• Home
  • 1st Annual Symposium
  • About
  • Available Positions
  • Issues
    • Vol. 4 Issue 2
    • Vol. 4 Issue 1
    • Vol. 3 Issue 3
    • Vol. 3, Issue 2
    • Vol. 3, Issue 1
    • Vol. 2, Issue 3
    • Vol. 2, Issue 2
    • Vol. 2, Issue 1
    • Vol. 1, Issue 1
  • Staff
    • 2009-2010 Staff
    • 2010-2011 Staff
    • 2011-2012 Staff
    • 2012-2013 Staff
  • Submissions
  • Subscribe
Featured Article

A featured article from the current issue of the Intellectual Property Brief.

Daily Blog

A daily blog of IP-related news and issues

Articles

All of the Intellectual Property Brief’s published articles. All articles are hand-selected from outside submissions and from our very own IPB staff members.

Issues

PDF versions of each of the Intellectual Property Brief’s issues.

Short Circuit

Case-by-case summaries of intellectual property related opinions from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Home » Copyright, Daily Blog, Featured

Gaga’s Betrayal: The Copyright Fight over “Judas”

Submitted by Christine Casaceli on February 11, 2013 – 12:01 AM6736No Commenthttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F2013%2F02%2F11%2Fgagas-betrayal-the-copyright-fight-over-judas%2FGaga%E2%80%99s+Betrayal%3A+The+Copyright+Fight+over+%E2%80%9CJudas%E2%80%9D2013-02-11+05%3A01%3A37Christine+Casacelihttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F%3Fp%3D6736

Lady Gaga
It seems fitting that Lady Gaga’s most recent legal battle is surrounding controversy over “Judas,” a song referencing the disgraced disciple famous for betraying Jesus for thirty pieces of silver. In 2011, a relatively unknown Chicago musician, Rebecca Francescatti, filed suit against the Mother Monster for allegedly stealing part of Francescatti’s copyrighted song “Juda.” The suit is for copyright infringement; Gaga is being accused of “sampling” Francescatti’s song which would violate two copyright protections. These protections are codified in 17 U.S.C. § 102, the first for the song itself and the second for the sound recording. If Gaga’s “Judas” is based off of Francescatti’s song she needs a license to be compliant with 17 U.S.C. § 115.

In order to be successful on a copyright infringement claim the plaintiff must demonstrate ownership of the work, proof the defendant had access to the song, and substantial similarity between the two works. The facts of this case are an interesting fit. Francescatti registered “Juda” in 1999 and recorded it in 2005. Both performers used recording engineer Brian Gaynor on their albums, however, Gaynor did not work with Gaga on “Judas.” Gaynor has also been named a defendant in the suit.

The definition of “substantial similarity” is slightly different between the circuits. In the 7th Circuit, where this case is taking place, the definition recently changed. Previously, the court used the “ordinary observer” test where the judges would attempt to determine, after listening to both songs, if an ordinary person off the street would consider them similar. The standard changed in 2012 with the Kanye West case, Peters v. West, where the Court of Appeals rejected the notion that opportunity was enough. The current standard requires the plaintiff to show that the defendant not only had access to their song but also provide evidence of similarity.

How the 7th Circuit will assess Gaga’s possible copyright infringement under the new standard articulated in Peters remains to be seen. For fun, be the ordinary observer and listen for yourself!

Lady Gaga- “Judas”

Rebecca Francescatti- “Juda”

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare

About the Author:

Author: Christine Casaceli

Christine Casaceli is a 2L at the Washington College of law interested in trademark and international law. She serves as a bluebooker and junior blogger for the IP Brief. She earned her B.A. in International Relations from Princeton University.

Christine Casaceli has written 6 posts for the IPB.

Leave a comment!

Click here to cancel reply »

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.

Copyright »

Appropriating Sid Vicious

Appropriating Sid Vicious

Mr. Brainwash’s works recently joined the increasing number of cases on appropriation art after photographer Dennis Morris sued the street artist for use of his 1977 picture of Sid Vicious.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Patents »

Oxycontin and the Implications of Pay-For-Delay

Oxycontin and the Implications of Pay-For-Delay

The Food and Drug Administration’s recent decision, which reasoned that the drug posed public health and safety concerns, creates serious patent implications with regard to generic drugs.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Trademark »

Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million

Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million

Supreme, one of the most coveted skate-inspired clothing brands, is suing women’s clothing brand Married to the Mob and its founder Leah McSweeney for trademark infringement to the tune of $10 million.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Facebook

Accepting Submissions

The IP Brief is currently accepting submissions. We are looking for papers that address a legal topic relating to any area of intellectual property. Please submit completed papers and a cover page with the name and title of the article to ipbrief [at] wcl.american.edu. Any questions can also be sent to this e-mail address.

Blogroll

  • American University Washington College of Law
  • Carrollogos
  • Copyright Blog
  • GamePolitics
  • Intellectual Property Watch
  • PatentlyO
  • Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property
  • Spicy IP
  • The TTABlog®
  • ©ollectanea

Tags

Archives

  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • January 2010

Random Posts

6 Ways to Get Your Domain Name Seized by ICE* The America Invents Act Makes U.S. One Step Closer to First-to-File System NPR Show Settles Lawsuit Against Creationist Radio Program Real Science Friday Are Human Genes Patentable?: Supreme Court to hear Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics Oral Argument NEW APPROACH IN PATENT TROLL FIGHT: RACKSPACE GOES ON THE OFFENSIVE Taiwan Relaxes Law Limiting Uses of Government-Owned IP Mutt’s v. Rutt’s: Dueling Hotdog Trademarks Short Circuit: November 5 - 18, 2012 Google Doodles Up a Patent for a “System and Method for Enticing Users to a Website” The New Hawaiian Model: The Native Hawaiian Cultural Trademark Movement and the Quest for Intellectual Property Rights to Protect and Preserve Native Hawaiian Culture Oral Arguments from Costco v. Omega Unveil Many Questions and One Laugh Short Circuit: September 4 - 28, 2012
(refresh random posts)

Latest Video Post

Relatively New Anti-Piracy PSA: Another Analogy Comparison of Piracy to Stealing Cars or an Effective Message?

Recent Posts

  • Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million
  • Appropriating Sid Vicious
  • Chick-Fil-A’s ‘Eat Mor Chikin’ Trumps Kale-Promotion Slogan
  • Oxycontin and the Implications of Pay-For-Delay
  • Oh, That’s Different … Never mind: USPTO Withdraws Ruling that IPAD MINI is “Merely Descriptive”

Twitter

  • No public Twitter messages.
  • Copy / Paste
  • Site Search
  • Wikipedia
  • Google
  • Facts
  • Amazon
  • eBay
  • Outlook
  • Gmail
  • Y! Mail
  • Twitter
  • Search & Share
Powered by WordPress | Log in | Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS) | Arthemia Premium theme by Colorlabs Project
The American University Intellectual Property Brief is licensed by the staff of the American University Intellectual Property Brief under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License. IPBrief.net is hosted by Dan Rosenthal. For technical queries, contact dan@danrosenthal.org

Creative Commons License