'The Fun Of Hating Mike Love' Chapter in Jon's Book.

[Mikie]

So what we are thinking is Mike may not have written a full lyric on some of the songs he didn't get any credit for.

No. What I'm thinking is that Mike may not have written a full lyric on some of the songs he did get credit for.

[Wirestone]

Actually, there has been one co-author left uncredited besides Mike -- Van Dyke's name was left off some Smile tunes, including Wonderful (at least in later releases). His participation in BWPS was contingent on a resolution of these publishing issues.

[Ron]

This quote was posted a few weeks ago, very relevant to the topic being discussed:

Published January 7 1967

Mike Love: “Our [early] stage act was sort of early rhythm-and-blues - stuff by the Coasters and Chuck Berry. Not too many musical innovations there. Our progress has been slow. Because of Brian being on the road with us. He and I used to write songs. I’d contribute a lyric or rhyme, but actually, the bulk of the work has always been Brian’s. We worked after or during road tours that lasted weeks. That’s enough to kill a person without trying to come up with hit singles every few months. Somehow we did. Then when Brian stopped touring, wham! We were staggered. And he keeps doing this to us! More and more and greater and greater things.”


He and I used to write songs. I’d contribute a lyric or rhyme, but actually, the bulk of the work has always been Brian’s.

This was Mike in 1967, current to the time when many of the songs in the later lawsuit were actually written. You have Mike basically giving most of the credit ('the bulk of the work...') for the creation of the music to Brian.

It's worth considering because the question can be asked: Do the specific credits Mike claimed on the songs named in the lawsuit, combined with the dollar amount calculated for the value of Mike's contributions to those songs and in relation to what Brian received percentage-wise for the same songs, add up to how Mike described the process in 1967 when all of this was a current issue and not a decades-old matter being taken to court?

Mike has NEVER said he wrote half of each song.  Remember he wanted to settle out of court for a token amount, and Brian's lawyers foolishly took it to court.  Leave things up to a judge or jury and you're going to get screwed every time. 

[Dr. Tim]

No need for a pull back, you are just recounting the history.  The point is certainly right about the paltry percentages of publishing allotted to the acknowledged co-writers - part of being a bit of a bastard.  We know Tony Asher got next-to-bupkes plus the cachet of writing words for Brian Wilson. I would not be surprised if Roger Christian got a similar deal, though he got to do other records with the SuperStocks.  Van Dyke too, though he did more writing and also played on sessions, then got his own deal.   But now that we're thinking about it, there's his name missing off Smiley Smile on songs he clearly co-wrote, as noted above.  And also "Sail On Sailor": to this day Van Dyke says it was only he and Brian who wrote it, yet two other co-writers got shoehorned in the credits ahead of him.  He says he can't explain it.  How'd that happen?  Apparently this would be a non-Mike-related credit dilution.

[Wirestone]

Remember he wanted to settle out of court for a token amount

But that settlement would include future credits and royalties, no doubt. It' s not like the offer was made solely out of the goodness of his heart.

There has been credit wackiness recently, too.  Andy Paley's name was left off "One For the Boys," which he claims to have composed large chunks of, on BW88. And Gary Usher's name has never been on "Walkin' The Line," even though it's pretty clear he co-wrote it. He's also not credited on "You've Touched Me," which comes from the Wilson-Usher "So Long," either.

[Chris Brown]

Remember he wanted to settle out of court for a token amount

But that settlement would include future credits and royalties, no doubt. It' s not like the offer was made solely out of the goodness of his heart.

There has been credit wackiness recently, too.  Andy Paley's name was left off "One For the Boys," which he claims to have composed large chunks of, on BW88. And Gary Usher's name has never been on "Walkin' The Line," even though it's pretty clear he co-wrote it. He's also not credited on "You've Touched Me," which comes from the Wilson-Usher "So Long," either.

Wow, never knew that about "One For the Boys." 

Cam's arguments make a lot of sense, and maybe what he's suggesting is more plausible than we'd like to think.  Going along those lines, my feeling is that if Brian was engaged in proactively screwing Mike out of credits, it wasn't so much a case of him being a flat-out greedy bastard and aiming to keep more of the royalties for himself - what I think happened is that Brian, being in the controlling position he was in at the time, took it upon himself to decide whether Mike's contribution to a particular song warranted being named as a co-writer.  If Mike only tweaked Brian's lyrics, or added a phrase here or there, maybe Brian decided that Mike wasn't entitled to a credit, and that's how he submitted the credits.

That being said, Brian has never struck me as a guy who really gives a damn about credits or royalties, so it's tough to say exactly what might have happened.  It's certainly not outside the realm of possibility that Murry purposely omitted Mike from credits that Brian submitted to him, and Brian either didn't notice or didn't think it was his place (being that he didn't like dealing with his Dad) to speak up and fix it.  As for why Murry would single out Mike for his underhanded deeds, one can only speculate, but perhaps he thought Mike was the least likely to discover the problems, least likely to protest, whatever.  If he tried to screw over Asher or Parks, they would happily call him out on it, but Mike was family and maybe Murry just thought Mike would let it slide.

Wirestone hit the nail on the head - we're trying to find rational motives for the actions of a highly dysfunctional family, and as much as I've enjoyed reading this discussion, I'm not sure there's a logical explanation out there to be had.

[Jon Stebbins]

As for why Murry would single out Mike for his underhanded deeds, one can only speculate...

He didn't. David got screwed out of millions by signing a Murry concocted fake termination contract...which not only was phony and illegal because Dave was a minor, but was backdated to months prior to Dave's actual date of departure. Al got screwed too...being paid as a sideman until...guess when??...1973.

[tpesky]

I'm guessing that it was likely no coincidence that Al finally got his full share in 1973 and Murry died in 1973........

[Cam Mott]

Another thing I'd like to know is how the judgement worked when Mike sued for credit. The suit is Mike v. Irving Music, then as "et al" like 4 subsidiaries of Irving, a couple of lawyers [possibly Brian's lawyers from his suit against Irvng], and Brian. So who is the suit against? Who pays the judgement and how is it divied up?