Comparison of Down Under (Men at Work) and Kookaburra Sits in the Old Gum Tree
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 вер 2024
- Some people have trouble hearing the melody of "Kookaburra" in the "Down Under" song by Men at Work. This video isolates the melody in the flute part.
UA-cam videos used to create this comparison:
“Down Under” : • Men At Work - Down Und...
MenatworkVEVO Channel : / @menatworkvevo
“Kookaburra” : • Kookaburra Song Australia
Anna Spear Channel : / @foxandghostgirlatvent...
Greg Ham - Isolated Flute & Synth : • Men at Work - Down Und...
StrangerInAustralia Channel : / @strangerinaustralia
Colin Hay in Sydney 2012 speaking humorously on the litigation of Down Under and Kookaburra and performing Down Under :
• Video
Colin Hay Channel (namesake, not the real Colin Hay) : / channel
They only knew about it because of a TV Quiz show (Spicks and Specks) that featured a question about "Down Under" the question was "What children's song is contained in the song 'Down Under'?" the answer was "Kookaburra"
Some scum bag, money chasing, pen pusher who was watching the show then decided to phone and email Larriken Records to suggest that they should sue the band for copyright infringement.
Colin Hay's dad Jim died shortly after the final court case in 2010 largely due to the stress of it all. While Greg Ham suffered a heart attack and died in April 2012 after sinking into a deep depression due to the stress and embarrassment that the court cases brought upon him. He took quite a lot of drugs afterwards and started using heroin again.
And for what 5% royalties?!?! Of course those greedy bastards wanted 40-60% but thankfully that never happened. Really just shows what people will do for money... 💸
And the song is from the 30s. It's a nursery rhyme. It would be like someone using London Bridge in their song. But Australian copyright allows that shit to be copyrighted for years and years. this reminds me of the idiocy with the song happy birthday which just got put into public domain a few years ago. Really, before a few years ago, you could get sued for having happy birthday in your media.
Sad to hear the bloke died because of this. Next they'll be copyrighting the C note. At the very worse, Down Under is a derivative work of the children's nursery song Kookaburra in the flute portion, and as such is completely unique under at least US copyright law, more here: www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.pdf
Copyright is just bullshit.
I heard about this via "Get This" many moons back. Wasn't it BMG music or something who had bought the copyright to the song?
I personally liked the song NOT because of some sh$ty bird song! And then, in art it’s called “borrowing”, but now in these lawsuit times it’s called “stealing” and is punishable, mainly for the money! Without borrowing the ideas humans would’ve stayed in caves! We wouldn’t have had renaissance! Because of this stupid and disgusting lawsuit people have died!
Wow how did this get to a court. There are songs that are a CLEAR rip off and yet there is never a lawsuit. But this is a really a stretch to say that some 1935 kids tune has been ripped off. I hear a different melody, a different tempo and only a few bars that are being claimed as the same. There is some really scum out there trying to make a buck on what is an icon song.
Once a kangaroo court, always a kangaroo court.
I played it before on flute. I always sped it up while playing it because i thought it sounded better. Trust me, its way too close to Kookaburra
usually songs that are "clear rip offs" do have lawsuits you just haven't heard of them - you can't stop the song from being played you just end up paying royalties. "Ice ice baby" was sued to oblivion by Queen and bowie for ripping off under pressure. Most music already have copyrights licensed to another artist since a lot of it is owned by the same label.
@@kaitlynmaxwell3737 Maybe you're tonedeaf
@@kaitlynmaxwell3737 I've played this song on keyboard and there is absolutely. No similarities. Kookaburra is all of key. Sure you could put the kookaburra lyrics to the flute Melody but you could do that with a ton of different lyrics. There is a UA-cam channel where the guy sings smash mouth all Star lyrics over just about any song you can think of and can make them fit. Doesn't mean everyone ripped off all Star... It's a fluke.
Bloody disgusting. Not even a little bit close. That money hungry family should be ashamed of themselves.
The family didnt want him to sue them
@Reunite The British Empire i agree with ur name
@Auslara33 Agreed with you!
@Auslara33 it's not even close, I think you better get your hearing checked.
@Auslara33 obviously not as much as you dumbfuck.
To compare these two songs is really reaching, down under is an iconic song and part of my childhood rip Greg Ham
The flute match the chorus of kookabura
@Jaz mine says listen
ua-cam.com/video/p2VitpGRalw/v-deo.html
It's not reaching. In interviews the band stated that they thought it was common domain, but it was copyrighted
It is purposefully sampled by the band into the song to make it more Australian
@@Smith-if8sn
it does not make it any less ridiculous.
in any other country this wouldve been laughed off.
