Just interested in what people think of the whole My Sweet Lord/He's So Fine thing. Was the judge right in finding George guilty.
Personaly I think probably yes (it's a hard one). And the smell o9f plagarism had been around George before.
I think the case and the disastrous Dark Horse Tour pretty well  did in George's solo career (until the Wilbury's at least).

i dont know enough about it to have a proper opinion i guess, its sad to think george would actually do something like that.....but how did they prove it!? the chord pattern was the same, ok but i notice similarites in plenty of songs, there just isnt enough different patterns for EVERY song to have a different one.

"And the smell of plagarism had been around George before."
^what do you mean by this kevin?

yeah I agree, there are so many songs out there that sound exactly the same, yet nothing happens like in George's case.

Quoted from DayTripper

"And the smell of plagarism had been around George before."
^what do you mean by this kevin?

Yeah sorry my wording was a bit strong. I was digging for a reaction! Just before Something was released Apple had signed James Taylor, who released a song on Apple called "Something in  the way She Moves" and a few critics went "hang on".
I've never heard it so have no opinion.
Like I said I was kinda poking the hornets nest.
Sorry

^i knew he had a song called that, i did notice that yeh...and i thought i wonder if its the same song. but its not of course, i didnt even thing he might of nicked it from there though...lol dont be sorry! i just wondered, if hed been warned before or something. he jsut doesnt strike me as the sort of person who would steal anothers tune.....it was aid that he often had too much material for the beatles to accomodate. or perhaps more than a certain 2 were willing to accomodate for. anyway, he had his own stuff....and i believe it was all HIS own. anyway. i talk too much

he was found guilty of "subconscious plagarism" anyway.
i think George said at the time that if this is so then Chuck Berry could sue every rock and roll band that ever was.

Theres only so many chords in music. I remember reading many times that Ringo would spend weeks trying to write a song and when he would finally present it to John and Paul, there were many times that they would fall down in laughter telling Ringo that he spent weeks rewriting a standard. Crap happens. I dont think George meant to do it, but when listening,,,,it does sound like that song chord wise.

You know that John put a couple of Chuck Berry songs on the Rock'n'Roll album as an out of court settlement over plagarism allegations re Come Together/You can't Catch Me.
Maybe because they're such potentially big sellers that they become targets.
The Stones/Verve case is another

Quoted from DayTripper

i dont know enough about it to have a proper opinion i guess,

me either DT ..

didnt that happen with joyhn, and chuck berry>? he sued him, because 'come together', sounded like a chuck berrry song(i cant remember the name now, lol).

ONly so many frets on that guitar! It's rife everywhere now. Could Hare Krishna's sue him aswell for nicking their chant? lol...jokin!  

i think its all bumpkiss..............if music is self expression. then why isn't plagarism a form of flattery??
i think phil spector was responsible for both the john and the george case....

Quoted from pc31

i think phil spector was responsible for both the john and the george case....

Phil Spector and Come Together? I don't see a connection

Subconscious plaguirism happens all the time. Really, it does. Take J.K. Rowling and that other book... I foget what it was called, but it was really similar to Harry Potter. I figure, she just read the book, and fogot about it. Then later these images came into her head and hs ethought they were her own imagination.

That's probaly what happened to George, song-wise.

Is'nt there only ever 7 stories?...The rest are variations....Heard that somewhere.

Every artists borrows something from another one way or the other so I think George took a little inspiration from He's So Fine but My Sweet Lord doesn't sound like it except a bit.  

Quoted from Wayne_L.

Every artists borrows something from another one way or the other so I think George took a little inspiration from He's So Fine but My Sweet Lord doesn't sound like it except a bit.  

I'm no expert but I think structualy it's pretty similar.

Quoted from Wayne_L.

I think George took a little inspiration from He's So Fine.  

thats the song by the chiffons yeah ?

Quoted from Mr_Kite

thats the song by the chiffons yeah ?

yes

Quoted from kevin_b

I'm no expert but I think structualy it's pretty similar.

I agree.

