Only fools steal song lyrics

November 1992
U.S. News & World Report;11/30/92, Vol. 113 Issue 21, p18
Announces that a New York jury has ruled that Frankie Lymon and the Teenagers' 1956 hit `Why Do Fools Fall in Love?' was illegally copyrighted by a record executive who didn't write the song. Two of the teenagers who did, and were paid just $14 a week when they toured with the group, may now collect as much as $4 million in royalties. Questions about copyrights on other doo-wop wonders; Earnings of the New Kids on the Block.


Related Articles

  • Practice: The pitfalls in protecting your designs from the clutches of others. Glazer, S.A. // Architectural Record;May1989, Vol. 177 Issue 6, p37 

    Discusses the limitations of legal protection for design concepts for architects. Copyright laws.

  • Nailing the copycatters. Hoffman, P. // Architectural Record;Jan1991, Vol. 179 Issue 1, p29 

    Examines how the new copyright law giving architects copyright protection of their designs will help the industry at home and abroad.

  • Businesses predict chaos over Europe's data rules. Geake, E. // New Scientist;2/1/92, Vol. 133 Issue 1806, p18 

    Reports on the criticism levied against the draft European law on data protection. What the proposed European legislation is supposed to do; The problems with the draft; Problems that it will create for consumers.

  • Copyright and copy wrong Heidemann, Mary Ann // Planning;Feb1992, Vol. 58 Issue 2, p24 

    No abstract available.

  • Work for hire: Round two. Dubro, A. // Publishers Weekly;6/30/1989, Vol. 235 Issue 26, p80 

    Discusses the legal battle over ending tax capitalization and the `work for hire' clause in the Copyright Act of 1976.

  • Cochran offers work-for-hire bill.  // Publishers Weekly;7/14/89, Vol. 236 Issue 2, p13 

    Discusses the US Supreme Court's interpretation of the work-for-hire provision of the Copyright Act and Sen. Thad Cochran's (R., Miss) introduction of a bill to `clarify' the matter further. Presents details of Cochran's legislation.

  • Britannica appeals Taiwan ruling allowing pirated `Encyclopaedia.'  // Publishers Weekly;7/14/89, Vol. 236 Issue 2, p14 

    Discusses the Taiwan Court ruling that denied `Encyclopedia Britannica's copyright ownership of its Chinese-language `Concise Encyclopaedia Britannica' and allows the publishing and sale of a pirated version. Reaction to the ruling; Tan Ching Book Co. of Taipei pirated the book; Impact of the...

  • The American experience. Risher, C.; Baumgarten, J. // Publishers Weekly;7/14/89, Vol. 236 Issue 2, p52 

    Opinion. Discusses the unauthorized electrocopying of copyrighted materials which is becoming more prevalent, and the difficulty in detecting the practice. The publishers' market for offering materials in electronic format could be destroyed; Collective licensing for publishers.

  • The international view. Clark, C. // Publishers Weekly;7/14/89, Vol. 236 Issue 2, p53 

    Opinion. Discusses the common practice of electrocopying copyrighted materials and provides tentative solutions. Collective licensing through national Reproduction Rights Organizations; Four objectives needed for collective licensing.

  • Getting copyright permission. Morgan, Rebecca L. // Supervision;May95, Vol. 56 Issue 5, p9 

    Discusses how to get permission to use copyrighted materials like articles, cartoons and chapters from books. Questions asked by any publication before granting reproduction permission.


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics