remember the change from “put” to “took”? Well…

The Bomp lyrics putatively at issue are mainly comprised of song titles and non-lexical vocables (nonsense syllables used in music). But Mr. Mann did not create these vocables or song titles; rather, it appears that Mr. Mann and his cowriter copied them from Black doo-wop groups active during the late 1950s and early 1960s. Specifically, it appears that Mr. Mann took “bomp-bah-bomp-bah-bomp” from The Marcels’ distinctive version of “Blue Moon,” which sold over a million copies, and “rama lama ding dong” from the Edsels’ then-popular “Rama Lama Ding Dong.” In short, the Bomp lyrics at issue are not original to Mr. Mann, and Defendants have no legitimate copyright claim in them.

And that is how this all comes full circle, in a way. The Mann threatened a punk feminist group over a song it created with lyrics designed to specifically criticize how he appropriated those lyrics from black doo-wop groups in the 60s. Like I said, that takes a nearly impressive amount of hubris.

As far as copyright cases go, this should be an easy one for the courts.

Filed Under: , , , , , , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Le Tigre Sues Barry Mann To Stop Copyright Threats Over Song, Lights Barry Mann On Fire As Well”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
30 Comments
PaulTsays:

Re:

"If the song is 22 years old, I find it hard to believe that they’re only discovering the alleged infringement now"

That’s the most believable and least silly part of this – a man didn’t discover a new punk song immediately on its release while he was in his 60s.

That doesn’t excuse people being sued decades after their work was released, but it’s not quite as ridiculous as Men At Work being sued in 2009 over a song that you had to work pretty hard to avoid hearing back in the 80s (which, should we be sadly reminded, successfully).

Oh, and if we need any further ammo as to the evils of copyright abuse, I spotted this gem from the Wikipedia article about the song Down Under while checking that I remembered the above year correctly:

"Colin Hay has since suggested that the deaths of his father, Jim, in 2010, and of Men at Work flute player Greg Ham in 2012 were directly linked to the stress of the court case.[38]"

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re:

That’s the most believable and least silly part of this – a man didn’t discover a new punk song immediately on its release while he was in his 60s.

From the Wikipedia entry:

Opening track "Deceptacon" references Barry Mann’s 1961 single "Who Put the Bomp (in the Bomp, Bomp, Bomp)" by asking "Who took the Bomp from the Bompalompalomp?".[27][28] It denounces a decline in meaningful lyrics in rock music.[15] Hanna expressed frustration that riot grrrl had been transformed into icons like the Spice Girls.[29] The song was popularized by online videos of its "aerobicon" choreography.[8] "Deceptacon" was featured in the 2006 Norwegian film Reprise, the 2003 skateboarding film Yeah Right!, the 2015 documentary film Hurricane of Fun: The Making of Wet Hot, the 2014 animated film The Book of Life, a Pandora Radio advertisement featuring British virtual band Gorillaz,[30] the fourth episode of the Netflix series Special and the trailer for the 2019 film Between Two Ferns: The Movie.

So that’s the Wikipedia entry that noticed, references to others who noticed, and several places the song was used. While you might be able to give Mann himself a pass, what about the label? I’m thinking it might not be that hard to justify they "knew or should have known."

PaulTsays:

Re:

"Is there not a tradition of white singers copying old r and b songs written by black writers"

There most certainly is. Also traditional tribal / aboriginal folk songs, etc.

"I hope this case is quickly shutdown in court even if he’s the Man"

Yeah, the problem is that even though most of the people who did such things are long dead, a lot of them signed to labels who are now part of corporations who are fighting constantly to make copyright effectively infinite. So, if a new artist reuses something that should by the rules at the time even the rip-off was recorded should have been long in the public domain by now, they risk being sued by someone who smells a profit and may decide not to take the risk. Which is the exact opposite of what the the copyright agreement was intended to be.

Lostinlodossays:

Language

Ohkay. Here’s my take on the songs at issue.

I’d like to thank the guy Who wrote the song That made my baby Fall in love with me

So to start off with, he at the time, already admits to the borrowed lyrics.

But I always had a slightly different opinion on the meaning of the chorus.

For me it was always a true secondary question. A racial one. Did a black man write the lyrics my “baby” loves.

