The Simpsons Shows Precisely How One Should Handle Derivative Homage Works

from the okilly-dokilly dept

When it comes to derivative works, copyright in America has a long and storied history of stifling new and creative expression in favor of control by some ultimately-creative original author. Frankly, the section of copyright law that gives authors of content control over derivative works never made much sense to me. Or, at least, it appears to be a wholesale contradiction of the idea/expression dichotomy that is also supposed to exist in copyright law. Still, we've seen all kinds of fallout from the derivative works section of the law spill over into the real world, from laughable attempts by musical artists to control short phrases to derivatives building off of the original author's secondary work. The point is that the general consensus among most creators appears to be that derivative works outside of the author's control are the enemy and should be beaten down by any means necessary.

The counterexample to that, however, is how the folks behind The Simpsons decided to handle one of the oddest musical acts I've ever come across. Think I'm exaggerating? It's a Ned Flanders homage using a death metal band as a vehicle to deliver "Flanderisms" via lyrics in what the band has termed "Nedal music."

The idea for Okilly Dokilly came from a conversation between Head Ned and the group’s original drummer, Bled Ned, who were trying to imagine the most ill-fitting name for a death metal band. After hitting upon Okilly Dokilly, the duo continued to spin the joke out: What if the frontman was dressed like Ned Flanders, what if everyone dressed like Ned Flanders, what if it was a “Nedal band” not a “metal band,” what if all the lyrics were Flanders quotes. The dream began to materialize when Head Ned realized they not only had access to a pink Flying V guitar, but his job at a clothing company allowed him to buy green sweaters in bulk.

When it comes to writing songs, Head Ned says a Flanders quote must fit one of two criteria: It either has to sound super dark and metal out of context (“Nothing At All,” “Claw My Eyes Out”) or so silly it has no place in a metal song (“Godspeed Little Doodle,” “I Can’t, It’s a Geo”). When the band set out to make their second album, Howdilly Twodilly, released last month, Head Ned took on the enviable task of re-watching the first 10 seasons of The Simpsons and jotting down the best lines in a notebook.

So...yeah. Now, this is all very clearly a derivative work of the original The Simpsons creation. Ned Flanders isn't just a character on the show; he's one of the most iconic characters on it. Building an entire musical concept around that character, that character's look and clothing, not to mention making lines he speaks in the show the principle lyrical device for all of the songs, is both creative and obviously stems from the original work. While Okilly Dokilly isn't getting radio play on the pop channels, they are playing shows around the country and even in the UK. Their touring van is, of course, named "Ned Vanders."

In fact, it was while they were touring in the UK that Head Ned got an email from one of the writers on The Simpsons and naturally thought they were all in deep shit.

Head Ned remembers waking up one morning in the band’s van — obviously nicknamed “Ned Vanders” — to an e-mail from Simpsons producer Richard K. Chung, who said the show was interested in running the “White Wine Spritzer” video (at the time, this was the band’s only music video; more recently they shared a clip for Howdilly Twodilly’s “Reneducation”). When the band asked how The Simpsons team had discovered them, Head Ned says they were told Al Jean came across their work via a Google alert.

“We’ve always operated as an homage to the show,” Head Ned says. “It’s great to be on the frontline of these tiny Simpsons fans conventions across the U.S. We’ve never tried to do anything as a deterrent to the show, but you’re never sure how the legality of everything works. But the fact that they contacted us and it wasn’t anything where they wanted us to stop and go home was very, very cool.”

Rather than trying to shut them down, the people from the Simpsons wanted to feature the band's work in the credits of an episode. Suddenly, the band that was an homage to a secondary character on The Simpsons had become featured on the show. You can see what this all looked like in the video below.

Something of a stark contrast to every creative person or group out there who slapped down every homage or derivative work just because it was a commercial project, huh? Not to mention how many fan-made works out there were created purely out of love for the original work.

The real question is why can't more creators act like this?

Filed Under: copyright, derivative works, embracing fans, fans, ned flanders, nedal music, okilly dokilly, the simpsons
Companies: fox


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    Thad (profile), 20 Apr 2020 @ 8:18pm

    Animation is built on plagiarism. If it weren't for someone plagiarizing the Honeymooners, we wouldn't have the Flintstones. If someone hadn't ripped off Sergeant Bilko, there'd be no Top Cat. Huckleberry Hound, Chief Wiggum, Yogi Bear? Hah! Andy Griffith, Edward G. Robinson, Art Carney!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    JoeCool (profile), 21 Apr 2020 @ 9:06am

    Why?

    The real question is why can't more creators act like this?

    Because their property isn't swirling around the toilet bowl ready to go under with clueless execs are frantically donning golden parachutes while the lawyers are told to monetize any last pennies before it all goes tits up.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    David, 21 Apr 2020 @ 9:36am

    The real question is why can't more creators act like this?

    Because not all creators think they'll play legal dilettant. Most have attorneys to handle that kind of situation. An attorney is paid for solving legal problems, not creative ones. A creative solution would mean the attorney would get paid for handing a legal problem back to the creators.

    That's like hiring a room cleaner to tell me when it's time for me to vacuum again.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Crafty Coyote, 21 Apr 2020 @ 12:58pm

      Re: The real question is why can't more creators act like this?

      Or not being so damn lazy and cleaning up your own room, if it means that much to you.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 21 Apr 2020 @ 1:03pm

      Re: The real question is why can't more creators act like this?

      A creative solution would mean the attorney would get paid for handing a legal problem back to the creators.

      Ah, no... I think the point is it would mean the attorney, after handing said problem back for a creative solution, would then not get paid the dozens/hundreds of billable hours available for repeatedly haranguing and bullying the poor schmuck on the other end, starting with boiler-plate threats... Which would defeat the entire purpose of being an attorney, no?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Crafty Coyote, 21 Apr 2020 @ 5:42pm

        Re: Re: The real question is why can't more creators act like th

        Of course, when what lawyers want is to just increase the amount of billable hours you can get paid by spewing lies that nobody believes, not even they themselves, then you really shouldn't be surprised when people stop listening to lawyers altogether.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 22 Apr 2020 @ 5:24am

          Re: Re: Re: The real question is why can't more creators act lik

          They don't have a problem if people stop being listening to them, as long as they get paid.

          And they make sure you will pay.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Crafty Coyote, 22 Apr 2020 @ 2:06pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: The real question is why can't more creators act

            And how do you suppose they go about forcing people to pay for an ineffective service that they could get elsewhere for much less?

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 21 Apr 2020 @ 10:53am

    The real question is why can't more creators act like this?

    Because fuck you, that's why.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Stikilly Lickilly, 21 Apr 2020 @ 12:31pm

    NuCopyRight: The Capitalist Dream

    The Real Question:

    "The real question is why can't more creators act like this? "

    The Real Answer:

    The chance to make more Money, without doing more work.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.