US court: No one owns rights to 'Happy Birthday' song
Arts & Culture
By
Kamau Muthoni
| Sep 25, 2015
A Unites States court has finally rested the row over the 'Happy Birthday' song ownership by declaring that a private entity has no rights to it.
The song popular across the world during birthday celebrations was subject to a legal suit with music publishing company Warner Chappell Music claiming copyright; they had been collecting royalties from the song for decades.
US District Judge George King was told that Warner Chappell bought the rights from Summy Co. at $25 million (Sh2,637,487,500). Summy Co. had acquired the rights of the song from the Hill sisters to exploit and protect.
"The defendants ask us to find that the Hill sisters eventually gave Summy Co. the rights to the lyrics, but this assertion has no support on the record. The Hill sisters gave Summy Co. the rights to the melody and the rights to the piano arrangement based on the melody but never the lyrics," Justice King ruled.
He added that: "Because Summy Co. never acquired the rights to the 'Happy Birthday' lyrics, (the) defendants, as Summy Co's purported successors-in-interest, do not own a valid copyright in the 'Happy Birthday' lyrics."
READ MORE
Bridging the digital divide calls for inclusive development
Why tech experts are against regulation of fast-growing AI
Treasury to cut borrowing, spending on shortfall in revenue collection
State to shut down 25 entities, privatise others in new reforms
Why Kenya must move fast to invest in digital rights security
State, workers' pay tensions cloud function
Why the super-rich are ditching commercial property investments
S Sudan Central Bank Governor Rallies East Africans to Invest in Juba
Co-op Bank lines up billions for women-owned SMEs after German loan deal
Construction players protest state's bid to tax mining sector
Two sisters originally crafted the world's most famous song in 1893.
Parry and Mildred Hill gave it life, together with the 'Good Morning' song and assigned their rights to Clayton Summy the same year.
Clayton then published the manuscript and filed for copyright. The copyright, however, expired in 1949.
- Why tech experts are against regulation of fast-growing AI
- State to shut down 25 entities, privatise others in new reforms
- Sugarcane farmers accuse AFA of 'siding with cartels' as prices drop