Infringement or coincidence?

Canadas own punk princess Avril Lavigne, was sued last July by U.S song writer Tommy Dunbar. The former member and founder of the 70's pop band,The Rubinos, claimed that Avrils number one hit "Girlfriend" sounded suspiciously like their 1979 hit " I wanna be your boyfriend". Avril denies the assumption, and states "I havehas never heard the song in my life". I find this a little odd, considering a couple months ago i remember reading an article in a magazine all about avril. At one point in the article, avril explains how she has always been inspired my music. She said that she is very much interested in old music, especially ones from the 70s and 80s. Now i could be wrong, but if someone is that interested in 70s music, you would think that they would come across the rubinos hit song ATLEAST once. Otherwise, Avril could have just been putting on a whole act about the music she liked. Tommys lawyer, Carlin Nicholas argued back that " the heart and soul of her song is directly taken from our clients song". It was this comment that was a bit of a stretch. Saying someone took the heart and soul of your song is like saying someone copied you by having the same color brown hair as you. There are so many songs that have the same idea and emotion but into the lyrics. It was Carlins comment that may have raised eyebrows about the rubinos intention of the accusation towards Avril.

Although the Rubinos have been out of the spotlight for many years, it is wrong for some to say that they had their stardom and fame, let the new stars have theirs. The Rubinos wrote that song , and it is their property. Just because they are an older band, does not give someone else the right to copy, or take parts from their song. If that was acceptable, then all music would be even more similar then it is now.

After almost eight months of gossip and arguements. It is now concluded, The rubinos and Avril conflict is now resolved. Or is it?

Avrils record company network issued a statment from Tommy Dunbar and band member James Gangwer. The two men stated that "We are satisfied that any similarities between the two songs resulted from Avril and Luke's use of certain common and widely used lyrics." They also concluded saying": "We therefore completely exonerate Avril and Luke from any wrongdoing of any kind in connection with the claims made by us in our lawsuit." After researching the rest of the case, i came to the conclusion that well, there is no conclusion. There is no official statement sayiang the verdict of the case. I find it a bit odd that the Rubinos would all of a sudden, change their view on the situation. They were so set on taking revenge on Avril, and now seem to have just dropped all accusations. There are only two explanation that come to mind, for the rubinos actions. One, they are just too tired to continue the case. And two, Avril did not want any more bad publicity and payed the rubinos to leave her alone.

-The Two songs that Tommy Dunbar claimed to be suspiciously similiar


There is also questioning that New comer, Vanessa Hudgens plagiarized Avrils song "complicated".

"Avril Lavigne". No date. Online image. taume. 11 Jan 2008.

The Canada Press. Avril Lavigne fights claims of plagiarism. July 7, 2007 . 11 Jan. 2008

Rolling Stone. Did Avril Bite A Peaches Track, Too?. 7 Oct. 2007. 11 Jan. 2008