It’s “Happy Birthday.”And because of a judge’s ruling on Tuesday, it’s no longer protected by copyright. You might have noticed how at some restaurants, they don’t actually sing the tune “Happy Birthday to You,” because they don’t want to get sued.Here’s why: two sisters wrote “Happy Birthday” about 120 years ago. They assigned the music rights to a music company. In 1998, that company was bought by Warner-Chappell Music. And since then, Warner-Chappell has made about 2 million bucks a year on fees for the use of the song, though it doesn’t charge people singing it at home.Anyway, a filmmaker that’s making a documentary about the song sued Warner-Chappell to avoid paying a 1,500 fine. A judge ruled that Warner-Chappell owned a limited piano arrangement, not the actual lyrical song itself. That means it’s free from copyright and free for anyone, anywhere to sing it, like a gift that keeps giving.[听力文本资源]1. [听力文本资源] What is the news report mainly about? [听力文本资源]A) Warner-Chappell Music.B) The song “Happy Birthday.” C) Birthday traditions around the world.D) The world's best known English language.2. [听力文本资源] Why couldn’t the song be sung in some restaurants in the past? [听力文本资源]A) The restaurants were too noisy.B) It was hard to perform the song well.C) The song was protected by copyright. D) Customers used to dislike the song.3. [听力文本资源] How did the song become free? [听力文本资源]A) The filmmaker was sued by Warner-Chappell.B) The filmmaker did not want to pay the fine. C) The actual lyrical song is owned by the filmmaker.D) The song was used in the filmmaker’s documentary.

[听力文本资源]Any idea what the world’s best known English song is? Before you guess, here’s a hint. It’s “Happy Birthday.” And because of a judge’s ruling on Tuesday, it’s no longer protected by copyright. You might have noticed how at some restaurants, they don’t actually sing the tune “Happy Birthday to You,” because they don’t want to get sued. Here’s why: two sisters wrote “Happy Birthday” about 120 years ago. They assigned the music rights to a music company. In 1998, that company was bought by Warner-Chappell Music. And since then, Warner-Chappell has made about 2 million bucks a year on fees for the use of the song, though it doesn’t charge people singing it at home. Anyway, a filmmaker that’s making a documentary about the song sued Warner-Chappell to avoid paying a $1,500 fine. A judge ruled that Warner-Chappell owned a limited piano arrangement, not the actual lyrical song itself. That means it’s free from copyright and free for anyone, anywhere to sing it, like a gift that keeps giving.[听力文本资源]1. [听力文本资源] What is the news report mainly about? [听力文本资源]A)  Warner-Chappell Music.B)  The song “Happy Birthday.” C)  Birthday traditions around the world.D)  The world's best known English language.2. [听力文本资源] Why couldn’t the song be sung in some restaurants in the past? [听力文本资源]A)  The restaurants were too noisy.B)  It was hard to perform the song well.C)  The song was protected by copyright. D)  Customers used to dislike the song.3. [听力文本资源] How did the song become free? [听力文本资源]A)  The filmmaker was sued by Warner-Chappell.B)  The filmmaker did not want to pay the fine. C)  The actual lyrical song is owned by the filmmaker.D)  The song was used in the filmmaker’s documentary.