Awesome New Mike Love Article!!

[HeyJude]

Just as the industry is riddled with lawsuits (legit and otherwise), it is also riddled with artists who clearly didn't obsess over songwriting credits, especially in cases where they were already wealthy and famous. Dennis with "You Are So Beautiful." George Harrison probably wrote more of "It Don't Come Easy" and "Octopus's Garden" than Ringo did, but never sought credit. Al never bothered Brian with a co-arranger credit on "Sloop John B."

As for the Mike/WIBN stuff, nobody is saying "he deserves credit but shouldn't have gotten it." Such a statement is obviously contradictory. I think some are saying "he technically contributed to a song, but his contribution may not have warranted a songwriting credit."

The issue of what constitutes a songwriting credit is clearly an ongoing issue for the courts. Matthew Fisher got his name on "A Whiter Shade of Pale" without having written any of the words or chords, but due to having formed the organ riff/motif. So you could literally play "A Whiter Shade of Pale" as a fully formed song with chords and lyrics, and without the organ riff, and it would still work, yet Fisher nearly 40 years later managed to sue and get his name on the song. I'm amazed *that* court ruling hasn't been used as the foundation for TONS of lawsuits from session musicians and other group members who have clearly added distinct riffs and motifs to songs.

[KDS]

Songwriting issues can make or break a band. 

Deep Purple and Van Halen decided to be diplomatic and credit each member for every song.  Then, members were accused of not pulling their weight, and both bands exist is fractured lineups. 

Can't please everyone. 

[Rocky Raccoon]

Mike Love should donate a portion of his Beach Boys hat collection to the Smithsonian.

[Doo Dah]

Songwriting issues can make or break a band. 

Deep Purple and Van Halen decided to be diplomatic and credit each member for every song.  Then, members were accused of not pulling their weight, and both bands exist is fractured lineups. 

Can't please everyone. 

That would probably make a fascinating thread on the General Music Discussion board. Publishing irregularities between certain bands. Huge court battles among the Smiths, etc. There really is no simple answer.

I used to know this reggae guitarist in Cleveland, bitching backstage after a show. It wasn't a publishing issue, but a credit issue. He'd go - "I'm working my ass off all night long, playing leads, sweating bullets...and f@#$'n Pablo's tapping a wooden block and gets paid the same amount every night as me!"

[Sam_BFC]

The truth is, Mike can't write a very decent set of lyrics these days without completely rehashing the past.

Or rather, "The truth is, Mike can't write a very decent set of lyrics these days without completely rehashing the past."

Or perhaps "Mike could write a decent set of lyrics by not rehashing the past".

[Cam Mott]

As for the Mike/WIBN stuff, nobody is saying "he deserves credit but shouldn't have gotten it." Such a statement is obviously contradictory. I think some are saying "he technically contributed to a song, but his contribution may not have warranted a songwriting credit."

So from now on in every discussion of the credit lawsuit we will frequently bring up that Brian technically contributed to a song lyric, say like California Girls and Good Vibrations, but his contribution of a single line may not have warranted the lyric writing credit of 100% or 50% he got but may not have warranted a lyric writing credit at all.

[HeyJude]

I don't think there's a lot of definitive evidence or even many anecdotes getting into how much of the lyrics Brian wrote for many if not most of his songs where there were multiple writers.

I don't find Mike to be a credible or objective source of information on these songs. He says in this new RS article:

"I wrote every last syllable of the words to ‘California Girls'"

but then only a few lines later mentions:

“The only thing I didn’t write was ‘I wish they all could be California girls.’ "

Wtf? I'd say that's a pretty key line of the song; it formed the title and the song's main refrain in the chorus. In fact, that one line constitutes the entirely of all of the choruses!

The "California Girls" example also isn't applicable because Brian's name was *already* on the song as the writer of the music. As previously mentioned, the Wilson/Love songs are, as far as I'm aware, all "Words and Music by...." rather than "Words by.... and then Music by....." Once someone contributed to a song, their name was locked into both words and lyrics.

So Mike was asking for his name to be added to "Wouldn't It Be Nice", a song by apparently all reports otherwise completely written by Wilson and Asher, because of the one couplet.

So even if Brian's lyrical contribution to something like "California Girls" wouldn't constitute a significant enough contribution to warrant lyrical credit (and I don't think there's ample evidence of that presently anyway), his name would still be under "Words and Music by...." because he wrote the music.

[Doo Dah]

As for the Mike/WIBN stuff, nobody is saying "he deserves credit but shouldn't have gotten it." Such a statement is obviously contradictory. I think some are saying "he technically contributed to a song, but his contribution may not have warranted a songwriting credit."