1) Kookaburra song has a triplet rhythm whereas Down Under has a sixteenth note rhythm. 2) It's only one bar of a two bar riff. But the law says it only has to be an important, essential, or distinctive part of the original work and small alterations can't save you. So I can see how it can be called an infringement of copyright. But it's a small part of the recording, so it would have been fairer if it only cost a small percentage of royalties. Most music creators wouldn't sue for one bar. It's like an unwritten rule that small breaches of copyright don't count because every song has at least one bar of melody from another song because there are a limited number of combinations for an 8 note scale.
its 2 bars that are repeated in the song a few times, and yeah that would get you sued everytime
A few minutes ago I heard a song whose riff was already familiar. It was "Sarbacane" by Johnny Halliday, apparently released in 1989. The intro is exactly that of "Money for nothing" by Dire Straits released in 1985. Was Halliday "inspired" by Knofler or did they find inspiration from an older song ? Anyway the case of Men at Work seems to me Angstromic beside this Kilometric case !
If someone doesn't know how to drill a hole, they will blow it up with TNT! I live in Poland and I know this hit very well, here we say: If you don't know what it's about, it's about money. Let MAW live!
Holy shit, they sound almost nothing alike. Wow.
I met Colin Hay and I asked him about this and the look on his face I could frame and stuck on a wall.
R.I.P. Greg Ham.
Where is the plagio?....it's stupid thing
R. I. P., Greg Ham. What they did to you was unfair.
This bullshit cost a man's life...I really hope that guilt sits with those that filed this law suit
it didn't. & it won't
It was the guilt of stealing the melody that killed him. It sat with him, it killed him. Job done.
ian Stewart True it's bloody unAustralian and an insult to our land and great music exports!..
very hard-hearted of them! Kookaburras now need support too
Almighty Shux wish it was you instead : (
This is a s-t-r-e-t-c-h..... really.
Hard stretch. And how petty to mention something so stupid almost 3 decades after the song was released. What a world we live in😔
I certainly didn’t catch the similarity!
I hope they found the guy who wrote the question for the ABC game show that started it all and punched him in the mouth...probably just some wanna be musician trying to be the smartest guy in the room just sad...
@@irish80-93 Calm tf down.
@@irish80-93 your comment is just sad.
Absolutely ridiculous to say this was plagiarized . RIP Greg Ham. I will always remember you for putting Australia on the map. I love Australia because of you and your music! Thank you.
*Austria
@@XDarket lol
it was plagarized and they admitted it and lost the court case. i mean nothing can be more simple than this,. they got caught stealing and admitted the theft
@@simonjames1604 They lost their case but i don't think they ever admitted to plagiarism.
@@coolcat6303 yeah they only had the flute player sit in a gum tree in the video, i mean they stole and got caught, who cares if they admitted it or not? they got done red handed for a lousy move
I must be deaf but I hear no similarities here.
Me neither!!
Sorry what did you say? I think I must be deaf too.
I can hear the similarities, always could, but to me that tied the whole song to our amazing Australian culture. As far as suing for the revival of the tune well, perhaps they should be grateful that somebody found it worthy to be included in their Aussie Down Under song! Mimicry is the best compliment! Wondering when Kraft will be suing over the use of the word "Vegemite"???
Australian culture was what Greg Ham was going for.
I don't think Kraft owns 'Vegemite' anymore.
igor javier and sixbells its exactly the same once I knew about it I listened for it it the song I knew it right away when I heard it
If a flute can plagiarize vocals; then there's a copyright drum-track in every song known to mankind.
IF they can trace owners ;)
Amen, Brother
Any instrument can plagiarize any other because it's the "tune" what matters (basic chord and notes distinctive signature in a song); the voice (vocals) are also considered part of the tune, thus a "virtual" instrument
It’s the melody you tard
I agree with you!!!
I am amazed that they found a plagiarised similarity. There are only 12 notes total and less than that in any one key. The bit that sounds similar is a pedal repetition that is a common technique in all music.
If this is plagiarism then there has never been an original rock and roll song or 12 bar blues since the very first one of each was written.
the flute plays 23 notes identical to the kookaburra melody, thats way too many to get away with and it is sadly plagarism
You don't need the flute to sing the song. Play it on guitar solo and there is absolutely zero of kookaburra in the song. The flute part is just a frill and not the melody of chorus.
@@NormBoyle the flute part is kookaburra , note for note, he even sits in a gum tree n the video while he plays it
@@simonjames1604 but that isn't the song. It's an arrangement done by the flute player. He didn't write the song.
