Filmmaker Jennifer Nelson had to pay $1,500 to have “Happy Birthday to You” sung in the movie she’s making. The money went to Warner Music Group, a company that claims to own the copyright on the song. A copyright is the legal right to use or sell a creative product such as a song, a TV show, a book, or a work of art. Warner has claimed the copyright for “Happy Birthday to You” since 1988.

“I never thought the song was owned by anyone,” Nelson said in an e-mail to The New York Times. “I thought it belonged to everyone.”

Nelson’s movie is a documentary(纪录片)— a film that uses pictures and/or interviews with people to create a factual report of real-life events — and is actually about the history of the “Happy Birthday” song itself.

Two sisters named Mildred and Patty Hill wrote a song called “Good Morning to All” in 1893. Over a short period of time, people began to sing the words “happy birthday to you” in place of the original lyrics to the tune of the Hill sisters’ song.

A number of history experts say that there is no record of who actually wrote the “Happy Birthday to You” lyrics(歌词). Historians also say there is no way to know when the general public began singing the “Happy Birthday” song, but they believe it was being sung by the public long before it was printed and owned by a company.

Nelson’s lawyers say this piece of music’s history proves that “Happy Birthday to You” belongs to everyone in the general public. That would mean Warner Music Group has no right to charge anyone a fee to sing the song in any setting.

Experts estimate that Warner/ Chappell, the publishing division of the Warner Music Group, has made about $2 million a year from licensing fees for “Happy Birthday to You.”

Nelson’s lawyers are asking a court in New York City to order Warner/Chappell to return fees they have collected over the past four years for use of the “Happy Birthday” song.

1.Jennifer Nelson had to pay Warner Music Group to ____________.

A. own the copyright on a song

B. have it write a song for her movie

C. have it play a song in her movie

D. have a song sung in her movie

2.The history experts’ statement can prove that the “Happy Birthday” song ____________.

A. does not belong to Warner Music Group

B. has more than 200 years’ history

C. was initially owned by another company

D. has always been very popular

3.According to Nelson’s lawyers, to sing the “Happy Birthday” song, people ____________.

A. should pay the Hill sisters

B. should pay Warner Music Group

C. need not pay for any purpose

D. need not pay except for commercial use

4.If the court supports Nelson’s lawyers’ claim, ____________.

A. she can obtain the copyright on the song

B. Warner will return about $8 million

C. Warner will have to pay her for her damages

D. she only needs to pay a little money to use the song

Should we allow modern buildings to be built next to older buildings in a historic area of a city? In order to answer this question, we must first examine whether people really want to preserve the historic feel of an area. Not all historical buildings are attractive. However, there may be other reasons—for example, economic(经济的) reasons—why they should be preserved. So, let us assume that historical buildings are both attractive and important to the majority of people. What should we do then if a new building is needed?

In my view, new architectural styles can exist perfectly well alongside an older style. Indeed, there are many examples in my own hometown of Tours where modern designs have been placed very successfully next to old buildings. As long as the building in question is pleasing and does not dominate(影响) its surroundings too much, it often improves the attractiveness of the area.

It is true that there are examples of new buildings which have spoilt(破坏) the area they are in, but the same can be said of some old buildings too. Yet people still speak against new buildings in historic areas. I think this is simply because people are naturally conservative(保守的) and do not like change.

Although we have to respect people's feelings as fellow users of the buildings, I believe that it is the duty of the architect and planner to move things forward. If we always reproduced what was there before, we would all still be living in caves. Thus, I would argue against copying previous architectural styles and choose something fresh and different, even though that might be the more risky choice.

1.What does the author say about historical buildings in the first paragraph?

A. Some of them are not attractive.

B. Most of them are too expensive to preserve.

C. They are more pleasing than modern buildings.

D. They have nothing to do with the historic feel of an area.

2.Which of the following is TRUE according to the author?

A. We should reproduce the same old buildings.

B. Buildings should not dominate their surroundings.

C. No one understands why people speak against new buildings.

D. Some old buildings have spoilt the area they are in.

3.By “move things forward”in the last paragraph, the author probably means “_________”.

A. destroy old buildings

B. choose new architectural style

C. put things in a different place

D. respect people's feelings for historical buildings

4.What is the main purpose of the passage?

A. To explain why people dislike change.

B. To warn that we could end up living in caves.

C. To argue that modern buildings can be built in historic areas.

D. To admit how new buildings have ruined their surroundings.

 0  133086  133094  133100  133104  133110  133112  133116  133122  133124  133130  133136  133140  133142  133146  133152  133154  133160  133164  133166  133170  133172  133176  133178  133180  133181  133182  133184  133185  133186  133188  133190  133194  133196  133200  133202  133206  133212  133214  133220  133224  133226  133230  133236  133242  133244  133250  133254  133256  133262  133266  133272  133280  151629 

违法和不良信息举报电话:027-86699610 举报邮箱:58377363@163.com

精英家教网