So from now on in every discussion of the credit lawsuit we will frequently bring up that Brian technically contributed to a song lyric, say like California Girls and Good Vibrations, but his contribution of a single line may not have warranted the lyric writing credit of 100% or 50% he got but may not have warranted a lyric writing credit at all.

California Girls. California Girls. Gawd...being beaten across the head with California Girls.

Cameron, in a parallel universe - if Mike received full lyric credit (50/50 overall) for Cali Girls back in the day, would it have improved the industry's (and the fan's) general perception of him? Would IT? Because after all is said and done, that was the gist of the Rolling Stone article. Arguing minutiae just obscures the obvious, and it turns into a pizzing match.

[Debbie KL]

I don't think there's a lot of definitive evidence or even many anecdotes getting into how much of the lyrics Brian wrote for many if not most of his songs where there were multiple writers.

I don't find Mike to be a credible or objective source of information on these songs. He says in this new RS article:

"I wrote every last syllable of the words to ‘California Girls'"

but then only a few lines later mentions:

“The only thing I didn’t write was ‘I wish they all could be California girls.’ "

Wtf? I'd say that's a pretty key line of the song; it formed the title and the song's main refrain in the chorus. In fact, that one line constitutes the entirely of all of the choruses!

The "California Girls" example also isn't applicable because Brian's name was *already* on the song as the writer of the music. As previously mentioned, the Wilson/Love songs are, as far as I'm aware, all "Words and Music by...." rather than "Words by.... and then Music by....." Once someone contributed to a song, their name was locked into both words and lyrics.

So Mike was asking for his name to be added to "Wouldn't It Be Nice", a song by apparently all reports otherwise completely written by Wilson and Asher, because of the one couplet.

So even if Brian's lyrical contribution to something like "California Girls" wouldn't constitute a significant enough contribution to warrant lyrical credit (and I don't think there's ample evidence of that presently anyway), his name would still be under "Words and Music by...." because he wrote the music.

Anyone who would argue that Brian didn't write essentially all the music probably hasn't listened to Brian's solo efforts as opposed to Mike's.  But I'm sure some die-hards here will have a suitable retort to this...Kokomo, perhaps? Phillips/McKenzie with tweaks by Mike and the heavy-lifting with Carl's vocal - the only reason some of us ever listened to it.

[bossaroo]

has anyone ever asked Mike why he waited over TWO DECADES to pursue legal action to establish his co-writes?

just seems like if it was so important to him and he felt so cheated and "f*cked with" he would have done something about it sooner.


doesn't it?

[Debbie KL]

has anyone ever asked Mike why he waited over TWO DECADES to pursue legal action to establish his co-writes?

just seems like if it was so important to him and he felt so cheated and "f*cked with" he would have done something about it sooner.


doesn't it?

It's one of those great cosmic mysteries, Bossaroo.

[Doo Dah]

I'd say it was Brian's settlement with Almo/Irving. It's like - a brother in law owes you money, isn't working, and suddenly you see him in a new car. "hey DUDE...you have that $100 I lent ya?"

Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it was probably predicated by the initial cash settlement. Then the Gold Rush was ON!

#unleashthelove

[CenturyDeprived]

I'd say it was Brian's settlement with Almo/Irving. It's like - a brother in law owes you money, isn't working, and suddenly you see him in a new car. "hey DUDE...you have that $100 I lent ya?"

Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it was probably predicated by the initial cash settlement. Then the Gold Rush was ON!

#unleashthelove

That, and probably many other unrelated facts, not the least of which would've included being essentially estranged from his cousin at the time. For all the years  before that, he was trying to continue the relationship and write with him, which would have been rather hard if he was in the midst of a legal action.  

Regarding this timing issue, I can't say I have any bad thoughts about Mike.  There was never going to be a good time to do it. Questioning him about the timing is a little bit like questioning the  timing of Cosby rape victims.   Mike probably felt like he got raped from a monetary and perception standpoint and over the credits for California Girls. Heaven knows I'm not the world's biggest Mike defender, but I have his back on this. That said, he certainly overreached, and attempted to overcorrect the problem, with no apparent grasp of how that would come off to others.

But I do have to say, I also cannot for the life of me fathom how Mike didn't try to find some legal recourse not long after the release of the song.  Maybe he was afraid of being kicked out of the band!  That's actually probably his biggest folly, because instead  of taking any major steps to correct the crediting issue at the time, he instead internally was resentful, which externally manifested in acting like a dick to Brian over lyrics, when Brian needed support - and not more second-guessing -  the most.

It's so bloody frustrating. Mike has a perfect understanding of what it is like being treated in an unfair/inappropriate manner by others, but a ***100%*** complete lack of understanding for when that sh*tty treatment is at his own hand, unleashed, however inadvertently, onto other people.