@@NormBoyle its stolen from another song and they got sued for it. you cant steal half a tune and get away with it
Poor Greg Ham. He died knowing this false accusation of "stealing" Kookaburra was tied to the song "Down Under". There is no comparison. Totally dumb and false accusation. His estate should sue.
the thickness of this one is strong. just google search the comparison for fuck's sake. But i guess it's easier to make an ignorant comment on a youtube video then it is to use your brain.
***ALMIGHT SHUX*** Actually the majority of people don't really see the comparison. In fact, most people who listened to "Down Under" before the suit DID NOT compare the flute solo to Kookaburra. So before you go around insulting people with your dirty mouth you should do your own research. G'day.
"the majority of people" are complete ignorami, FACT ;)
let me spell it out for you:
koo-ka bur-ra sits in the old gum tree
G G G G A A A G E G_E
mer-ry mer-ry king of the bush is he
E E E E F F F E C E_C
see those two lines? same sequence of notes, transposed
MAW Flute Solo:
F F F U C K Y O U
D D D U M T W A T
LOL i couldn't resist ;)
Real MAW Flute Solo:
F# F# F# F# G G G F# D F# D
(the notes are different because it's been transposed. You can't claim someone else's melody as your own just by transposing it or even changing the key)
reduced to numbers to make it even MORE CLEAR: (4 being the lowest note in the melody counting notes going up)
KOOK:
3 3 3 3 4 4 4 3 1 3 1
MAW
the fucking same :)
I don't need to do the research because I understand how music works.
if you want to look into the odds of coming up with the same melody as someone else randomly, go right ahead. it's almost impossible. ALMOST.
kinda agree with both sides. yes Shux has spotted the similarity. & also, Elizabeth B has spotted that Shux is a total asshole
the whole thing is still a load of cock though. Down Under is an epic song. & only in an ass-backwards modern court can a great piece of art like that be accused of plagiarizing a forgettable & simplistic kids tune
lancsFrogger I love your way of thinking! ♥
they shouldve been honored there shitty nursery rhyme was used in this epic song lol
I am Brazilian and a fan of Men At Work. I never knew about the plagiarism situation of the song Down Under. How can justice incriminate the Band? Greg Ham died of heartbreak and they stained their greatest success! For God's sake!!!
"justice"...there is your answer.
Yes so sad about Greg Ham that he had to die with this on his mind.
Saddest thing of the whole affair.
As a musician, I can only hear a slight similarity in the melody of the flute and the notes of the song of the Kookaburra. There are MANY songs that sound similar to each other. Thats how hundreds of thousands of song have been written. Hell, every other rock song was in the key of G,C and D.
its identical , the flute player admitted thats what he was playing , hell he even sits in a gum tree in the video. as a musician get your hearing checked you may be tone deaf.
Influenced by should be the legal term or pastiche like quentin tarantino does with most of his movies or martin scorcese.
@@hgv3666 in this case its just stealing and the artist involves admits stealing so thats why they lost the case, they were guilty of stealing and everyone knows it.
@@simonjames1604 Você ganhou algo nesse processo, pois parece de tanto que defende o suposto plágio aqui.
@@don5anjos just presenting the facts of the case. men at work lost , and they lost for a reason
whoever had the rights to the kookaburra song should get down on their knees and thank Men at Work. people turn evil when they think they can get money
Agree with you.
I see almost none similarity, and Down Under is a thousand times better song than that children´s crap song made in 1935 !!!!!
INSIGHTFUL!
100%
It’s almost old enough to be exempt from copyright law
Nope. Copyright is the Author's life + 70 years. The weird thing about this case, nobody noticed it until mid 2000s when the suit is filed. Which means some nerd sitting at the copyright owner's office randomly noticed it.
🖒 I agree, Javier.
This is crazy. I listen to the isolated flute track subtitled with the "Kookaburra" lyrics. Then I rewind to the actual song, and it's a different melody.
@@_Anton_Marchenko_ the first 23 notes are identical, you are tone deaf., sorry.
@@_Anton_Marchenko_ men at work lost over a million dollars US trying to fight this court case , taking it twice to the australian supreme court and losing BOTH times. so this isnt a 5% right issue at all, men at work stole someone elses work, got caught and paid the price. the fact that your untrained ears cant hear it? that tells us nothing, sorry!
I think so too
@@simonjames1604how
you might have autism of some sort, else why are you so obsessed about this case?
can we just sit back in awe at how cool that FLute and Synth only version is?
The problem is that apparently we can't. We have this copyright backed morons around the corner all the time.
it is so cool! the main reason i rewatch the video
Yes… I listened to that isolation track over and over. Love it!
Someone should make a hardstyle song with it!
