[ SECRET POST #4072 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4072 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 28 secrets from Secret Submission Post #583.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

06. https://i.imgur.com/M5CS9vv.png

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think the situation is deep enough for this to accurately be described as "shade"

[(Anonymous)]

No, it's not "shade" in the purest sense as used in the drag world, but it's funny when you realize that Taylor Swift's own lawyer probably made the point that her lyrics are so unoriginal that a verbatim match does not constitute plagiarism. Never mind the judge - the judge didn't come up with this argument. Her own legal counsel must have used it.

[(Anonymous)]

How is that throwing shade? The judge is just saying the phrase is commonly used.

[(Anonymous)]

I would say "banal" has a generally negative connotation? It doesn't just mean that something is commonplace, it means that it's so common that it's boring and unoriginal.

[(Anonymous)]

So, it's another word for Taylor Swift lyrics?

[(Anonymous)]

thatsthejoke.gif

[(Anonymous)]

It being unoriginal is the judges point exactly, so yes. But boring... Doesn't most people love clichés?

(This goes for most pop songs and it shouldn't surprise any fan or superstar.)

[(Anonymous)]

"Banal" is generally not considered a compliment, especially when it's describing a creative endeavor.

[cbrachyrhynchos]

Possibly, but I'd want to read the decision to be certain.

Actually, the judge was saying that actors acting in accordance with their nature was banal.

[(Anonymous)]

"The lynchpin of this entire case is thus whether or not the lyrics 'Playas, they gonna play, and haters, they gonna hate' are eligible for protection," he wrote.

"In the early 2000s, popular culture was adequately suffused with the concepts of players and haters to render the phrases 'playas… gonna play' or 'haters… gonna hate', standing on their own, no more creative than 'runners gonna run'; 'drummers gonna drum'; or 'swimmers gonna swim.'

"The concept of actors acting in accordance with their essential nature is not at all creative; it is banal.

"The allegedly infringed lyrics are short phrases that lack the modicum of originality and creativity required for copyright protection," Fitzgerald added.

The lawsuit was arguing that combining the two thoughts was original enough to warrant protection, though short phrases are generally immune from copyright.

Anyway, I agree with the judge and I think a bunch of pop songs have fairly generic concepts that are just put together in interesting or catchy ways.

[(Anonymous)]

is 'banal' in this context actually a legal term?

anyway, I'm with you. I like Tswift, but what makes the song fun is the rhythm and the tune more than that chorus in particular

[(Anonymous)]

ayrt

I don't think 'banal' is a legal term, though we are talking about copyright law, so it could have a more specific meaning in that context.

I think "Shake It Off" is catchy as hell, but am I looking for originality in the lyrics? Nah.

[(Anonymous)]

Tay's lyrics are so creative. That judge is just mean and mean and mean and mean.