Judge rules ‘Happy Birthday’ in public domain

Copyright catalogs at the Library of Congress. A federal judge ruled Sept. 22 that the song, “Happy Birthday” is in the public domain, and is not the property of Warner/Chappell and its parent company Warner Music Group. (Photo by Michael Holley)

Copyright catalogs at the Library of Congress. A federal judge ruled Sept. 22 that the song, “Happy Birthday” is in the public domain, and is not the property of Warner/Chappell and its parent company Warner Music Group. (Photo by Michael Holley)

It’s just a simple little ditty more than 100 years old.

Everyone in America, maybe the world, knows its lyrics and music. But, if a judge’s ruling stands, that little ditty will mean millions of lost dollars to a music publisher.

A federal judge ruled Sept. 22 that the song, “Happy Birthday” is in the public domain, and is not the property of Warner/Chappell and its parent company Warner Music Group.

Since 1988, Warner/Chappell has claimed copyright to ‘HappyBirthday,” the most popular song in the English language. The music publisher reportedly makes approximately $2 million a year from the song in licensing fees.

But, Judge George H. King, a Los Angeles federal court district judge,
ruled the song belongs in the public domain.

“Happy Birthday” originally had nothing to do with birthdays. The song was published in 1893 by the Clayton F. Summy Company. It was written by Kentucky sisters Patty and Margaret Hill as “Good Morning to All.”

Patty was a kindergarten teacher.

Early in the 20th Century someone — no one knows who — applied birthday lyrics to the melody. Warner/Chappell acquired the Summy catalog in 1988 and claimed the “Happy  Birthday” copyright.

In his decision, King wrote, “Because Summy Company never acquired the rights to the ‘Happy Birthday’ lyric, defendants, as Summy Co.’s purported successors-in-interest, do not own a valid copyright to the ‘Happy Birthday’ lyrics.”

A suit that resulted in this decision was filed in 2013 by Jennifer Nelson, a filmmaker who wanted to make a documentary about the song.

She filed the suit after Warner/Chappell told her she would have to pay a fee of $1,500 to use the song in her proposed film.

“Happy Birthday” is just one of thousands of songs that may — or may
not — be under copyright. Artists, musicians and other have to pay copyright holders to use a song under copyright.

For example:

“Amazing Grace.” That is in the public domain.

“Little Drummer Boy.” That’s under copyright. So, it’s pay to play.

Christmas arrives in just a couple of months. With all the holiday songs, what’s public and what isn’t?

“White Christmas” — copyrighted.

“Deck the Halls” — public domain.

“Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas”  — copyrighted.

“Do You Hear What I hear?” — copyrighted.

“Silent Night” — public domain.

“Amazing Grace” — public domain.

“Sleigh Ride” — copyrighted.

The copyright police will not come to your home or church if you sing copyrighted songs without permission and paying a fee. But that leaves a lot of musicians, choral groups, etc. in jeopardy.

Is there away to find out what songs are, or are not, copyrighted.

There is a website that gives this very information for thousands of songs. The website — www. pdinfo.com-pd-song-list — belongs to Public Domain Information Project.

The project states that as a rule of thumb, any song composed before 1923 most likely is in the public domain.

For living composers, Congress has declared that a work, not otherwise legally protected,  is copyrighted for the life of the author plus 70 years.

As for “Happy Birthday,” a spokesman for Warner/Chappell was quoted as saying the firm is considering an appeal of the judge’s ruling.

 

 

 

— Judge rules ‘Happy Birthday’ in public domain —