I'd heard about the Avril Lavigne-Chop Suey debacle before but never actually listened to it until the link at the start of the thread. Oh dear god that was awful. Shameful even.
My personal least favourite was the Sugababes version of Obsession. The original (and indeed pretty much any other subsequent covers) feature a guy singing one set of lyrics and a girl the other, because that's what the song is about (that and undertones of stalking and rape). When the Sugababes did it, all of them sung all of the lyrics, thus meaning none of it made any sense and making them sound like a bunch of skitzos. Also they sounded awful.
Kiraxa said:
A cover is the legal term for a band ripping off another band's song. Its legal as long as they make it sound different in some manner.
That's not right at all. If it's patently the same song with the same words, any band would get sued if they just plain 'ripped it off'. A cover is when an artist or band, having paid royalties to whomever the copyright holder is, records their own version of a previously released song. And they don't have to make it sound different, there are plenty of covers out there, particularly with todays contemporary music, that are practically identical to the original.