Living off a bad song: Las Ketchup and Fran Perea

Living your whole life off a bad song: the business of plagiarized hits

The music industry hides an uncomfortable secret: you don't need to be a genius to make a living from music. All it takes is a mediocre song, a well-executed plagiarism and an audience that doesn't ask questions. Las Ketchup and Fran Perea are the two clearest examples of this phenomenon in Spain.

The Aserejé case: a nonsense song that filled its writer's pockets

«Aserejé», released in 2002, is a perfect example. Its lyrics are gibberish that, according to urban legend, tell the story of Diego, a young man who walks into a nightclub under the influence of substances. The song was a worldwide hit, but the Muñoz sisters, the Ketchup girls, barely saw a single euro. The real beneficiary was Manuel «Queco» Ruiz, the producer and composer, who took the lion's share of the royalties. The song, moreover, borrows the bassline from Chic's «Good Times».

Fran Perea and the 'Pure' plagiarism: a melody that wasn't his

Fran Perea's case is even more blatant. His song «Uno más uno son siete» (One Plus One Makes Seven), from 2003, is practically identical to «Pure» by The Lightning Seeds, a hit from 1989. The composer was Mikel Erentxun, formerly of Duncan Dhu, who simply adapted the melody. Perea became famous thanks to the TV series Los Serrano and has lived off that song ever since. The question is whether it's him or the composer who's living off it.

Who keeps the money? The fine print of copyright

The difference between author and performer is key. The author gets paid for every play, while the performer only receives royalties for their performance. In the case of «Aserejé», Queco cashed in; Las Ketchup didn't. In Fran Perea's case, Erentxun is the author, so he's the one who gets paid. The artist in the public eye is just the visible face.

So yes, you can live your whole life off a bad song. The question is who ends up with the money.