|
||
|

We Didn't Start The Fire#REDIRECT We Didn't Start the Fire We Didn't Start the Fire'''We Didn't Start the Fire''' is a song by Billy Joel that lists 120 well-known events, people, things, and places from his lifetime, from 1949 to 1989, when the song was released on his album ''Storm Front''. Joel explained that he wrote this song due to his interest in history. He commented that he would have wanted to be a history teacher had he not become a rock and roll singer. __NOTOC__
We Didn't Start the Fire== Copyright Concerns == Much as I like the idea of this page, aren't these lyrics copyrighted? - User:Hephaestos 17:18, 25 Aug 2003 (UTC) :We can probably fix this by axing the chorus and making a few other changes so the page is "commentary". Worst case, we end up with some like "Verse 7 (1955) alludes to the deaths of Albert Einstein and James Dean ..." User:Loren Rosen 17:58, 25 Aug 2003 (UTC) ::Yeah, adding links surly makes it a derivitive work for academic use or comment. User:Cgs 18:27, 25 Aug 2003 (UTC). Didnt he say ''Cassius Clay'' in the song too? I mean if he didnt, he missed big time! ''User:AntonioMartin'' :Anyway, the annotations really need to be improved to indicate the precise event being alluded to, which often isn't immediately obvious from the link alone. User:Loren Rosen 19:44, 25 Aug 2003 (UTC) I think you need to add the composer(s) and author(s) name as well, but even then i thnk copyright gets in the way. I would like to see song lyrics on Wikipedia or maybe then the un started project sourceburg. - fonzy :Regarding the Rockefeller link to Nelson Rockefeller: What did he do in 1953 that was so memorable? He became governor of New York State in 1959, so it's not that. Or perhaps does this refer to some other member of the Rockefeller family? User:Loren Rosen 05:28, 26 Aug 2003 (UTC) :Looks like Winthrop Rockefeller moved to Arkanas in '53. So I'm changing the link. ::Ah, my fault, didn't remember precisely when Nelson was governer... thought that the time period sounded vaguely correct. --User:Dante Alighieri 19:44, 26 Aug 2003 (UTC) Erm........ song lyrics are copyright, guys! -- User:Tarquin 20:26, 26 Aug 2003 (UTC) :IANAL, but wouldn't the links themselves be seen as commentary? Therefore we're not just listing lyrics, we're making commentary on them, which would constitute fair use.... right? --User:Dante Alighieri 20:33, 26 Aug 2003 (UTC) Is linking to the mentioned subjects the most we can do as far as making this an article goes? I mean, we couldn't mention some historical significance of each person/thing/event, or do something (more than linking) that the song itself doesn't? User:Koyaanis Qatsi 20:31, 26 Aug 2003 (UTC) : I don't think it's fair use because we have the ''whole'' song! Cut the chorus, cut the incidental words, and put each verse into bullet form. That should be ok - User:Tarquin 20:36, 26 Aug 2003 (UTC) ::I don't think it's fair use either, but I also don't think it's an article. ^_^ User:Koyaanis Qatsi 20:45, 26 Aug 2003 (UTC) ::: No - it's not an article. I created it because it's an excellent place to start browsing from. Just like the front page is not an article, but very useful none the less. User:Cgs 22:22, 26 Aug 2003 (UTC). Ugh, stupid edit conflicts... :( OK, aside from the article as it is now written, we also have We Didn't Start the Fire/temp. People care to vote on which version is best for our purposes? --User:Dante Alighieri 20:50, 26 Aug 2003 (UTC) :The temp article doesn't have the words "We didn't start the fire" in it at all, which might make some people wonder where the title comes from. We should have the corus at least once. User:Cgs 22:23, 26 Aug 2003 (UTC). All that blue is hurting my eyes 8-|. I link to external site for song lyrcis see: Eurovision Song Contest 1956. - fonzy Maybe we should ask permission, like from his agent or something -- at least get some sort of assurance that he's not going to sue. BTW, the lyrics are online at billyjoel.com and there's some kid who did a school paper with links (just like ours). Question: whose version is more sophomoric? Heh, heh. --User:Ed Poor 02:11, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC) :Depends on whether or not the student was in his second year. ;) :I'd be for asking permission, although I'm not volunteering (I have horrible luck with it). I'm guessing we're legally OK with what we've got here, but the publicist might give permission to use the whole thing. Never hurts to ask. - User:Hephaestos 02:22, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC) :It does hurt to ask. If we ask then we're sort of saying that it isn't a deriviative or academic work so we have to ask permission. User:Cgs 11:00, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC) Well, I'm going to guess that this is a special case of a "derivitive or academic work" and take the daring step of leaving it alone. If Billy Joel or his lawyers ever come to wikipedia.org, they're welcome to blank the page. But I don't think they will, because: #We credit the source. #We link to [www.billyjoel.com their website], which generates valuable "hits" for them. #We are non-profit. #And I sincerely believe it's "fair use", even though (a) we've quoted the bulk of the work pretty much as a continuous extract and (b) all our "commentary" consists of is links to other articles. To our credit, every single proper noun in the song links to an article. I'd think they'd be glad not mad. My vote is to leave it alone. --User:Ed Poor 13:15, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC) ---- I think this article, as is, is the very embodiment of fair use. There is no reference to "start the fire" anywhere except in the title; there is no copying of the very important chorus of the song. I think it would be a good test case actually; wait for a cease-and-desist letter. - User:Hephaestos 06:51, 4 Nov 2003 (UTC) : No, why don't you ask them and see what they say. Fair use does not give us the right to republish virtually all of the lyrics and then relicense their work under GFDL. 38 of 43 unique lines (88.4%) is a substantial copying. The claim that