Quoted from kevin_b

Phil Spector and Come Together? I don't see a connection

phildoe owns stock in catch seven music.they were seven seas music,they own the rights to you cant catch me with is what come together ripped a line from.
as far as chuck berry was concerned lennon paid tribute to him using the line but the powers that controlled it didn't agree....

Plagarism is bullshit...

I think the main similarities are the chord progression and the vocal melody in the lines "He's so fine" and "My sweet lord"... Besides that, they are anything alike...

First, George's song is more folk-rock where the Chiffons are obviously motown...

Second, George would never be caught dead singing "Do-lang-do-lang-do-lang"...

Third, the Chiffons' writing style for this song is sort of question and answer with the line and "do-lang" bit, whereas George's doesn't do that... Also, the Chiffons' song is talking about the guy where George's talks about his need for God...

And lastly, George's song has a much better and more original sound than the Chiffons'! Their song sounds like every other 10 million songs that came out during the early 60's... They should talk!

Anyway, sorry if my writing sounds poor and my ideas jumbled... I'm tired

^ nah its clear as crystal, especially the doo lang part. shudder.

Everyone that writes music can tell you that sometimes you just re-write excisting songs because they're somewhere in the back of your mind... He probably didn't know it sounded so similar... Even though I think it's strange that no one (the musicians, the recording staff, the record label people etc.) noticed the similarity before they released it, because it really is pretty obvious...

Didn't George or someone close to him buy the rights to "He's So Fine" to get out of trouble? I remember reading something like that...

I agree that, especially now, everything is pretty much rehash, someone said that there are only so many chord progressions, etc., how many blues songs could fill the court dockets? However, George was dead a** guilty, it wasn't a line like he took from James Taylor or a chord progression, it was repeated over and over again note for note. Maybe he didn't think much of it, it just fit and sounded good, but if he would have added the "doodle-langs", it would have been exactly like "He's so Fine".

if he is its dissapointing because it is a great song

I don't think they sound that similar. One's a motown female r + b dance song and the other's a male rock and roll spiritual,acoustic guitar driven song. They may have the same chords,but the feel is completely different.

Quoted from andyec

I don't think they sound that similar. One's a motown female r + b dance song and the other's a male rock and roll spiritual,acoustic guitar driven song. They may have the same chords,but the feel is completely different.

Unfortunately the feel was not the issue. If someone knicks your black car, paints it red with flowers and says "bit the feels different" it's still your car. (a loose analogy I know)

I really don't think he did it on purpose though. George has got talent coming out of his earsm he doesn't need to nick from the Chiffons.

What did George in was not simply the similarity of the melody, but the "grace note" or hesitation before he starts singing "My Sweet Lord"--he starts singing just after the beat.  

BEAT . . . "My Sweet Lord" . . . .  

Which is what . . . BEAT . . . "He's So Fine . . ." Does.  

He was definitely guilty of plagiarism, whether it was unconscious or not became the real issue.  

I think the real issue is: how many melody lines and beats can you have in a three-chord song (MSL has more than three, but not much more).  That's why rap's so big now.  It's nearly impossible to come up with anything completely original in that simple three-chord structure.  

Oh to me back in the day when Buddy Holly could write "Peggy Sue" with three chords and it was as original as Gershwin!

Also, the Beatles were notorious "thieves" of hooks and riffs.  Most obviously the "Day Tripper" riff.  But you can't copyright a riff.  

Can you imagine how many lawsuits there would be if every bluesman decided to go to litigation for plagiarism? Everyone would be suing everyone. Might make for a good Saturday Night Live skit.

that whole thing was pretty dumb. My Sweet Lord is a much better song anyway

I think he was guilty in part - sometimes a tune will jump in your head that you might think you wrote but later realise is a re-write of something you've heard.

I believe the problem with George's case was that it was difficult to prove he hadn't heard of He's So Fine, especially as The Beatles were so into Girl Groups in the early Sixties.

So basically he didn't copy the song intentionally which is why the royalties were split.

Of course the opposite can be true; you might have a tune in your head that you're convinced is someone elses but turns out not to be - as in 'Yesterday' for example. Paul was positive this was someone elses song - that's why he played it to everyone who'd listen, to make sure it wasn't nicked!