The song doesn’t question who “sung” but who “put” or wrote.

That aside… we have this:

Boogity boogity boogity
Boogity boogity boogity shoo
Which is claimed to be a reference to CC’s song, pony, according to a few sources (see genius) but that’s not completely accurate alone.

That itself, the song, comes from a demo recording of Screaming Jay where he put his later-famous play hoodoo persona on display. Popping back into a recording session wearing a cape and white mask:

Whispering
“Boogity boogity boogity”
And then yelling
“boo! “
That outtake is available on the When Radio Was/Time/Life Tape/Recored set I Put A Spell On You: Best of Screaming Jay.

Which furthers my opening
I see a frat boy in desperate need to understand his footing in life when he’s pulling lyrics from black singers.

So he’s not just complaining about lyrics he borrowed, but borrowed lyrics he borrowed.

:facepalm: in the most obvious of ways!

Lostinlodossays:

Language

Ohkay. Here’s my take on the songs at issue.

I’d like to thank the guy Who wrote the song That made my baby Fall in love with me

So to start off with, he at the time, already admits to the borrowed lyrics.

But I always had a slightly different opinion on the meaning of the chorus.

For me it was always a true secondary question. A racial one. Did a black man write the lyrics my “baby” loves.

The song doesn’t question who “sung” but who “put” or wrote.

That aside… we have this:

Boogity boogity boogity
Boogity boogity boogity shoo
Which is claimed to be a reference to CC’s song, pony, according to a few sources (see genius) but that’s not completely accurate alone.

That itself, the song, comes from a demo recording of Screaming Jay where he put his later-famous play hoodoo persona on display. Popping back into a recording session wearing a cape and white mask:

Whispering
“Boogity boogity boogity”
And then yelling
“boo! “
That outtake is available on the When Radio Was/Time/Life Tape/Recored set I Put A Spell On You: Best of Screaming Jay.

Which furthers my opening
I see a frat boy in desperate need to understand his footing in life when he’s pulling lyrics from black singers.

So he’s not just complaining about lyrics he borrowed, but borrowed lyrics he borrowed.

:facepalm: in the most obvious of ways!

PaulTsays:

Re:

"If the song is 22 years old, I find it hard to believe that they’re only discovering the alleged infringement now"

That’s the most believable and least silly part of this – a man didn’t discover a new punk song immediately on its release while he was in his 60s.

That doesn’t excuse people being sued decades after their work was released, but it’s not quite as ridiculous as Men At Work being sued in 2009 over a song that you had to work pretty hard to avoid hearing back in the 80s (which, should we be sadly reminded, successfully).

Oh, and if we need any further ammo as to the evils of copyright abuse, I spotted this gem from the Wikipedia article about the song Down Under while checking that I remembered the above year correctly:

"Colin Hay has since suggested that the deaths of his father, Jim, in 2010, and of Men at Work flute player Greg Ham in 2012 were directly linked to the stress of the court case.[38]"

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re:

That’s the most believable and least silly part of this – a man didn’t discover a new punk song immediately on its release while he was in his 60s.

From the Wikipedia entry:

Opening track "Deceptacon" references Barry Mann’s 1961 single "Who Put the Bomp (in the Bomp, Bomp, Bomp)" by asking "Who took the Bomp from the Bompalompalomp?".[27][28] It denounces a decline in meaningful lyrics in rock music.[15] Hanna expressed frustration that riot grrrl had been transformed into icons like the Spice Girls.[29] The song was popularized by online videos of its "aerobicon" choreography.[8] "Deceptacon" was featured in the 2006 Norwegian film Reprise, the 2003 skateboarding film Yeah Right!, the 2015 documentary film Hurricane of Fun: The Making of Wet Hot, the 2014 animated film The Book of Life, a Pandora Radio advertisement featuring British virtual band Gorillaz,[30] the fourth episode of the Netflix series Special and the trailer for the 2019 film Between Two Ferns: The Movie.

So that’s the Wikipedia entry that noticed, references to others who noticed, and several places the song was used. While you might be able to give Mann himself a pass, what about the label? I’m thinking it might not be that hard to justify they "knew or should have known."