links to articles are scholarly is not something I would want to prove in a court. User:Daniel Quinlan 07:04, Nov 4, 2003 (UTC) ::Have you asked them? I think I said earlier on this talk page that it would be great to ask them, maybe they could point our links more in the direction the song was talking about. I admit I haven't asked them; in my defense, I haven't majorly jerked with the article, either. - User:Hephaestos 07:14, 4 Nov 2003 (UTC) ::Well, the whole article is released under the GFDL... links and all. If people take the article and remove the links, that would be a modification of their own and would violate copyright. That's not our problem if we have a legitimate fair use version. --User:Dante Alighieri | User talk:Dante Alighieri 22:01, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC) == From Wikipedia:Possible copyright infringements == *We Didn't Start the Fire includes all or almost all of the lyrics to the song. Probably would be a major issue for the song owner unless we get permission. Does not qualify for fair use. User:Daniel Quinlan 06:39, Nov 4, 2003 (UTC) **User:Hephaestos and others are claiming it ''is'' fair use. Discuss on the Talk:We Didn't Start the Fire. User:Angela * Because the song is mostly a list of facts we can list the facts without violating copyright. I suggest just making it a list of topics mentioned in the song without using Joel's phrasing. Oh what the heck. I'll just do it. --User:Gbleem 20:31, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC) ---- This page has flicked between linked lyrics and a list as it is now several times. I really don't like it as a list and I think the lyrics are fair use. I think we should have a vote on this. User:Cgs 00:43, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC). * I don't like leaning on fair use unless we have to. --User:Gbleem 08:19, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC) Lyrics are NOT fair use. See the history of www.lyrics.ch. User:RickK | User talk:RickK 08:22, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC) www.lyrics.ch gives me a page in german. I'm assuming someone bought their domain name. What was in the history? --User:Gbleem 08:43, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC) Someone just needs to ask them permission... --User:SjUser Talk:Sj lyrics.ch was a repository of thousands of song lyrics. United States recording industry lawyers got the site shut down. The Swiss government showed up at the owner's door and toted off all of his computer equipment. User:RickK | User talk:RickK 08:45, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC) :See [http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,17499,00.html http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,17499,00.html] for details. User:RickK | User talk:RickK 08:49, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC) But we're providing comment on the lyrics with our links (every single phrase is linked). That makes us different from just a site listing lyrics. Does someone know for sure (a lawyer perhaps) what the law says about fair use? User:Cgs 13:09, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC). ---- Getting permission: If we were asking permission to use the song in a textbook we might have a chance but since we would be asking to publish the lyrics under the wikipedia license the chances of getting that are nil. Fair use: There are plenty of articles on the internet that explain fair use. The fact that we are not using a small portion nixes the concept of fair even if we meet other fair use requirements. Fortunately the actual facts are not covered by copyright. If we remove those portions that make it a Billy Joel song and leave just a list of facts then it may be published under the Wikipedia license. User:Gbleem 05:33, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC) :Question--since the old version is still easily accessible via the page history, couldn't we still be sued? User:Meelar 05:41, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC) == Lock the page == The article is entirely complete as is. I see no reason to change it in the future. The only changes here are probably going to be vandalism. I recommend we lock the page. Does wikipedia have a lock message that states the article is entirely complete without need for further changes?--User:Will2k 13:48, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC) :There's still changes that could be made to the article - to the lead section, or links, for example. The list may be complete, but that's not a good enough reason to protect the page, unless and until it gets a huge amount of vandalism. See Wikipedia:Protection policy. User:Sjorford User talk:Sjorford 14:01, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC) ::There may not be huge amounts of it, but it's all vandalism. If there needs to be changes to intro or links, it should be posted here.--User:Will2k 13:55, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC) :This is very much against the Wiki spirit and the locking policy. There is a great deal to add. User:Dcoetzee 23:45, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC) == claim of influence == the article states, "This song was very influential to American Culture at the time of its release in 1989." "very influential"? "to American Culture"? this is NPOV? i was around in 1989, part of american culture. i heard a few people mock the song. that's about it. how was it "very influential"? and if it was, what description does one then apply to things such as the iran hostage crisis, the birth control pill, etc? the claim should be adjusted downward, or justified with examples. User:SaltyPig 19:03, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC) :I think the claim is based on how the song got written in the first place. Joel heard someone say their generation (the one before his) had it tough (Depression/WW2) but Joel believed his generation had it just as tough (As described in the song). It was a chance for everyone to reflect on what kind of things they actually grew up with and how they persevered through those tough times. That said, I have nothing against removing it.