The 'My Sweet Lord' case does seem to have been high profile - then and now. Of course it happens all the time - from the same period for example, listen to the songs 'Meet On The Corner'/'Streets Of London'. Was there also a problem with John Lennon's song 'Come Together'? That doesn't seem to get mentioned very much in the general media.

Quoted from zilch

The 'My Sweet Lord' case does seem to have been high profile - then and now. Of course it happens all the time - from the same period for example, listen to the songs 'Meet On The Corner'/'Streets Of London'. Was there also a problem with John Lennon's song 'Come Together'? That doesn't seem to get mentioned very much in the general media.

"Paul Cashmere: How do you feel about "My Sweet Lord" these days. How did the court case surrounding that song effect your songwriting?

George Harrison: It didn't really affect my songwriting. I did record "This Song," which was kind of a comment about the situation. The thing that really disappoints me is when you have a relationship with one person and they turn out to betray you. Because the whole story of "My Sweet Lord" is based upon this fellow, Allan Klein, who managed the Beatles from about 1968 or '69, through until 1973. When they issued a complaint about "My Sweet Lord", he was my business manager. He was the one who put out "My Sweet Lord" and collected 20 percent commission on the record. And he was the one who got the lawyers to defend me, and did an interview in Playboy where he talked about how the song was nothing like the other song. Later, when the judge in court told me to settle with them, because he didn't think I'd consciously stolen their song, they were doing a settlement deal with me when they suddenly stopped the settlement. Some time elapsed, and I found out that this guy Klein had gone around the back door. In the meantime, we'd fired him. He went round the back door and bought the rights to the one song, "He's So Fine," in order to continue a law suit against me. He, on one hand, was defending me, then he switched sides and continued the law suit. And every time the judge said what the result was, he'd appeal. And he kept appealing and appealing until it got to the Supreme Court. I mean this thing went on for 16 years or something ... 18 years. And finally, it's all over with, and the result of it is I own "My Sweet Lord," and I now own "He's So Fine," and Allan Klein owes me like three or four hundred thousand dollars 'cause he took all the money on both songs. It's really a joke. It's a total joke.

Paul Cashmere: There's a movie plot in there somewhere.

George Harrison: There's definitely a book, because, now with any kind of law pertaining to infringement of copyright, they always quote this case. It's become the precedent in all these law students' books.

Paul Cashmere: So we might be seeing George Harrison make a guest appearance on "LA Law."

George Harrison: (Laughs) I doubt it, but we did keep a lot of lawyers employed for years, and we still are in one way or another. There's always some kind of bullshit going on."

From here: http://abbeyrd.best.vwh.net/harrison.htm

Quoted from zilch

. Was there also a problem with John Lennon's song 'Come Together'? That doesn't seem to get mentioned very much in the general media.

Yes. A little problem with Chuck Berry, but they settled out of court, so it never achieved the prominence of George's case. Hence the Chuck Berry songs on Johns' Rock'n'Roll album.
I think the last high profile case was The Verve/Stones battle over Bitter Sweet Symphony (which The Stones won.)

Quoted from The_End

...
Of course the opposite can be true; you might have a tune in your head that you're convinced is someone elses but turns out not to be - as in 'Yesterday' for example. Paul was positive this was someone elses song - that's why he played it to everyone who'd listen, to make sure it wasn't nicked!

A reading about that:
http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/VOLUME05/Oldsweetsongs.html

Although not part of this main subject, I notice that in the interview above, George refers to 'this guy Klein'. I don't think Paul ever did get full credit for being correct and not wanting him to manage the group (or an apology when the situation got out of control).

Quoted from kevin_b

Yes. A little problem with Chuck Berry, but they settled out of court, so it never achieved the prominence of George's case. Hence the Chuck Berry songs on Johns' Rock'n'Roll album.
I think the last high profile case was The Verve/Stones battle over Bitter Sweet Symphony (which The Stones won.)

Chuck stated that You Can't Catch Me (including the phrase: Here come a flat-top, he was movin' up with me) looked a lot like Come Together. The case was settled when John offered to include You Can't Catch Me on his Rock And Roll Album in 1975.