Confusion in the courts and platforms because of a song by Farid Al-Atrash.. What is Nancy Ajram’s relationship? | Programs

Tweeters reacted to a demand by one of the heirs of the late artist Farid Al-Atrash for financial compensation from a company that used the lyrics and melody of a song by the artist without obtaining the approval of the heirs.

Tweeters reacted to a demand by one of the heirs of the late artist Farid Al-Atrash for financial compensation from a company that used the lyrics and melody of a song by the artist without obtaining the approval of the heirs.

The advertisement, which promoted an ice cream product, used the lyrics and melody of the song “You and I, and there is no limit to us,” which is one of the late singer’s most famous songs, which he composed and sang in the movie “Exit from Paradise” in 1967.

When the words and melodies were used in the new advertisement presented by the Lebanese singer Nancy Ajram, Faisal Fouad Al-Atrash demanded financial compensation amounting to 10 million pounds (one dollar equals about 50 pounds).

Al-Atrash said in a statement that the announcement “holds criminal liability for an infringement on literary rights, and was made without the approval of the Society of Authors and Composers (SASIRO) or the Egyptian Civil and Music Publishers Company.”

But the production company said that it had obtained a waiver from the author’s heir, and confirmed that it had also obtained a waiver from the song’s rights holder.

This announcement sparked some comments, especially since the song is well-known and very famous. Ghassan Henedy commented by saying, “It is a natural right for the heirs of the late Farid (Al-Atrash) to obtain Ajram’s approval (from them).”

Henedy attacked the artist Nancy Ajram by saying, “This piracy method on her part is unacceptable. She wants to make commercial advertisements and collect money, but not at the expense of productions by a great giant like Farid Al-Atrash, may God have mercy on him.”

On the other hand, Serena defended the artist Nancy Ajram by saying, “I believe that the producer of the advertisement is responsible for the legal concessions, and this is an obvious thing. What about the singer?”

As for Kamal, he said that the whole story is an attempt to appear, saying, “These are things that happen with the agreement of both parties to return to the limelight and occupy social media and the media, and then share the profits.”

Ihab Odeh opposed Al-Atrash’s grandson’s position by saying, “The families of artists’ relationship with the artist’s production ends after his death with the distribution of the inheritance, but his art is the property of his contracts and then his fans,” adding, “The work of the deceased ceases and the connection with the heir ceases after the division of the inheritance.”

Al-Atrash’s grandson did not demand the amount of compensation from the Lebanese singer, but rather the advertising company.

Leave a Comment