唱過那麼多次生日歌 你付過版稅嗎

It is one of the most beloved and famous of all songs, belted out at countless gatherings for infant and octogenarian alike. Yet “Happy Birthday to You,” far from being as free as a piece of cake at a party, is actually considered private property.

這首歌家喻戶曉、備受喜愛。下至學步嬰兒，上至耄耋老人，無數人的聚會上都有這首歌高聲響起。不過，《祝你生日快樂》並不像派對上的蛋糕一樣免費，它的版權其實屬於私人。

A federal lawsuit filed by a group of independent artists is trying to change that, and lawyers in the case, in a filing last week, said they had found evidence in the yellowed pages of a nearly century-old songbook that proves the song’s copyright — first issued in 1935 — is no longer valid.

一羣獨立藝術家發起聯邦訴訟，試圖改變這個局面，本案原告律師們在上週提交的一份文件中聲稱，他們在一本近百年前的舊歌集泛黃的紙頁間找到了證據，證明這首歌的版權已經過了保護期（1935年初次登記註冊）。

A judge may rule in the case in coming weeks. If the song becomes part of the public domain, it would cost the Warner Music Group, which holds the rights, millions of dollars in lost licensing fees. It would also be a victory for those who see “Happy Birthday to You” as emblematic of the problems with copyright — a song that has long since survived anyone involved in its creation, yet is still owned by a corporation that charges for its use.

接下來的幾個星期裏，法官將會對此案做出判決。如果這首歌屬於公共版權，它目前的版權所有者華納音樂集團將會損失數百萬美元的版權許可費用。此外，還有許多人認爲，《祝你生日快樂》堪稱現行版權制度中各種問題的象徵，這首歌所涉及的所有創作者均已作古，但它的版權卻仍然屬於一家大公司，使用它還要向公司繳納費用。此案如果勝訴，對於這些人來說也不啻爲一種勝利。

“It is one of the few songs that you’ve heard for as long as you’ve lived, and you kind of think of it as a folk song,” said Robert Brauneis, a professor at the George Washington University Law School who in 2010 published a skeptical study of the copyright of “Happy Birthday to You.”

“幾乎沒有什麼歌能讓人聽一輩子，這首歌就是其中之一，你覺得它應該是屬於民歌，”喬治·華盛頓大學法律學院的羅伯特·布羅奈斯(Robert Brauneis)說，2010年，他就《祝你生日快樂》的版權問題發表了一份充滿懷疑的研究報告。

The case also highlights the centrality of copyright claims to media businesses like the music industry, where the question of who owns the rights to a song can be worth millions of dollars. Advocates for rigorous copyright laws point out that they protect musicians as well as the companies that represent them. Still, their interpretation can rattle the industry; that was the case in March, when a jury found that Robin Thicke’s song “Blurred Lines” had copied “Got to Give It Up,” a 1977 hit by Marvin Gaye.

這個案子也凸顯出，對於音樂行業這樣的媒體業來說，對版權的要求可謂重中之重——在音樂行業內，一首歌的版權歸屬價值成百上千萬美元。支持嚴密的版權法的人指出，這些法律保護音樂人的利益，也保護代表音樂人的公司的利益。但是他們的解釋也會令這個行業感到不安；比如今年三月，法庭判決羅賓·西克(Robin Thicke)的歌《含糊其辭》(Blurred Lines)抄襲了馬文·蓋伊(Marvin Gaye)1977年的金曲《要放棄了》(Got to Give It Up)。

Part of the dispute over “Happy Birthday” derives from the song’s byzantine publishing history. Its familiar melody was first published in 1893 as “Good Morning to All,” written by Mildred Hill and her sister Patty, a kindergarten teacher in Kentucky. Birthday-themed variations began to appear in the early 1900s, and soon “Happy Birthday to You” was a phenomenon, popping up in films and hundreds of thousands of singing telegrams in the 1930s.

