This story relates why you may soon be able to sing "Happy Birthday" without worrying that you'll get a hefty bill from the copyright "owners".

Is that for real? I've heard "happy birthday" many times on TV and in the movies (at least I think so). Everyone sings it. Heck, they teach you to sing it when you wash your hands to be sure you spend enough time washing.

The troll that claimed ownership managed, according to several stories, to make about $2M a year from royalties. If you've ever heard the weird song they sang at the Outback for birthdays, it was due to their not wanting to pay the shysters. Until this case, no one wanted to spend the time and money fighting the "copyright owners."

Wow! That's a great story.

Perhaps you've heard about Michael Jordan's lawsuit with Dominick's Foods, where he won $8.9 M for a congratulatory ad that appeared in Sports Illustrated's commemorative issue - but without Michael's permission. The funniest part was that Dominick's only sold 2 steaks because of this ad because it was on the inside cover of the special issue and people didn't want to cut it up. One might say that Dominick's spent $4.45 M for each steak sold!

Two jurors asked to have their pictures with MJ, making me think the jury's decision was based more on their being fans than on the law.

It sounds excessive but you have to wonder at a company that would use a celebrity for an ad without permission on a national magazine. Did they think he wouldn't notice?

The other day, I saw a story about the baker who was fined $135K f9or refusing to bake a gay wedding cake. The baker claimed religious persecution and that the fine was excessive. It seemed that way to me, too, until I learned that besides refusing to make the cake, the baker engaged in various misconducts against the two lesbians, including posting items on Facebook and other sites disparaging them and trying to get them fired. So it wasn't an actual fine, but a penalty for their civil misdeeds. And the judge ruled that they can't pay the fee from contributions they've received. The money has to be their own.

quote:

And the judge ruled that they can't pay the fee from contributions they've received. The money has to be their own.

So - how does a judge control that? I mean, they could write a check from the bank account where they put their earnings, and then replace that with the contributions check. And, I agree, that fine does not sound excessive.

Not sure if you can access it because of the Tribune rules, but here is a reasonable article by Eric Zorn on the MJ award. For the record, I have a great amount of admiration for MJ. He is probably my most favorite athlete ever. However, I think he was wrong in this instance.