Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
10 Comments
gwiz665says...Men at Wok are usually good cooks.
vaporlocksays...What BS. The song is from 1934 and it still has a valid copyright. Out-f*ckin-rageous!!!
therealblankmansays...>> ^vaporlock:
What BS. The song is from 1934 and it still has a valid copyright. Out-f ckin-rageous!!!
Thank Disney.
doremifasays...Absolute nonsense. The hook has a measure of that pentatonic children song and remotely so. Wrong. Plain wrong.
siftbotsays...Moving this video to maatc's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.
Opus_Moderandisays...So that one little section of the flute part constitutes plagiarism? If that's the case, there are tons of little bits of songs that sound like other songs. Haven't these people ever heard of mash ups?
shuacsays...>> ^gwiz665:
Men at Wok are usually good cooks.
I love that restaurant. You should see what they come out & sing for birthdays.
Duckman33says...Yes, if this is true and they lost this opens the door for a million other lawsuits. Bloody ridiculous. There are a ton of songs that have bits and pieces that sound like riffs from other songs. Besides, the flute riff not even really that similar to what they were singing.
sillmasays...wtf, I thought men at work would breeze through this retarded lawsuit, they really lost?
sillmasays...seems they indeed lost
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8497433.stm
Discuss...
Enable JavaScript to submit a comment.