圍繞着《生日快樂》的爭議有部分是來自這首歌錯綜複雜的出版史。1893年出版了一首名爲《大家早上好》(Good Morning to All)的歌，與它旋律頗爲類似，創作者是米爾德里德·希爾(Mildered Hill)和她的姊妹——肯塔基州的幼兒園老師帕蒂(Patty)。生日快樂主題的演變版本於20世紀初出現；30年代，《祝你生日快樂》開始風靡一時，出現在許多電影裏，乃至數十萬“唱歌電報”中（由歌手爲接收電報的人唱出電文內容，是一種禮物——譯註）。

Its appearance in a scene in Irving Berlin’s show “As Thousands Cheer” in 1933 led to a lawsuit, and in 1935 the copyright for “Happy Birthday to You” was registered by the Clayton F. Summy Company, the Hill sisters’ publisher. The song changed hands over the years, and Warner acquired it in 1988 when buying the song’s owner, Birchtree Ltd., as part of a publishing deal reported at the time to be worth $25 million. According to some estimates, the song now generates about $2 million in licensing income each year, mostly from its use in television and film.

1933年，這首曲子出現在歐文·柏林(Irving Berlin)的演出裏，名爲《千萬歡呼》(As Thousands Cheer)，引發了一場法律訴訟；1935年，《祝你生日快樂》的版權被希爾姊妹的出版商克萊頓·F·薩米公司(Clayton F. Summy Company)註冊。多年來，這首歌的版權幾經易手，1988年，華納公司買下了這首歌的所有者伯奇特里有限公司(Birchtree Ltd.)，作爲一項出版合約中的一部分，據當時的報道，該交易價值在250萬美元。據估計，如今，《祝你生日快樂》每年爲華納公司帶來200萬美元的許可收益，大都來自電視和電影中的使用。

Yet while the song is widely performed at private gatherings, its copyright status leads to peculiar workarounds in public settings. Chain restaurants often come up with their own songs to avoid paying licensing fees, according to Mr. Brauneis’s paper. On live television, it is not uncommon for an impromptu performance to be quickly silenced by producers.

誠然，這首歌在私下場合廣爲使用，但它的版權狀況在公共環境下卻導致了各種應變之道。根據布羅奈斯的文章，（有人慶祝生日時）連鎖餐廳經常播放自己的歌曲，避免爲播放這首歌支付費用。在電視現場節目裏，如果有嘉賓即興演唱這首歌，製作人就趕快消音，這種事屢見不鮮。

Jennifer Nelson, who is making a documentary about the song and first filed the lawsuit against Warner two years ago, said that the company charged her $1,500 to use the song. The case, which has been joined by other artists and seeks class-action status, is being heard in federal court in Los Angeles. Plaintiffs want the song to be declared part of the public domain, and for Warner to return licensing fees dating to at least 2009.

詹妮弗·納爾遜(Jennifer Nelson)正在爲這首歌拍攝一部紀錄片，兩年前正是她首次起訴華納公司，她說，公司要求她爲使用這首歌支付1500美元。後來其他藝術家也加入進來共同起訴，洛杉磯聯邦法庭已經受理這一案件。原告們希望這首歌可以被改判爲屬於公共版權，華納公司則需退還至少到2009年爲止他人支付的許可費用。

“Our clients want to give ‘Happy Birthday to You’ back to the public, which is what Patty Hill wanted all along,” said Mark C. Rifkin, a lawyer for the plaintiffs.

“我們的客戶希望把《祝你生日快樂》歸還給公衆，這也是帕蒂·希爾一直以來的願望，”原告的一位律師馬克·C·裏夫金(Mark C. Rifkin)說。

Warner, which declined to comment for this article, contends in court filings that its copyright is valid. The song also generates hundreds of thousands of dollars each year for a nonprofit group, the Association for Childhood Education International.

華納公司拒絕爲本文接受採訪，它在法律文書中主張，自己的版權是有效的。這首歌每年亦爲非營利組織“國際兒童教育協會”(Association for Childhood Education International)帶來數十萬美元的收入。

Yet “Happy Birthday to You” has long been a prime target for critics of the laws that regulate copyright. Thanks to an extension made under the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 — which was lobbied for heavily by Hollywood — the song remains under protection through 2030.

其實《祝你生日快樂》早已是版權法批評者們的主要抨擊對象。由於1998年通過的桑尼·波諾版權延長期法案（Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act，規定版權的保護期限是作者有生之年加死後70年，比伯爾尼公約規定的國際慣例多20年，1923年前的出版物均屬公共版權——譯註），版權保護期限得以延長（好萊塢做了大量院外遊說，力主通過這一法案），因此這首歌直到2030年都在版權期保護之內。

“The fact that ‘Happy Birthday to You’ is still under copyright is the most symbolic example of how copyright has expanded and overreached beyond its Constitutional purpose,” said Kembrew McLeod, a communications professor at the University of Iowa who has written about the song.