Yeah and it was made 40 years ago wtf
As we say in Australia "you're joking aren't ya!?" One became a pseudo national anthem and one is only know to a few elderly music nerds - money sure makes people ugly
I grew up singing the children's song in CANADA pre release of the MAW record. Ignorance is bliss...AND GET'S YOU SUED, HAHA.
One was known to children and people globally decades before the MAW record and one is known by a continent of ignorant bogan sports fanatics. Open your mind, just don't let your brain fall out.
Wow Almight Shux ... no idea where you grew up or live but in my country (the land down under - aka as a continent of ignorant bogan sports fanatics) your attitude is worthy of the dunny! Maybe you should get a life other than growling at others!
Icy Bones
read the thread idiot, and don't take my comment out of context.
I sang Kookaburra in grade school in the U.S. I never picked up on either of the 2-bar riffs from the flute solo in "Land Down Under" as being from the children's song. Apparently, neither did the music company that brought the suit for over 28 years.
People will do anything for money. Hope they're happy now.
I am at a loss as to why Men at Work lost this lawsuit. Trying really hard to find a similarity between the songs and even with this video explanation- I still can’t.
I was just thinking the same thing. Me neither. I here no similarity whatsoever. And I'm trying really hard to hear it.
WAS THEY ALL TONE DEAF?!?!?! There is no similarities WHATSOEVER! It was all a damned greedy money grab. Rest in Peace Mr. Ham.
The only tone deaf things going on are the people that cant hear the similarities, having said that this video did a terribly job at the comparison.
its identical there are 23 notes from kookaburra played in the same order several times in the song, you cant do that and thats why men at work lost
This is insane. to be sued over this is just completely nuts...
Seriously, how many musicologists testified at this trial? What a travesty -- and what a cruel punishment for Colin Hay -- who wrote this great song in the late 70s - and to the flute player, Greg Ham, who blamed himself (and died early because of it!) for adding the handful of notes. THIS VERY VERY SIMPLE PROGRESSION OF A HANDFUL OF NOTES must be found in dozens and dozens of classical pieces and folk songs as folk songs are frequently very similar in structure. Think of the dozens of rock songs that use the same chord progressions -- there are only so many patterns of notes available. Nowadays Beethoven would have been sued out of existence for "plagiarizing" Handel's "Sarabande," even though it was a deliberate tribute AND the sequence of notes in "Sarabande" went back much earlier than Handel. And many songs have used lines from novels or poems etc in their lyrics (see The Cure's wonderful "Charlotte Sometimes," based on the excellent English children's novel "Charlotte Sometimes" -- the author has said that she loved the fact that the band was so inspired by her novel). In the idiotic money-grubbing that goes on now the band would be sued for using lines from the novel in their lyrics.
Beethoven would have been sued out of existence, ha! good one, I'll plagiarize this if you don't mind
Indeed RIP Greg
Well said. It's like if the "Whoo Hoo" guy sued for copyright infringement every time somebody used that phrase.
it was several handful of notes that belonged to another song and taking that many handfuls is why they lost the case.
@@simonjames1604 Larriken Records appreciates your devotion to them. Hopefully you got a bonus in your next check because of your support.
as a regular person... I hear two completely different songs
The melody is similar but it is definitely not ripping off the 1935 melody! I mean maybe at some degree but this is more of an accidental sampling than a complete rip-off! Anyways the melody similarities are most likely by coincidence than the band copying an song that was at the time 45 years old! Come on people, there were lawsuits over this! Also the series of lawsuits started in 2008 which is 28 years after the release of this song, so really I think that someone found a similar melody just to potentially get some fame or money out of this magnificent piece of music.
I read it was because a TV Quiz-show featured the question "what children's song does "Down Under" feature"? and the next day the rights holders set the wheels in motion to sue, they had no idea until it was on this quiz show.... Crazy!
it is , 23 identical notes in the flute part. its why they lost the case
@@simonjames1604 Damn you must be the guy that posed the question on the game show
@@The504lego nah i am just a better musician than you . i can hear the plagarism. its no shock they lost if you actually can hear.
@@simonjames1604 It's not even that close there's trills that the original song doesn't have.
I was reading about this on Wikipedia after listening to Cargo for the first time in years. Came off that the current copyright holders bought the rights to kookaburra for it's potential lawsuit. Curious; I looked up Australia's copyright laws and it's 50 years of protection for anything that was copyrighted before 2005. So it should of expired in 1984 and they bought in 1990; 6 whole years after it had expired and then sue Men at Work nearly 20 years later. Totally bummy.! Rip Greg Ham; we'll remember you as a talented artist and a falsely accused plaigarizer.
he wasnt falsely accused , the band thought incorrectly that koukaberra was public domain and it wasnt. he is sitting in a gum tree in the video there is no question that they knew exactly what they were doing, they just didnt think it would cost them.