Aren't people who experience a crappy thing like Mike did supposed to gain empathy and not repeat the pattern of treating others badly?  Brian is far better at that than Mike. That's an ideal situation, of course, and Mike may not be emotionally capable of it. Or only a very little bit.  At least all the children of the band seem to be very consciously trying to break the cycle by having their own group and staying out of the unfortunate situation that the earlier generations inflicted on each other.

[Doo Dah]

with no apparent grasp of how that would come off to others.

--------------

And that is what the interview in Rolling Stone is all about. Sometimes it's not about being right. It's how you're perceived when you're right.

[Cam Mott]

Well you've avoided my point and put words in mouth, I did not say in any way Brian shouldn't be credited (unless you think neither one deserves it for one line) or not credited for composition, I said lyrics.  I'm pretty sure Brian has admitted Mike wrote the lyrics to California Girls and Mike deserved the credit. Is Brian reliable on the subject?

From memory, Mike has said he didn't think he could reclaim the credit for 30 years, until Brian's attorneys promised to restore them or something plus share 30% of damages won from Irving if Mike would help them in their suit against Irving music. Brian's attorneys won but welched on their deal and Mike sued Brian and Irving and some et als I believe to get his credit back and promised damages. Something like that.  Going out on a limb here, but maybe that's why it still stings for Mike even though he won.

[CenturyDeprived]

Well you've avoided my point  

Bwhahahahahahaahahaahahahaahhahaahahaahahahaahahahahahahahaahahaahahahaaha  

[wilsonart1]

In Mike's own words, And,OK, so than.   

[Robbie Mac]

I'd say it was Brian's settlement with Almo/Irving. It's like - a brother in law owes you money, isn't working, and suddenly you see him in a new car. "hey DUDE...you have that $100 I lent ya?"

Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it was probably predicated by the initial cash settlement. Then the Gold Rush was ON!

#unleashthelove

Yep.  That crass opportunism of Mike's action is why I can't be down with Team Mike.

[Lee Marshall]

has anyone ever asked Mike why he waited over TWO DECADES to pursue legal action to establish his co-writes?

just seems like if it was so important to him and he felt so cheated and "f*cked with" he would have done something about it sooner.


doesn't it?

It's one of those great cosmic mysteries, Bossaroo.

Perhaps a little...Gotta strike while the iron is hot...while your opponent is down and out/seemingly incapacitated.  And...Gotta get 'er done just in case there's an improvement in the opposition's awareness of 'things'.  Opportunity knocked.  What was that old Elvis tune?...It's now or never?  Opportunity asked...Want a mountain?  Or a molehill?  Mountains are only going to be available NOW.

Someone went mountain climbing with a picnic basket loaded with bullshit...and an apple.

[SMiLE Brian]

#unleashthelove

#mikelovenotpeace

[Cam Mott]

Apparently the money was Brian's lawyers' offer to Mike in Brian's earlier suit against against Irving.  It was promised to Mike by Brian lawyers, not Mike taking advantage of Brian.

http://articles.latimes.com/1994-12-13/business/fi-8511_1_beach-boys-lead-singer

[filledeplage]

Apparently the money was Brian's lawyers' offer to Mike in Brian's earlier suit against against Irving.  It was promised to Mike by Brian lawyers, not Mike taking advantage of Brian.

http://articles.latimes.com/1994-12-13/business/fi-8511_1_beach-boys-lead-singer

Thanks for that, Cam. If I am reading between the lines, correctly, the lawyers would have been sent the check, and from there, were supposed to distribute the settlement, and did not.  Hence the punitive damages to the lawyers.  Yikes.

[The LEGENDARY OSD]

OMG, on Rolling Stone's FB page, on their Mike article post, there are like over 400 anti-Mike comments. He is being pummeled! What a disaster this article is for Mike.

Wow. You ain't kidding. 544 comments total, and the consensus ain't pretty. If his aim with the interview was to reframe his legacy, he failed miserably. That's the thing about branding; it's a real bitch to change image brand when it's cemented in the eyes of the public. He knows all about market branding...but now it's all boomeranged on him. Payback's a bitch.

I loved this comment (wish I thought of it... )
"He is the Salieri of the movie Amadeus..."

Celebrating 1060 shares today with the bulk of the comments supporting the fact that the article has put myKe luHv in his rightful place in history. 

[SMiLE Brian]

#notthebeachboys

[Emily]

Of pertinence to this thread is a quote in an otherwise unrelated article:
"It’s hard to get good counsel, especially for celebrities. 'Musicians get terrible advice. They surround themselves with people who are fans or wannabe musicians who couldn’t make it on the stage so they became accountants or attorneys,' said Jane King, a money manager at Fairfield Financial Advisors, who works with clients in the entertainment industry."
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/02/kanye-west-53-million-dollar-debt-explained
It's similar to the hiring of Landy - celebrities need to be wary of hiring professionals who make a point of working with celebrities.