--User:Will2k 23:38, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC) ::The song must have some influence, if not at it's time of relese then now. I've seen it refrenced in multiple English Course books in my college studies as a example of unique poetic style, more than that is the fact that I hear references to this song as much as american pie, which is indisputedly invluential. What I'm getting at is that it may have been / is infuential but people didn't / don't fully recognize that.--User:Kodemage 22:04, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC) ==Details== I've started adding some brief details about what exactly happened to the linked subjects in the cited year. I'd appreciate it if you guys could check out the linked articles and help out. I think they make the article much more informative. User:Dcoetzee 23:46, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC) == External Links == I'm very new to wikipedia, so please excuse me if I over stepped my bounds. I have removed the last 3 links from the External links section. The First was a link to another article which tries to do what has been attempted here but not as well and seems extraneous. The other 2 links could be found with a quick google and I don't believe they serve the encyclopedic qualities wikipedia strives for. I would also request feedback on the sections 1959 and 1961 which I fleshed out earlier today. --User:Kodemage 10:54, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC) :Welcome to Wikipedia. Your changes look fine and I agree with them. Just a quick note that discussions to talk pages are usually placed at the end instead of the beginning, but not a big deal.--User:Will2k 14:31, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC) == We Didn't Start the Fire#1960 We Didn't Start the Fire#1962 == Ok, I need some help with the payola seciton, it almost appears that wikipedia lacks sufficient content on that subject. There was a specific event in 1960 that Joel is talking about but I can't find it, just hints in other articles 2 or 3 degrees away from bribery#payola. Also, Brittish Beatle Mania began in 1963 according to The Beatles#History although some significant events did occure in 1962. Suggestions on how to deal with this, it almost seems Joel is incorrect in the song, but we can't really say that can we? --User:Kodemage 10:53, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC) :In some cases Joel did list things a year or two too early or too late. Considering he needed to make everything fit the rhythm and rhyme, this shouldn't be too surprising. Either find something important that happened that year or just explain that it really didn't happen that year. User:Dcoetzee 19:02, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Heavy Metal Suicide == Reverted This change as the event it intended to link to happened after the song was written / released see: Judas Priest#Subliminal message trial (Also, this probaby should have been the link instead of heavy metal suicide.) On the other hand Judas Priest may be wrong about the year in which case you can just put the changes back and I'll apologize. --User:Kodemage 06:34, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC) :There's a lot of debate over whether this line should be read "heavy metal suicide" or "heavy metal, suicide". I'm inclined towards the latter, as I can't think of any notable heavy metal band members committing suicide prior to the song being written. User:Dcoetzee 07:18, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC) ::Of course the phrase "heavy metal, suicide" has nothing to do with heavy metal ''bands'' or ''band members'' committing suicide.--User:Will2k 13:44, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC) ==Cola Wars== I think this more specifically refers to "The Pepsi Challenge" campaign (at least initially)--an unusually direct attack on a competitor, compared to the normal 'image' ads for soft drinks. Our Pepsi article's history seems to support this. User:Niteowlneils 17:13, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC) :Then why the rock and roll before that line?--User:Will2k 17:18, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC) ::Because it fit the music? Seriously, I'm not certain and that's why I didn't change the article, but the way I remember it, the challenge ads were a pre-cursor of the popstar ads, as described at cola wars. Also, I don't usually associate ads that don't mention the competing product(s) as part of an ad "war". User:Niteowlneils 20:27, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC) :::I wasn't around at the time but perhaps you can enlighten me. How does the Pepsi Challenge and the like relate to the music of the time? And really, who says it isn't both?--User:Will2k 20:30, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC) ::::It may have been both. However, thinking about it further, Coke and Pepsi have been each other's main competitor for many years before and after the early '80s, and have also used popular singers since, so the direct attacks/taste tests seem to arguably be the most unique facet of their marketing of that period. That said, I don't really care enuf to research it further--like I said, I'm not certain, so I didn't change the article, so it really doesn't seem to matter that much. Also, if you actually read what I wrote, I never said it wasn't both. User:Niteowlneils 21:03, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC) We didn't start the fire#REDIRECT We Didn't Start the Fire See other meanings of words starting from letter: WWA | WB | WC | WD | WE | WF | WG | WH | WI | WJ | WK | WL | WM | WN | WO | WP | WR | WS | WT | WU | WX | WY | WZ |Words begining with We_Didn\'t_Start_the_Fire: We_Didn't_Start_The_Fire We_Didn't_Start_the_Fire We_Didn't_Start_the_Fire We_didn't_start_the_fire We_Didn't_Start_the_Fire/temp We_Didn't_Start_the_Fire/temp |
||
These materials are based on Wikipedia and licensed under the GNU FDL
YouTube.com videos better site than Turbo Tax 2007 | ||
|
|