my sweet lord and he’s so fine: an early precursor of a modern issue len rabinowitz

My Sweet Lord and He’s So Fine:My Sweet Lord and He’s So Fine:An Early Precursor of A Modern IssueAn Early Precursor of A Modern Issue

Len Rabinowitz


The Songs: You DecideThe Songs: You Decide He’s So Fine recorded in He’s So Fine recorded in

19621962 Topped US Billboard Topped US Billboard

charts charts Beatles not big in US in Beatles not big in US in

19621962 Song reached number Song reached number

12 in England in 1963 12 in England in 1963 during a week that the during a week that the Beatles were number 1Beatles were number 1

Harrison admitted that Harrison admitted that he knew the songhe knew the song


He’s So Fine languishedHe’s So Fine languished My Sweet Lord generated My Sweet Lord generated

in jam session with Billy in jam session with Billy Preston, 1969- Question of Preston, 1969- Question of authorshipauthorship

Preston released the song Preston released the song before Harrison- Harrison before Harrison- Harrison listed as sole authorlisted as sole author

Song was a huge hit when Song was a huge hit when recorded and released by recorded and released by HarrisonHarrison

Bright Tunes Music- the Bright Tunes Music- the owner of He’s So Fine- owner of He’s So Fine- brought suit on February brought suit on February 10, 197110, 1971

Billy Preston and George Harrison withPresident Ford, 1974


Judge (a musician, but more Judge (a musician, but more classically oriented- less classically oriented- less improvisational) focused on improvisational) focused on two phrases of melodytwo phrases of melody

Other major differences not Other major differences not consideredconsidered

Harrison knew of earlier Harrison knew of earlier song; claimed no intentsong; claimed no intent

Harrison found guilty of Harrison found guilty of “subconscious plagiarism”“subconscious plagiarism”

Judge: “Perfectly obvious… Judge: “Perfectly obvious… the two songs are virtually the two songs are virtually identical”identical”

Upheld on appeal; Intent Upheld on appeal; Intent not necessary for plagiarismnot necessary for plagiarism

Judge’s decision centered onthese phrases


Initial decision came in Initial decision came in 19761976

Early decision that got Early decision that got musicians thinking about musicians thinking about “influence” and “original”“influence” and “original”

Professional digital Professional digital recording began a few recording began a few years lateryears later

Digital audio sampling- Digital audio sampling- artists using phrases from artists using phrases from other artists in recordings- other artists in recordings- was huge issue in the was huge issue in the 1980’s for musicians, well 1980’s for musicians, well before MP3 for consumersbefore MP3 for consumers

This Yamaha recorder allows samplingCD’s into your own recordings


Ethical AnalysisEthical Analysis Kant, 1Kant, 1stst formulation: formulation: ““Act only from moral rules that Act only from moral rules that

you can at the same time will to you can at the same time will to be universal moral laws”be universal moral laws”

Can musicians unconsciously Can musicians unconsciously borrow from each other?borrow from each other?

Proposed Rule: Musicians can Proposed Rule: Musicians can unconsciously borrow from each unconsciously borrow from each otherother

Musicians have always influenced Musicians have always influenced and borrowed each other; and borrowed each other; Impossible to eradicate influencesImpossible to eradicate influences

Universal Rule: Musicians may Universal Rule: Musicians may unconsciously borrow from each unconsciously borrow from each otherother

Musicians continue making music Musicians continue making music as they always haveas they always have

Rule is acceptable; Under this Rule is acceptable; Under this analysis judge got it wronganalysis judge got it wrong A stressed-out musician


Kant, 2Kant, 2ndnd Formulation Formulation ““Act so that you treat both Act so that you treat both

yourself and other people yourself and other people as ends in themselves and as ends in themselves and never only as means to an never only as means to an end”end”

Improvisatory musicians Improvisatory musicians use their influences as use their influences as means to an endmeans to an end

Musicians must consider or Musicians must consider or cite influences before cite influences before playingplaying

Judge’s decision likely Judge’s decision likely correct under this correct under this formulationformulation

A musician “fighting the power!”


Social Contract TheorySocial Contract Theory Law is a form of social contractLaw is a form of social contract Current law recognizes intellectual Current law recognizes intellectual

property and says works are born property and says works are born copyrightedcopyrighted

Modern musician’s heavy use of borrowing Modern musician’s heavy use of borrowing and influences without citation likely and influences without citation likely violates social contract of lawviolates social contract of law

By this analysis behavior of modern By this analysis behavior of modern musicians is unethicalmusicians is unethical


The Cardinal Virtues:The Cardinal Virtues: Judgment: Harrison showed poor judgment in writing the Judgment: Harrison showed poor judgment in writing the

song as written. He could have known it was too similarsong as written. He could have known it was too similar Honesty: Harrison was honest in acknowledging knowledge Honesty: Harrison was honest in acknowledging knowledge

of the other songof the other song Prudence: Writing songs for popular consumption is not a Prudence: Writing songs for popular consumption is not a

prudent actprudent act Courage: Writing songs for popular consumption is Courage: Writing songs for popular consumption is

courageouscourageous Justice: Justice was eventually done for the owner of the Justice: Justice was eventually done for the owner of the

song- not necessarily the performer. Harrison was harmedsong- not necessarily the performer. Harrison was harmed Self mastery: Complex. Harrison could have thought this Self mastery: Complex. Harrison could have thought this

through more. However, professional songwriting requires through more. However, professional songwriting requires considerable focus and determination.considerable focus and determination.

On the whole, Harrison’s actions come up short in the On the whole, Harrison’s actions come up short in the cardinal virtuescardinal virtues


References:References: The “My Sweet Lord”/”He’s So Fine” The “My Sweet Lord”/”He’s So Fine”

Plagiarism Suit. Article written by Joseph Plagiarism Suit. Article written by Joseph C. Self, C. Self, http://http://abbeyrd.best.vwh.net/mysweet.htmabbeyrd.best.vwh.net/mysweet.htm Accessed on July 12, 2008.Accessed on July 12, 2008.

George Harrison and The Chiffons. George Harrison and The Chiffons. http://www.benedict.com/Audio/harrison/hhttp://www.benedict.com/Audio/harrison/harrison.aspxarrison.aspx. Author unknown. Accessed on July 12, . Author unknown. Accessed on July 12, 2008.2008.

my sweet lord and he’s so fine: an early precursor of a modern issue len rabinowitz

Documents

harrison harrison

song harrison

harrison song

modern issue hes

fine languished hes

intent harrison

sweet lord

song slide