Torn from LasagnaFarm's Legal Briefs

From CNN:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court refused Monday to intervene in a lawsuit over the hit song "Rosa Parks" by the Grammy-winning musical group OutKast.

LasagnaFarm’s legal correspondent, a legal correspondent so cagey he hunts down wild ambulances just for the tort of it (my apologies), has spent the last day and several nights all up in this case’s, er, grill. He’s also prepared some possible civil filings that could be in the offing for the music industry, should the judgment be against OutKast ultimately. “It’s like the court firing up some freebase in front of Richard Prior circa 1981,” said the obviously drunk correspondent, before falling into some trashcans outside his Upper West Side townhouse, and receiving an angry kick in the crotch by a Web editor, who fled the scene.

Ford Motor Company, General Motors, DaimlerChrysler v. The White Stripes, Ltd., Third Man Records, Inc., V2 Records, Inc.
Plaintiff alleges music group “The White Stripes” (heretofore referred to as “The Group”), made unlawfully slanderous comments and published libelous materials insinuating the plaintiffs’ culpability in the death of a child and/or related or non-related acquaintance in the musical work “The Big Three Killed My Baby.” Additionally, plaintiffs allege damage to their corporate reputations from said comments, citing such examples as “their ideas made me want to spit” and “better ideas are stuck in the mud the motors runnin' on tuckers blood” that fall outside the protection of permissible artistic/editorial license.

Good Humor, Mr. Softee (et. al.) v. Van Halen, LLP
Plaintffs charge lyrics of the recorded work “Ice Cream Man” (heretofore referred to as “The Work”) suggest a “guarantee to satisfy” among street vendors of ice cream product. Plaintiffs argue that they (and divisions and corporate partners) hold no such warrantee to be good and proper. Moreover, The Work makes reference to “all flavors and push-ups too,” which implies the availability of said products a matter of due course, an implication of indenture that is disavowed by all plaintiffs. Moreover, the lyric “push-ups too” connotes sexual innuendo that is damaging to the plaintiffs’ corporate branding.

Brass Monkey Beverages Limited v. Beastie Boys, Capitol Records, et. al.
Plaintiff alleges music group “Beastie Boys” (heretofore referred to as “The Group”) willfully disparages plaintiff’s alcoholic beverage product “Brass Monkey” (heretofore referred to as “The Product”) in recorded work entitled “Brass Monkey” (heretofore referred to as “The Work”). Plaintiff alleges damaged viability of The Product as a commercial good, insofar as said reference has increased liability of the plaintiff in incidents of underage drinking, criminal mischief, felonious loitering, property damage and defacement, and judgments related to such criminal and civil charges, as well as personal injury claims related to alcohol poisoning, unprotected sex, accidental dismemberment, fallings, and vomitorious incidentals. Plaintiff also holds one lyric in particular (i.e., “that funky monkey”) to have unduly characterized The Product, in that The Product is not, in actuality, “funky,” insomuch as the plaintiff makes no guarantee as to the actual degree of “funk” characterizing The Product. Moreover, The Product neither contains actual monkey, nor does it include as an ingredient, nor makes any claims to the effect that it contains, any substance of simian origin.