It wasn't on Cargo but on the debut album Men at Work
@@simonjames1604and why should it? it’s a folk song bozo
@@BRIAN_IVERSON_20 no it isnt bozo it was written by a fellow australian who was still alive when men at work stole it
Wow...not even close. The very first time I heard George Harrison's "My Sweet Lord," I thought immediately "He's So Fine." They were clearly almost identical, as Harrison admitted. But this? Whatever similarity there is had absolutely nothing to do with the success of the song. The judges must be idiot with no understanding of music.
There are only 12 tones in music. The idea that there is any resemblance to "Down Under" and "kookaburra" is tantamount to saying "they are both audible". It's ridiculous!
the flute plays the first 23 notes of the melody of koukaberra in the same order. thats like hitting the lottery with 23 numbers . the odds against it just happening are pretty much zero so this was deliberate. the fact you cant hear it doesnt mean it didnt happen. and thats why they lost the case.
I was a professional musician for years -- this is a stretch. I mean... when you have to use your imagination to "try to make it fit," then no, it wasn't "stolen or lifted."
it was played note for note because the flute player thought it was a trad song. he sits in a gum tree in the video, its so obious that i think you may be tone deaf.
I am a musician and singer and when I hear a new song on the radio that comes out I can frequently tell if it's a ripoff of some other song for example, when Sam Smith's "Stay With Me" came out and I heard it for the first time I immediately started humming and singing Tom Petty's "I Won't Back Down." I found out later that Smith had indeed ripped Petty off and had to pay. I can say with 100% certainty that "Down Under" and the "Kookaburra" song sound little to nothing alike. Possibly in one or two of the first notes of the flute but you could insert tens of thousands of songs that have these exact same two notes in progression. In comparing the lyrics, musicianship and overall sound of the song there is no comparison to be made they are not even remotely close. The flute doesn't make the song, people weren't going out and buying up this album because "Those first two notes on the flute are so dope man!" This court in Australia who made this judgement screwed up and it's sad to hear that the flute player went down the drain and killed himself over this horrible decision.
I would like to add that "Down Under" is in a minor key. So even if the short sequence of the notes are the same, they are in a different place harmonically.
the first 23 notes in kookaburra are played on the flute in down under. several times. so you cant tell because you missed two identical streams of notes several times. the notes are not close to each other but actually the same, no variation at all which was why the case was a loss for men at work
I always thought that the part of the song was an homage to song. It's a song about Australia!
I've always sung "kookaburra sits in the old gum tree" when that part of Down Under plays...it was always meant to incorporate iconic Australian things.
Well said
yes exactly a reference not a copy
Since Kookaburra song is a children's song played in every school (according to comments), Greg Ham must've thought it was public property, so basically anyone could use it and nobody would give a damn let alone present a lawsuit.
seriously, we sang this song in Ohio in my 3rd grade music class- so did, I think, nearly all Americans
My granny in England used to sing it to me in the early 2000s too
@@maximilian333 I never heard of it.. born and raised in Chicago
That's exactly what happened
Took me long enough to hear the similarities, but I just one question: Why is this even a big deal? It's just a few notes in a random song! The flute part isn't even the main part of the song, and it's a pretty simple melody at that! They even changed it a bit as well, so it's not even the same melody (added other parts and made it faster), so why care!?!
Because copyright forces you to protect it otherwise someone can use your lack of enforcement as an excuse to actually rip you off. It's pretty dumb
because the new copyright owners of the song (it was purchased in 2008) wanted some easy money.
@@AChannelFrom2006 Excactly that! Did they get any money after all?
@@pcon71 Yes they ended up getting $4.5 million and continued royalties. It ended up causing the death of one of the members of the band, Greg Ham.
@@pcon71 The Libraries Board of South Australia sold the rights to the Kookaburra song to Larrikin Music Publishing Pty Ltd. for a sum of $6,100 in 2008.
Larrikin Music took Men at Work to court seeking 60% of future royalties and past earnings. They ended up being awarded $4.5 million and 5%.
They're exactly the same. Just the "kookaburra sits in the old gum tree" part. There's no need to get all defensive about it.
listen to something long enough and you can fit whatever you want , they key here is the rhythm. You need to listen real hard and change the accents to adopt the kookabura song to the flute part, therefore justifying the argument. I say if you have to dive that deep then it isnt comparable . Damn good musicians name ruined by idiots
no you dont its the same 23 notes as the first two lines as kookaburra, its identical . which is why they lost the case
What is interesting is that if you listen to the 1980 original version, there is a lot more instrumentation, there more flute, and a jam about 2 minutes into the song. When they come out of the jam, Ham plays the arabic riff, "Streets of Cairo", Obviously he was incredibly talented flute player. And while the Kookabura sits and ROTS in the old gum tree, Ham revitalized it and brought that old bird back to life and played it better
No need to attack the kookaburra he didn’t file a lawsuit 😤😤
I agree. Men at work did excellent work on that song. Piss on the idiots that filed that lawsuit.