“《祝你生日快樂》仍在版權保護期內，這是版權法過度擴張，達到違憲地步的最典型例子，”愛荷華大學傳播學教授坎姆布魯·麥克里奧德(Kembrew McLeod)爲這首歌撰文寫道。

Mr. Brauneis contended in his 2010 study that the song’s copyright may not have been properly renewed when its initial term expired, in 1963. But lawyers for the plaintiffs in the “Happy Birthday” suit — for whom Mr. Brauneis said he was working as an unpaid consultant — now say they have proof of deeper problems.

1963年，這首歌的版權期第一次到期，布羅奈斯在他2010年的那篇文章中主張，當時就不應當將它的版權期予以延長。但《生日快樂》一案的原告律師們（布羅奈斯爲他們充當免費顧問）說，他們有證據，可以揭示更深層次的問題。

Last week, they submitted evidence that they called “a proverbial smoking gun”: a 1922 songbook containing “Good Morning and Birthday Song,” with the birthday lyrics in the third verse. While other songs in the book are given with copyright notices, “Good Morning and Birthday Song” says only that it appears through “special permission” of the Summy Company. Under the laws of the time, an authorized publication without proper copyright notice would result in forfeiture of the copyright, according to lawyers involved in the case. Furthermore, under the 1998 law, anything published before 1923 is considered part of the public domain.

上星期，他們提交了一樁證據，他們稱之爲“衆所周知的冒煙火槍”：那是一本1922年的歌集，裏面收錄了名爲《早安與生日歌》(Good Morning and Birthday Song)的歌曲，第三段是生日快樂的歌詞。那本書裏的所有歌曲都附上了版權聲明，《早安與生日歌》則是經過薩米公司的“特別許可”才得以使用的。本案律師稱，根據當時的法律，正式出版物如果沒有版權聲明，就會導致版權被沒收。根據1998年的法律，任何1923年以前出版的作品均屬公共版權領域。

Warner argued that while earlier versions of the birthday song may have been published, they were not authorized by the sisters themselves. Also, no copyright covered “Happy Birthday,” the label argues, until it was registered in 1935, so there was no copyright to be invalidated in 1922.

華納公司稱，儘管生日歌的若干早期版本可能早早就得以發表，但它們都未經過兩姐妹本人授權。此外，公司聲稱，沒有一項版權涵蓋了《祝你生日快樂》，直至這首歌於1935年正式註冊，所以，不存在失效的1922年版權。

Both sides have asked for summary judgment, and the judge, George H. King of United States District Court in Los Angeles, is expected to rule soon. Judge King could deny both motions and hold a trial — raising the possibility of a strange proceeding in which all principal witnesses are long dead.

雙方都要求做出簡易程序判決(summary judgment)，期望此案法官，美國洛杉磯地區法庭的喬治·H·金(George H. King)能夠速戰速決。金法官也可以否決雙方的要求，舉行庭審——這可能會很奇怪，因爲所有關鍵證人都早已身故。

As part of the evidence submission last week, the plaintiffs included a paper trail showing how they tracked down the songbook. It started with electronically scanned images from Warner of a 1927 edition of the same book, but with the publisher’s crucial permission line about “Good Morning and Birthday Song” blurred. Lawyers for the plaintiffs searched for other copies of the book and found one at the University of Pittsburgh; a 1922 edition was also located.

原告上週呈送的證據中包括書面文件，追溯他們是怎樣查找到那本歌集。一開始，他們在華納找到那本歌集1927年版的電子掃描圖片，但關於《早安與生日歌》最關鍵的出版者許可那一行是模糊的。原告律師開始尋覓這本書的其他版本，最後在匹茲堡大學找到了；而且還找到了1922年的版本。

In a series of emails about the 1927 edition, a Pittsburgh librarian told Mr. Rifkin that the songbook had been found in a university storage facility.

在一系列關於該書1927年版的電子郵件通信裏，匹茲堡的圖書管理員告訴裏夫金，這本歌集是在一間大學的儲藏室裏找到的。

“Here you go,” she wrote in sending it to him. “Surely the copyright hasn’t lasted this long.”

“加油吧，”她在隨書附上的郵件裏寫道，“版權肯定持續不了這麼久。”