Judge’s present to world with Happy Birthday ruling
THOUSANDS of people who were charged for using the song Happy Birthday to You may get their money back after a court ruled that the tune was free for all to sing.
An American judge said the song was not under copyright following a twoyear legal battle, and a music publishing company may have to pay back tens of millions of dollars it charged in licence fees. Warner/Chappell, the publishing arm of Warner Music Group, levied fees totalling $2 million (£1.3 million) a year for the commercial use of Happy Birthday, including in films, plays and greeting cards.
People singing the song in their homes or at private parties did not have to pay but businesses such as restaurants were technically liable if they used it. A case against Warner was brought by Jennifer Nelson, an inde- pendent film-maker, who was producing a documentary about the song and was charged $1,500 to include it.
Following the ruling, she said: “This is a great victory for musicians, artists and people around the world who have waited decades for this.” Randall Newman, Ms Nelson’s lawyer, said: “Happy Birthday is finally free. Finally, the charade is over. It’s unbelievable.”
Ms Nelson had also asked the court to make Warner refund $5 million col- lected from thousands of people in recent years. The court will decide at a later date whether that money has to be returned. In theory, the amount refunded could amount to tens of millions of dollars stretching back decades.
One of those seeking a refund is Rupa Marya, of the band Rupa & The April Fishes, who had to pay $455 after including the song on their album.
Others who have had to pay fees in the past include the film-maker Steve tary
During the case, lawyers analysed the long and complicated history of the song. It was written by sisters Mildred Hill and Patty Hill in Kentucky in the 1890s for use in a nursery.
The lyrics were published by the Hill sisters and copyright was reputedly assigned to their publisher, Clayton F Summy Co, in 1935. Warner bought Clayton F Summy Co in 1988 and said this meant it had rights to the song. But in a 42-page ruling, District Judge George H King, sitting in Los Angeles, said: “The Hill sisters gave Summy Co the rights to the melody, and the rights to piano arrangements based on the melody, but never any rights to the lyrics.” A spokesman for Warner/Chappell said it was “considering our options”.
It may have come as a revelation to many people that every time they celebrated a family birthday with a song, they were not just giving musical expression to happiness, they were making use of the valuable intellectual property of the Warner/Chappell Music Company of Los Angeles. Yet a US court case has highlighted that company’s erstwhile ownership of Happy Birthday
to You, and thus the right to millions in royalties for its public performance. Hence the song is seldom heard in films and television shows.
The judge has now ruled that the company’s claim to copyright over the song is largely invalid. Filmmakers and others are free to use it without charge. Given the ubiquity of the song, this seems only sensible. We wish for many happy returns of such judicial common sense.