Come on ...really? Been listening to this song for nearly 40 years and NEVER did I think to myself “that flute line sounds like Kookaburra” :-(
Same. And I'm a flautist and musician who sings kookaburra to kids fairly regularly!
O.k., if you isolate it I can hear the similarity, but it isn't wholesale lifted, it isn't played to BE kookaburra (it's more like a quote or homage, I guess) and it never occurred to me for that reason.
Such a shame.
@dfens1944 lol indeed. I tell you what, when you've posted some videos of yourself performing to a higher standard than Alan or myself, I'll take your comment seriously 😉 Can't wait to hear you! 👍🏻🎶🎵
I like how mr. Ham was sitting on an old (gum?) tree while playing the flute. He most likely heard the Kookaburra tune in his childhood too and probably wanted this scene to be a homage/reference.
That's what I was thinking, but I can't hear any similarity at all.
This is my opinion.
I think mr. Ham ,who grew up with this song, is playing it in tribute. In music this is called a musical quote. He's even sitting in a tree when the lyric is "kookaburra sits in an old gum tree."
The song is 1932 maybe he assumed it was in the public domain..
That's like listening to a Gorillaz sing and fitting the lyrics of a different song to the beat. The entire lawsuit is bullshit.
IME (In My Ears), the flute riff in 'Down Under' sounds *NOTHING* like that lame song for booger machines (I mean, 'kids'.) The Judge who 'overheard' the lawsuit couldn't have 'heard' any similarities because there are none. I hate that the Men had to go through that shit: particularly Greg Ham. IMO, it broke him (not money-broke, but emotionally/physically/mentally/personally -- although it's my understanding that, in the end, he did lose pretty much everything) and sent him into a downward spiral. I refuse to believe that he was an alcoholic and/or drug addict, nor will I remember him for 'copying' something because you can't copy something that doesn't exist. Instead, I am choosing to remember Greg Ham as the cute, goofy, sweet, gentle, loveable, down-to-earth, playful and extremely talented, multi- instrument-playing musician with the amasingly beautiful blue eyes & the mischievous, grin/smile that melted the heart of the 13-year-old girl that I was in 1982. They still do 💙.
To me it's just a passing citation of the children's rhyme, and the flute melody constitutes only a minor part of the song, which has many other well crafted parts. To make a lawsuit out of it is utterly shameful, even for greedy lawyer's standards. I'm disgusted that such an ugly motivation has tainted such a great song.
Absolute joke . How could a judge come to this decision . Lives have been ruined
Long live Greg Ham... I love this song but can't help but get sad whenever I hear it because of the bullshit copyright claim :(
Hannah Gissane me too.
Greg Ham was freaking amazing and that isolated audio only proved it.
When I first saw/listened to the official "Down Under" video, the first things that struck me was "That flute sounds like the Kookaburra song." I remember Kookaburra from my childhood, and assumed it was in public domain and that the flute riff was a nod to it. So I searched on Kookaburra and was surprised to learn it was still under copyright, and also learned of the unfortunate lawsuit between the two tunes. I tend to think the use in "Down Under" was intentional, but as more of an acknowledgement than a ripoff. Both pertain to Australia, and the first video shot of the flautist has him sitting in a tree while playing the riff ("Kookaburra sits in the old gum tree..."). That having been said, I wish the Kookaburra folks would have just let it go.
100% !!!!
Same here I thought that sounds similar to Kookaburra. I always figured it was to go with the aussie theme.
The thing is, the woman who wrote Kookaburra was dead long before the court case, so it really is the corporate money-grabbing record label who have decided to sue, yes they own the rights but it leaves a bad taste in the mouth for sure!
Technically for copyright you *have* to go after it otherwise the next time people will point to the previous incident as precedent to why they can use it
I REMEMBER SINGING THIS LIKE 5 YEARS AGO IN PRIMARY! God that gave me a lot of memories.
Though we sang "How fun your life must be"
And I also assumed Kookaburra was some old hag sitting in a literal gum tree, and that the "king of the bush" was some random king who sat in a bush all day.
Wtf? I've spent my life studying, playing and teaching music and I am just not hearing this.
Same here. I didn't read every reply here, but there is a big difference that could explain why we are not hearing this. Though the sequence of the notes might be similar, the relationship with the harmony is not the same.
