When You Wish Upon A Lawsuit: Another "Family Guy" Music Lawsuit

Music publishing house Bourne Co. filed a lawsuit last Monday against 20th Century Fox, the Fox network, 20th Century Fox Television, 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment, Fuzzy Door Productions, Cartoon Network, Seth McFarlane, and Walter Murphy over a 2000 episode of Family Guy entitled “When You Wish Upon A Weinstein.” The episode- which didn’t air in the United States until 2003 for fears it was “anti-Semetic”- plays on various Jewish stereotypes and includes a scene in which the main character sings a song hoping for a Jewish accountant which is an obvious parody of When You Wish Upon A Star from the 1940 film Pinocchio. Bourne- which controls the rights to the Oscar-winning song as successor to Irving Berlin, Inc.- claims the original song, which was originally sung by Cliff “Ukulele Ike” Edwards and is used in the logo of The Walt Disney Company, is “one of the most famous songs of all time” which “epitomiz[es] the wonders of childhood and the powers of love, hope, and belief” and the parody is “frequently anti-Semetic,” “initially witheld…from distribution in recognition of how offensive the episode is (even by the standards of a show that prides itself on offensive content)” and “[has] harmed the value of [the original song] by associating the famous song with a vile and outrageous anti-Semitic message.” Bourne also comments in their filing that the show is often considered to be a ripoff of The Simpsons and “frequently relies on outrageous and offensive content to attract its viewership.” Bourne is suing for the removal of the song from future airings and purchases of the episode and statutory damages of a minimum of $150,000. This isn’t the first time the show has been sued over music parodies: Earlier this year, a court threw out a case filed by Carol Burnett and her company, Whacko Inc., over the unauthorized use of her trademarked “Charwoman” cartoon character and a parody of her show’s theme song after the show was denied permission for the genuine article.

I don’t think Bourne is going to win this one. I’m also surprised that the rights to the song aren’t held by one of Disney’s publishing arms- I guess Walt hadn’t started expanding the business in 1940.

Why doesn’t somebody just sue the show for being so unfunny? That’s a lawsuit they could probably win.

:confused: What’s Irving Berlin got to do with it? The song was written by Leigh Harline & Ned Washington (no clue if either of them were Jewish).

The song was originally published by Irving Berlin’s self-named company. Bourne Co. renewed the copyright in 1967. Irving Berlin Co. sold all non-Berlin compositions it owned to Bourne in or around 1944.

Gotcha. Thanks. :slight_smile:

Overall, the key part he’s going to have to prove is

A pretty specious assertion at best, especially given that the only people who would know this version of the song are (a) fully aware of its satiric intent, and (b) unlikely to be people who don’t view a Disneyfied world with a certain skepticism anyway.

Dumb.

I don’t know if he’ll win the suit, but he made me laugh. (“Frequently?”) Good for him!

People let their children watch Family Guy?

Anyway, I thought parody was protected speech.

My understanding is that it’s protected by fair use - but legally, parody is defined more narrowly than most people do: spoofs that don’t refer to the original piece of work aren’t considered parody.

I don’t understand what you’re saying about the boundaries of parody. I didn’t see the ep in question, so I didn’t hear the song. If the song so closely resembles When You Wish, as they claim, how can it not “refer” to it? WYWUAS is, as they claim, so widely known that anyone who hears a line of the tune, without its original lyric, will recognize it at once.

I’m a mere non-lawyer, so surely I have misunderstood you.

I’m not a lawyer either. And as a non-FG fan, it’s been years since I heard the song. But the way I understand it - and I hope a lawyer will explain if I’m wrong -using the tune and some of the words from a song does not constitute parodying it. The lyrics of the FG song would have to comment on the original song, for example mocking it in some way. They don’t, from what I can see. The song is called “I Need a Jew.”

This link has the lyrics, although you’ll probably get pop-ups along with them.

If the song was so horrendously offensive, why has it taken four years for the shyster lawyers to ask for their pound of flesh?

If they had actually used the tune of the original song without permission, I could see their point. But much like The Simpsons, Family Guy parodies songs by getting the real tune when possible and writing a similar-sounding song when they can’t. In this case, they wrote a soundalike- probably because they knew they couldn’t get permission for the real thing, as the lawsuit proves. (The Burnett casevwas over a soundalike, too- Burnett had denied permission for the real thing.)

UPDATE

A lawsuit music publisher Bourne Co. filed against the producers of Family Guy over a parody of a classic standard was thrown out yesterday. In 2007, Bourne sued the producers of the show over a parody of the classic, Academy Award-winning song “When You Wish Upon A Star” that appeared in a 2003 episode entitled “When You Wish Upon A Weinstein” (actually produced in 2000, but held back due to fears of backlash from the Jewish community). The company stated that the parody “harmed the value and reputation” of the signature theme of The Walt Disney Company “by associating the famous song with a vile and outrageous anti-Semetic message.” Seth MacFarlane, creator of the series, pointed out that he originally wanted to use the actual song, but was denied the rights, and that the parody version “absurdly inserts and juxtaposes Peter’s ignorant racial stereotypes” regarding Jews- which he later learns are wrong- “into the fantasy world [of Pinocchio] by, among other things, depicting the Jews as magical creatures that come to Peter in the form of a magical spaceship that turns into a flying dreidel.”

According to MacFarlane, he and the writers were both “parodying the ‘wholesomeness’ of [the song] while simultaneously engaging in the height of irony and making a sharp point about Walt Disney’s reputed anti-Semitism.” (One of the documents used to comment on rumors and public curiosity about whether or not Disney was an anti-Semite was actually a Straight Dope column, which is pointed out to be one of the top five hits for Googling “Disney Jews.”) Writer Ricky Blitt added, “Part of the comedic and parodic message comes stems from this kind of ‘reverse Archie Bunker-like situation’ of Peter singing about his ignorant views against the background of this iconic, wholesome, fairy tale song…Whereas you are usually wishing for world peace or for the world to be perfect, here, Peter is wishing for a Jew who is good with money to come into his life. This is the juxtaposition that makes the parody song especially funny.” Bourne was unaware of the parody until an employee found a clip of the song on YouTube in 2007.

Yesterday, New York District Judge Deborah Batts threw out the case, stating that although an obvious parody of the original, the music, lyrics, and tone of the offending song were obviously meant to be satirical and contrary to the positive message of the original, and that “the owner of a well-known work ‘must expect, or at least tolerate, a parodist’s deflating ridicule’” and that “it is precicely [the song’s] beneficial association” with Disney and its “reputation for wholesomeness…that opens the song up to ridicule by parodists seeking to take the wind out of such lofty, magical, or pure associations.” Batts also commented that the defendants’ use of the song “calls to mind a warm and fuzzy view of the world that is ultimately nonsense; wishing upon a star does not, in fact, make one’s dreams come true. By pairing Peter’s ‘positive,’ though racist, stereotypes of Jewish people with that fairy tale world view,” the parody can be interepreted as stating that “any categorical view of a race of people is childish and simplistic, just like wishing on a star.”

The court documents are rather interesting to look at.