Not totally surprisingly, Chantal Kreviazuk, who accused Avril Lavigne of ripping off songs and taking writing credit she didn’t deserve, has recanted. Everything little thing.

I would like to apologize for any misconceptions concerning Avril Lavigne, which may have resulted from statements I made in my interview with Performing Songwriter Magazine. It was not my intention to call Avril’s songwriting ability or ethics into question.

“My statements and any inference from my statements, which call into question Avril’s ethics or ability as a respected and acclaimed songwriter, should be disregarded and are retracted. Avril is an accomplished songwriter and it has been my privilege to work with her.”

[From Reuters]

Sounds like someone got served. Kreviazuk had attacked Lavigne’s songwriting and ethics in Performing Songwriter Magazine.

I mean, Avril, songwriter? Avril doesn’t really sit and write songs by herself or anything. Avril will also cross the ethical line, and no one says anything. That’s why I’ll never work with her again. I sent her a song two years ago called ‘Contagious,’ and I just saw the track listing to this album [the newly-released The Best Damn Thing] and there’s a song called ‘Contagious’ on it—and my name’s not on it. What do you do with that?”

[From Torontoist]

Lavigne responded on her website, saying, “Chantal’s comments are damaging to my reputation and a clear defamation of my character and I am considering taking legal action.” Sounds like she took it.

I feel really badly for Chantal Kreviazuk, whoever she is. I really doubt a person in her position (not well known but well respected within the music industry) would say something like that about a famous singer unless there was truth to it. It seems like most websites and people in the music industry consider Avril to be somewhat of a hack. The way Kreviazuk took back absolutely everything, it almost seems like she’s groveling. You’ll note that she never denies saying any of those things, or tries to blame the writer or say things were taken out of context, which is good. She’s of course responsible for her own words. I don’t see how she could say something so powerful and then take it back, without giving some sort of reason. I’m guessing the reason is someone else’s power, combined with fear.