This is the biggest load of horse manure I've ever heard in my life. The flautist throws together a little four phrase, rhythmic, D major, 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 pentatonic riff, structured A B A C, and yes, you can hear that phrases B and C have the same notes as KSITOGT, but this is not a copyright violation and it's really sad that the legal system couldn't figure that out. I'm a composer myself and knowing that note match is in there doesn't change the way I feel about this piece as a whole - that flute riff is inspired. It's a great song and the vultures who attacked this band and caused them such grief should hang their heads in shame.
Utter bollocks..... Nothing that would demand a copyright claim to me... Obviously greed being the motive. Only the transcript must have showed similarity, but hey, accidental if anything and no deliberate copying I would say.... To think the tragic repercusions because of greed were avoidable.....
As a Musicologist I can honestly state there is no fucking similarities. Total bullshit.
maybe...you shouldn't be a musicologist. the ten notes used for "kookaburra sits in the old gum tree" are clearly used in the flute melody. now, whether it's worth suing someone over is an entirely different question.
Well I am, so you can piss up a rope, jack. The notes used do not constitute the melody. If going by your (lack) of logic we can start suing all kinds of composers for take your pick of most RnR/Blues/Jazz recordings.
SOUNDS NOTHING LIKE DOWN UNDER! kookaburra sounds nothing close
Por mas que la escucho no encuentro similitud entre una y otra canción, no estoy en absoluto de acuerdo que sea un plagio, descansa en paz Greg Ham
What a load of BS. The woman who wrote the song was alive for 30 years and never had a problem with it before the troll bought the rights to the song. Legal system madness
This family now has blood on their hands for something that doesn't even sound remotely the same...
Gourgandise its not the family, it’s just some company that acquired the rights to a song that probably should have been public domain.
Not even close. But may be i'm deaf.
why the big deal?
Bullshit, the notes don't match at all. Any musician can tell you that.
¡NO SE PARECE EN NADA. ESO DE KOOKABURRA ES UNA BASURA!... ¡VIVA LA MEMORIA DE GREG HAM, UN GRAN MÚSICO Y PERSONA! ¡EL JUEZ QUE DICTAMINÓ PLAGIO DEBE ARDER EN EL INFIERNO, POR SIEMPRE! ----
So he copied it because the songs are slightly similar. Wow, that NEVER happens, right?
kookaburra is a folk traditional tune, therefore it was very appropriate for Ham to "quote" it, musically...it's not copying, it's referencing...of course he should have included kookaburra in the music...this whole thing must've broken his heart ...and he died!!!! : (
you cannot just say they killed him, you did not know his health status prior the trial nor did you know his mental status either before or after the trial. The inability of the man to cope with something is only himself to blame, it's not like he got raped or anything similar. If you can't deal with real life consequences, well, maybe you are not fit for life, it's that simple.
We won the America's cup to Down Under in 1983. The crew would play it on Australia II every morning before they went out for the race. Kookaburra has been present at ... what achievement exactly? If this is actionable plagiarism, then how come Australian Crawl didn't sue Guns n' Roses for Sweet Child O' Mine - it's nearly the same as Unpublished Critics, except for Slash's solo and of course the lyrics, and possibly played in a different key.
Matt Flynn all valid. You’re right.
As an American who has a slight musical background and has not heard either of these songs EVER, the fact that this was a lawsuit is filthy.
Are.... they.... serious. Serious question, why don't people sue left and right for all these "cover" songs? Why hasn't talk talk sued madonna?
Every song gets sued these days.
Por favor!!!! la cadencia musical ni se aproxima!!!! le robaron la vida a Greg una vergüenza. Please!!!! the musical cadence is not approaching! They took Greg's life, a real shame.
So I grew up in Norway and sang Kookaburra all the time in school. Then I heard Down Under as a teenager, and my first thought was:"cool, they've used the Kookaburra riff to make us subconciously think of Australia during the first few seconds of the song. Nice idea." and I believed that for over a decade, until my boyfriend rabdomly told me about the lawsuit because of "some kid's song" and I'm like "yeah, they used Kookaburra in the song, everyone knows that?" like... What? My life is a lie.
Don't hear any similarity. Maybe a note or two. The court ruling is preposterus.
What a tragedy. This still gets me. There are like what, 99 billion songs out there? The chances of notes, melodies, chords and riffs overlapping is inevitable! Billions of songs but only so many chords. Nothing short of a "Money Grab" with a very long stretch! What's next? "Hey! wait a minute...the album artwork on my 1943 album uses a light blue coloring on the gatefold near the left edge! You can't do that!! I'm suing your ass!" Rest in peace Greg Ham, you did nothing wrong. You crafted a pop song which was adopted by your country with open arms. You did Australia proud.
