independent and unofficial
Prince fan community
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Music: Non-Prince > Supreme Court Allows Rosa Parks to Sue Rap Duo
« Previous topic  Next topic »
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Author

Tweet     Share

Message
Thread started 12/08/03 12:47pm

sinisterpentat
onic

Supreme Court Allows Rosa Parks to Sue Rap Duo

By James Vicini

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court (news - web sites) cleared the way on Monday for civil rights icon Rosa Parks to proceed with her lawsuit against OutKast and others over the rap music duo's hit song with her name as its title.




Reuters Photo





The justices let stand a U.S. appeals court ruling that reinstated Parks' false advertising and publicity claims against OutKast and three Bertelsmann AG (news - web sites) units -- LaFace Records, the record producer, and Arista Records and BMG Entertainment, the distributors.


Parks made history in 1955 when she refused to give up her seat to a white man and move to the back of a city bus in Montgomery, Alabama.


Her arrest, which became a defining moment in the civil rights movement, led to a 381-day boycott of the bus system by blacks. It resulted in the end of segregation on public transportation and became a catalyst for organized boycotts, sit-ins and demonstrations across the South.


The song, "Rosa Parks," released as part of the 1998 album "Aquemini," was nominated for a Grammy award. The lyrics do not mention her by name, but the chorus says, "Ah, ha, hush that fuss. Everybody move to the back of the bus."


The album by rap recording artists Andre Benjamin and Antwan Patton has sold more than two million copies and the song enjoyed long-lasting success on the Billboard charts.


Parks, a Detroit resident, sued in 1999, claiming use of her name without permission constituted false advertising and infringed on her right to publicity. She also claimed it defamed her character and interfered with a business relationship.


She had approved a collection of gospel recordings by various artists, released in 1995 and entitled "A Tribute to Mrs. Rosa Parks."


A federal judge dismissed the lawsuit in 1999, ruling constitutional free-speech rights under the First Amendment covered the use of Parks' name.


The appeals court upheld the dismissal of the claims of defamation and interference with a business relationship, but reinstated the rest of the lawsuit.


It said the defendants needed to show some artistic reason for calling the song "Rosa Parks." The appeals court sent the case back for more hearings to determine whether use of her name was symbolic, as the defendants argued, or disguised commercial advertisement.


Attorneys for OutKast and the other defendants appealed to the Supreme Court, asking the justices to hear the case. They said the appeals court unconstitutionally allowed public figures to use trademark and right-of-publicity laws to censor speech.


But the high court rejected the appeal without comment.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #1 posted 12/08/03 12:50pm

whodknee

This'll surely help her legacy.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #2 posted 12/08/03 12:59pm

Jasziah

avatar

disbelief
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #3 posted 12/08/03 1:03pm

Supernova

avatar

More power to her.
This post not for the wimp contingent. All whiny wusses avert your eyes.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #4 posted 12/08/03 1:37pm

sinisterpentat
onic

Supernova said:

More power to her.


Well it's not like her name helped with the record sales. Personally I think she was just out for some cash. Outkast did change the title of the track on the later pressings.

I will say they should've kicked her out a couple of bucks just on G.P., but who knows they might've she just wants more.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #5 posted 12/08/03 1:50pm

Supernova

avatar

sinisterpentatonic said:

Supernova said:

More power to her.


Well it's not like her name helped with the record sales. Personally I think she was just out for some cash. Outkast did change the title of the track on the later pressings.

I will say they should've kicked her out a couple of bucks just on G.P., but who knows they might've she just wants more.

Did you ever think that she just doesn't want her name associated with this type of music, or specifically Outkast for some other reason? They have rights, but so does she. And it's her name.
This post not for the wimp contingent. All whiny wusses avert your eyes.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #6 posted 12/08/03 2:02pm

2freaky4church
1

avatar

You have to have freedom of speech. No one's name is sacrad. Rosa is getting a bit senile.
All you others say Hell Yea!! woot!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #7 posted 12/08/03 2:08pm

Supernova

avatar

2freaky4church1 said:

You have to have freedom of speech. No one's name is sacrad. Rosa is getting a bit senile.