PaulTsays:

Re:

"Is there not a tradition of white singers copying old r and b songs written by black writers"

There most certainly is. Also traditional tribal / aboriginal folk songs, etc.

"I hope this case is quickly shutdown in court even if he’s the Man"

Yeah, the problem is that even though most of the people who did such things are long dead, a lot of them signed to labels who are now part of corporations who are fighting constantly to make copyright effectively infinite. So, if a new artist reuses something that should by the rules at the time even the rip-off was recorded should have been long in the public domain by now, they risk being sued by someone who smells a profit and may decide not to take the risk. Which is the exact opposite of what the the copyright agreement was intended to be.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...
Older Stuff
13:40 It's Great That Winnie The Pooh Is In The Public Domain; But He Should Have Been Free In 1982 (Or Earlier) (35)
12:06 Norton 360 Now Comes With Crypto Mining Capabilities And Sketchy Removal Process (28)
10:45 Chinese Government Dragnet Now Folding In American Social Media Platforms To Silence Dissent (14)
10:40 Daily Deal: The 2022 Ultimate Cybersecurity Analyst Preparation Bundle (0)
09:29 A Fight Between Facebook And The British Medical Journal Highlights The Difficulty Of Moderating 'Medical Misinformation' (9)
06:29 Court Ruling Paves The Way For Better, More Reliable Wi-Fi (4)
20:12 Eighth Circuit (Again) Says There's Nothing Wrong With Detaining Innocent Minors At Gunpoint (15)
15:48 China's Regulatory War On Its Gaming Industry Racks Up 14k Casualties (10)
13:31 Chinese Government Fines Local Car Dealerships For Surveilling While Not Being The Government (5)
12:08 Eric Clapton Pretends To Regret The Decision To Sue Random German Woman Who Listed A Bootleg Of One Of His CDs On Ebay (29)
10:44 ICE Is So Toxic That The DHS's Investigative Wing Is Asking To Be Completely Separated From It (29)
10:39 Daily Deal: The 2022 Complete Raspberry Pi And Arduino Developer Bundle (0)
09:31 Google Blocked An Article About Police From The Intercept... Because The Title Included A Phrase That Was Also A Movie Title (24)
06:22 Wireless Carriers Balk At FAA Demand For 5G Deployment Delays Amid Shaky Safety Concerns (16)
19:53 Tenth Circuit Denies Qualified Immunity To Social Worker Who Fabricated A Mother's Confession Of Child Abuse (35)
15:39 Sci-Hub's Creator Thinks Academic Publishers, Not Her Site, Are The Real Threat To Science, And Says: 'Any Law Against Knowledge Is Fundamentally Unjust' (34)
13:32 Federal Court Tells Proud Boys Defendants That Raiding The Capitol Building Isn't Covered By The First Amendment (25)
12:14 US Courts Realizing They Have A Judge Alan Albright Sized Problem In Waco (17)
10:44 Boston Police Department Used Forfeiture Funds To Hide Purchase Of Surveillance Tech From City Reps (16)
10:39 Daily Deal: The Ultimate Microsoft Excel Training Bundle (0)
09:20 NY Senator Proposes Ridiculously Unconstitutional Social Media Law That Is The Mirror Opposite Of Equally Unconstitutional Laws In Florida & Texas (25)
06:12 Telecom Monopolies Are Exploiting Crappy U.S. Broadband Maps To Block Community Broadband Grant Requests (7)
12:00 Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of 2021 At Techdirt (17)
10:00 Gaming Like It's 1926: Join The Fourth Annual Public Domain Game Jam (6)
09:00 New Year's Message: The Arc Of The Moral Universe Is A Twisty Path (33)
19:39 DHS, ICE Begin Body Camera Pilot Program With Surprisingly Good Policies In Place (7)
15:29 Remembering Techdirt Contributors Sherwin And Elliot (1)
13:32 DC Metro PD's Powerful Review Panel Keeps Giving Bad Cops Their Jobs Back (6)
12:11 Missouri Governor Still Expects Journalists To Be Prosecuted For Showing How His Admin Leaked Teacher Social Security Numbers (39)
10:48 Oversight Board Overturning Instagram Takedown Of Ayahuasca Post Demonstrates The Impossibility Of Content Moderation (10)
More arrow
This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it