I can see how it doesn't look good especially having the flute player sitting in a tree just like the Kookaburra lol
This sounds like some American country music tune. But all songs are similar to each other to some degree.
Even if the songs were spot on, the original owner of the Kookaburra song was okay with it. It is dodgy that the new owners (vultures) of the tune ended up pushing one of the members of Men at Work to death.
It can also sound a bit like Seals & Crofts Humming Bird or hundreds of other songs. There are only so many notes in the Western scale so there will be some similarities. Whoever created the Western Scale, when they come around, you better have your wallets out!
what a bunch of guano ....
first time i heard the kookaburra song was when they played it in Doctor Who. this kid sang it repetitively all throughout the episode and not once did i ever think "wow that sounds familiar!"
Sad thing about the whole law suit to me is the Kookaburra melody really adds little to the song and it was a classic in its own right. In my opinion the Kookaburra musical quote is just a musical joke, quoting a kids song for a laugh. Such a shame its now been tarnished with all this negativity, as for the people below who think their opinion holds more weight the more offensive they are I challenge you to talk to real people in the real world like that and see how far you get...hospital is my prediction
it doesn't work that way. Kookaburra was around first. She sold the rights. You have to wait 70 years after writer dies
before it public domain.
0:11 i think that's the similarity
For all of you guys saying it sounds nothing the same, the kookaburra song needs to be a bit faster and it actually sounds exactly the same, it rhymes with the flute part.
Hayley Thompson dude that still doesn’t mean it’s plagiarism!!!
Yep and if you carefully 'in/depth 'Scrutinize- the 'Music' the 'chords' and the 'Progressions -the Words the 'Genre' and the 'theme/idea of the song.. no doubt it's been 'Plagiarised''
There is only a smiliar part in the initial notes not enough to say it is...
+Superior play it on the flute yourself faster. Youll hear it. I did
Down Under (Men at Work) is far superior to that other shit and they sound nothing alike
I've been playing guitar for 30 years and I don't hear it.
I don't hear it either. Open up two instances of the video above and play the Men at Work flute and the vocals of Kookaburra simultaneously and they just don't match.
the flute plays the melody of the first two lines of kookaburra several times, its impossible not to hear it
What an outlandish claim of plagiarism .
The progression of notes is definitely there, not sure how time deaf people can’t hear it. That said, this is pretty benign and doesn’t deserve a court case.
The people who started this lawsuit don't care about art, or creativity. The judge who ruled clearly has no understanding of how music is written.
Im just going to say it is bullcrap to pull a good song apart to find something like this when Led Zepplin and Rolling Stones have careers off copying people.
People saying they can't hear any similarities are pretty tone deaf. If you sing the line along with the flute they follow the same notes. It doesn't warrant plagirism though. RIP Greg
it plays several times in the song and i think thats what sunk them, once they might have gotten away with , but a 23 note phrase repeated? nobody anywhere would let that go
What a load of crap! Those two songs sound NOTHING alike. Whoever filed the lawsuits must be freaking tone deaf. I have a natural affinity for tunes as I was once a top 40 DJ in my earlier years and was notorious for being able to recognize even slightly different versions of the same song.
Im still gonna crank it up and sing along to this great song " Down Under" ...Ive always loved it and always will. RIP Gregory Ham
It's the whole chorus melody, and the song is an Australian anthem of sorts. Obviously it was done intentionally.
I musically quoted "I'm the king of the castle, you're the dirty rascal" in a song but nobody raised a stink
That song is public domain though, that's a really old song, a 19th century rhyme.
The kookaburra song is still under copyright.
You should look up "Steve Aoki - Crash Into Me " ;)
Veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeery subtle. I would have thrown out the case. So sorry for Greg Ham. The suit over "Stairway to Heaven" is pretty clear-cut and it did not pass!
The rhythms of the Kookubura melody is different than that of the down under flute solo. Hence the melodies are different. How the hell did men at work lose this case?
because the first 23 notes of kookaburra are repeated identically by the flute in down under several times, they may have gotten away with once but as it was they stole and got caught doing it
That's exactly what I thought. It's crazy. The whole song is different.
@@simonjames1604 It was so similar that it only took 30 years for the owner of the rights to the song to sue. The original composer was not involved in any lawsuit. Bogus case that is why they only got 5%.LOL!
@@ricomajestic they won, the claim was legit, the tune was stolen so not "bogus" at all
@@simonjames1604 And OJ Simpson was "innocent" and innocent people have served decades in prison for crimes they didn't commit. What\s your point?
You can copyright a song, or a recording. You can't, or at least shouldn't be able to copyright a melody. To think you can own a sequence of frequencies is the epitome of entitlement, arrogance, and greed.