You rarely have anything intelligent to say.
That hasn't changed.
This post not for the wimp contingent. All whiny wusses avert your eyes.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #8 posted 12/08/03 2:46pm

sosgemini

avatar

isnt this sorta like naming a movie "Steven Spielberg"?

so is the supreme court saying that having her name as the song title is akin to her endorsing the song? thats the only way I can think why the supreme court would side with her on this...

its strange that they sided with her...strange.
Space for sale...
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #9 posted 12/08/03 3:44pm

FutureShock

2freaky4church1 said:

You have to have freedom of speech. No one's name is sacrad. Rosa is getting a bit senile.


I think it is her family members who pushed this issue more than anyone. If Outkast was degrading Rosa Parks in the song, then I could understand. But, it seems like such a non-issue to sue someone over. The funny thing about it is that most people probably don't even know the song as "Rosa Parks" they just know it's "that song by Outkast about moving to the back of the bus."

If you ask me, I think it's just some greedy family members who want to collect.
"You've got to believe in something... why not believe in me?"
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #10 posted 12/08/03 3:46pm

sinisterpentat
onic

Supernova said:

sinisterpentatonic said:

Supernova said:

More power to her.


Well it's not like her name helped with the record sales. Personally I think she was just out for some cash. Outkast did change the title of the track on the later pressings.

I will say they should've kicked her out a couple of bucks just on G.P., but who knows they might've she just wants more.

Did you ever think that she just doesn't want her name associated with this type of music, or specifically Outkast for some other reason? They have rights, but so does she. And it's her name.


True, she has rights too, but this is the scenario I have in my head.
"Grandma they used your name on the new outkast album!"

R.P. "Who is Outkast?"


I personally feel that she was persuaded by family members and lawyers to pursue this case. Like I said before, they changed the name of the track, what more could she want besides money? How much does she want for that? It's not like they're degrading her in the lyrics.

Ah ha, hush that fuss
Everybody move to the back of the bus
Do you wanna bump and slump with us
We the type of people make the club get crunk

[Verse 1:(Big Boi)]
Many a day has passed, the night has gone by
But still I find the time to put that bump off in your eye
Total chaos, for these playas, thought we was absent
We takin another route to represent the Dungeon Family
Like Great Day, me and my nigga decide to take the back way
We stabbing every city then we headed to that bat cave
A-T-L, Georgia, what we do for ya
Bull doggin hoes like them Georgetown Hoyas
Boy you sounding silly, thank my Brougham aint sittin pretty
Doing doughnuts round you suckas like then circles around titties
Damn we the committee gone burn it down
But us gone bust you in the mouth with the chorus now

[Hook]

I met a gypsy and she hipped me to some life game
To stimulate then activate the left and right brain
Said baby boy you only funky as your last cut
You focus on the past your ass'll be a has what
Thats one to live by or either that one to die to
I try to just throw it at you determine your own adventure
Andre, got to her station here's my destination
She got off the bus, the conversation lingered in my head for hours
Took a shower kinda sour cause my favorite group ain't comin with it
But I'm witcha you cause you probably goin through it anyway
But anyhow when in doubt went on out and bought it
Cause I thought it would be jammin but examine all the flawsky-wawsky
Awfully, it's sad and it's costly, but that's all she wrote
And I hope I never have to float in that boat
Up shit creek it's weak is the last quote
That I want to hear when I'm goin down when all's said and done
And we got a new joe in town
When the record player get to skippin and slowin down
All yawl can say is them niggas earned that crown but until then...



I don't see what she finds so offensive about these lyrics, besides a couple of curse words. shrug

Her name's not even mentioned.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #11 posted 12/08/03 3:48pm

sinisterpentat
onic

FutureShock said:

2freaky4church1 said:

You have to have freedom of speech. No one's name is sacrad. Rosa is getting a bit senile.


I think it is her family members who pushed this issue more than anyone. If Outkast was degrading Rosa Parks in the song, then I could understand. But, it seems like such a non-issue to sue someone over. The funny thing about it is that most people probably don't even know the song as "Rosa Parks" they just know it's "that song by Outkast about moving to the back of the bus."

If you ask me, I think it's just some greedy family members who want to collect.


Wow we said pretty much the samething, at the same time! wink
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #12 posted 12/08/03 3:57pm

Supernova

avatar

sinisterpentatonic said:

Supernova said:

sinisterpentatonic said:

Supernova said:

More power to her.


Well it's not like her name helped with the record sales. Personally I think she was just out for some cash. Outkast did change the title of the track on the later pressings.

I will say they should've kicked her out a couple of bucks just on G.P., but who knows they might've she just wants more.

Did you ever think that she just doesn't want her name associated with this type of music, or specifically Outkast for some other reason? They have rights, but so does she. And it's her name.


