Link Source

NEW YORK (Reuters) - John Lennon's sons and widow, Yoko Ono, on Monday lost a battle to block the use of the song "Imagine" in the documentary "Expelled: No Intelligence allowed."
ADVERTISEMENT

Ono, her son Sean Ono Lennon, and Julian Lennon, John Lennon's son from his first marriage, along with privately held publisher EMI Blackwood Music Inc filed suit in April in Manhattan federal court seeking to bar the filmmakers and their distributors from continuing to use "Imagine" in the movie.

They said the film, which looks at alleged discrimination against scientists and teachers who support so-called intelligent design as an alternative to Darwin's theory of evolution, used the song without their permission.

But on Monday U.S. District Judge Sidney Stein found in favor of the filmmakers based on a "fair use" doctrine. "That doctrine provides that the fair use of a copyrighted work for purposes of criticism and commentary is not an infringement of copyright," the judge said.

The documentary features Ben Stein, an actor, comedian and former speechwriter for President Richard Nixon.

The suit, which sought unspecified damages, named the film's producers and distributors -- Premise Media Corporation, C&S Production LP and Rocky Mountain Pictures.

Lennon recorded "Imagine" in 1971 and in 2004, Rolling Stone magazine ranked it No. 3 on their list of the 500 Greatest Songs of All Time, according to the lawsuit.

(Reporting by Christine Kearney; Editing by Michelle Nichols and Cynthia Osterman)

The film met every test of fair use for referencing "Imagine." This lawsuit was frivolous. Yoko should pay the court costs and the fees for the dendant's lawyers. Plus a hefty punitive judgment for wasting the court's precious time.

If her name wasn't Yoko Ono, I don't think any judge would have even taken the case.

And after the verdict, the film's narrator Ben Stein sent a note to the judge, "Thanks, Uncle Sidney." LOL. Just kidding.

I whole-heartedly disagree with Ben Stein's premise and plot/point he is trying to make with his movie.

BUT, his use of Lennon's "Imagine" was a fair use.

DESPITE the fact that "Imagine" should have been in the public domain by now (being as old as it is) ...and GRANTING that Yoko, being the heir, STILL holds the legitimate copyright...

"Imagine" was FAIRLY used by Stein in this instance.

In my heart, I think John would agree. (But then, he'd have a rebuttal!)

--------

Yoko's case/accusation here was well intentioned, but WRONG in a free society.

I have tons of respect for her, but she has some learning to do.

YoKo's imaginary chat with John:

Lennon: Well, I think I wrote the bloody thing didn't I? Who the hell is Ben Stein?

hmm...

...actually, Ben worked for the self-same White-House administration that tried to get John deported way back when.

Then its definitely fair use!

"DESPITE the fact that "Imagine" should have been in the public domain by now (being as old as it is) ...and GRANTING that Yoko, being the heir, STILL holds the legitimate copyright..."

Herein lies some of the problems with current copyright laws. Where is the 'limited times' aspect as required by our constitution? Secondly, why do we allow copyrights to pass down to heirs after death of the copyright holder in the first place??

Clearly our founding fathers NEVER intended copyrights to be in the predicament that they are in today. And both Congress and the Supreme Court are responsible.

This case was not frivolous. In fact, this is the first time EVER that a piece of music used in a (non-music) documentary has been found to be fair use! Although the factors did lean heavily on the side of fair use (transformative, commentary, criticism), it would not have been irrational to expect the opposite outcome.