True, she has rights too, but this is the scenario I have in my head.
"Grandma they used your name on the new outkast album!"

R.P. "Who is Outkast?"


I personally feel that she was persuaded by family members and lawyers to pursue this case. Like I said before, they changed the name of the track, what more could she want besides money?

It doesn't change the fact that there are still albums in print that still contain her name. And since she has never been sue-happy before you have no basis for that theory.

How much does she want for that? It's not like they're degrading her in the lyrics.

Maybe many of the new schoolers don't find the word "nigga" degrading, but don't take for granted that the Mother of the Civil Rights Movement just might. She has not stated her specific objection publicly, that's just a theory of mine. And since she IS one of the flashpoints of that movement she SHOULD be afforded the respect of not having that word in a song with her name connected to it. Believe it or not that word is not a "term of endearment" to a lot of Blacks, as many who like to generalize would think.
This post not for the wimp contingent. All whiny wusses avert your eyes.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #13 posted 12/08/03 4:12pm

sinisterpentat
onic

Supernova said:

sinisterpentatonic said:

Supernova said:

sinisterpentatonic said:

Supernova said:

More power to her.


Well it's not like her name helped with the record sales. Personally I think she was just out for some cash. Outkast did change the title of the track on the later pressings.

I will say they should've kicked her out a couple of bucks just on G.P., but who knows they might've she just wants more.

Did you ever think that she just doesn't want her name associated with this type of music, or specifically Outkast for some other reason? They have rights, but so does she. And it's her name.


True, she has rights too, but this is the scenario I have in my head.
"Grandma they used your name on the new outkast album!"

R.P. "Who is Outkast?"


I personally feel that she was persuaded by family members and lawyers to pursue this case. Like I said before, they changed the name of the track, what more could she want besides money?

It doesn't change the fact that there are still albums in print that still contain her name. And since she has never been sue-happy before you have no basis for that theory.

How much does she want for that? It's not like they're degrading her in the lyrics.

Maybe many of the new schoolers don't find the word "nigga" degrading, but don't take for granted that the Mother of the Civil Rights Movement just might. She has not stated her specific objection publicly, that's just a theory of mine. And since she IS one of the flashpoints of that movement she SHOULD be afforded the respect of not having that word in a song with her name connected to it. Believe it or not that word is not a "term of endearment" to a lot of Blacks, as many who like to generalize would think.


Well, there are so many references made in rap music, from movies to people. True she should be respected for the part she played in the movement. You would think Outkast would've known better being from Atlanta and all. If she wins this case you can expect an onslaught of lawsuits in any song that makes reference to an individual. Her name is not mentioned once in this song.

I agree, she might not find those lyrics flattering, but my question still stands, how much does she want for that? And what is she gonna do with the money? I still say the people in her life are pushing her on this.

Outkast did show enough respect to change the title, I would think Outkast tried to settle the financial aspects of the case out of court, maybe there weren't enough zero's on what they were offering.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #14 posted 12/08/03 4:19pm

Supernova

avatar

It's really hard to say tho, since she hasn't said anything publicly, or released any statements.

But what does it matter what she would do with the money?

When other people sue they don't get that question.

`
[This message was edited Mon Dec 8 17:09:35 PST 2003 by Supernova]
This post not for the wimp contingent. All whiny wusses avert your eyes.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #15 posted 12/08/03 4:19pm

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Let's not get to pc here; it is only a song.
All you others say Hell Yea!! woot!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #16 posted 12/08/03 4:44pm

Anxiety

I think it's ridiculous that she won this case. She's a public figure. Unless the words of the song are libelous or represent some kind of intentional harm to her character, she should just have to deal with it.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #17 posted 12/08/03 9:40pm

Janfriend

This is stupid. What if there was a song about how wonderful she is? Would she be suing? What about songs that actually mentions other famous figures'/celebrities names? Do they have the right to sue?
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #18 posted 12/08/03 10:18pm

Sdldawn

fucking stupid
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #19 posted 12/08/03 10:37pm

cynicalbastard

avatar

this is dumb. I hope Dorothy Parker doesn't come out of the woodwork, asking for some money from P.

This is too restrictive on artists (and anyone daring to use names in songs). It wasn't like they were misrepresenting something or trying to cash in on her. As mentioned too, they already changed the song title for her.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Music: Non-Prince > Supreme Court Allows Rosa Parks to Sue Rap Duo