The Smiley Smile Message Board

Because its almost identical in the versus but not the chorus. The BBs borrowed alot from Chuck but no more than the beatles or stones, the beatles first albums (introducing/please please me & for sale/vi_65) were half covers and the RSs didnt have an orig lp til aftermath in 66..

Brian said it is. Chuck Berry's lawyers said it was. The judge said it was.

Respectfully, you're talking utter and complete nonsense. As usual.

Edit: my bad - of course, the case never made it to court. SoT settled before that. Oops...

 :lol :lol :lol

I've often wondered whether it was that lawsuit that prompted Brian (or Murry) to credit "Boogie Woodie" to Rimsky-Korsakov! Just in case. ;D     

  Yes and No. "Sweet Little Sixteen" is obviously the template for "Surfin' USA", but when The Beach Boys were done they'd created a signature song that is uniquely their own, thus continuing the longstanding folk tradition of borrowing from others to make something new.

  I'm not sure Chuck Berry himself had anything to do with the lawsuit - when the record came out, he was in prison, where he remained until late 1963.

 The Beach Boys, The Beatles, and The Rolling Stones can all count Chuck Berry as a primary source, probably the primary source. Where would any of them be without Chuck Berry?

Just in case what?
It was common practice to copyright original new arrangements of public domain works. It was a good formula. La Bamba and Nut Rocker gave lots of people idea$. Ka-ching!
If Murry and/or Brian didn't already know about copyrighting new original arrangements of public domain works then Gary Usher, or someone they knew who was in the business may have clued them in.

The Beach Boys needed material in a hurry in the early days. So, a rewrite of Swanee River and a boogied up classical tune was a quick way to get new original material to record. It made good sense to go the adaption route, where needed, especially from a publishing point of view.

I was listening to Chuck Berry yesterday on the way to work, and was reminded just what a fantastic talent he was.  I'm sure at the time, it was nearly impossible NOT to be influenced by the guy, everything from the way he structured songs, to the way he played his solos, to the way he wrote his lyrics you can hear in tons of music that came out in the next ten years.

The Beach Boys completely ripped him off, but I'm o.k. with that.

thats what I mean but according to doe Im just nonsense because of my grammar etc.

It wasn't the grammar as much as your choice of words. And if you don't take the time to write the words you mean then you shouldn't get snippy when people infer a different meaning than the one you intended :)

I also like it when artists one likes rip off someone else, it's part of the "folk tradition", but when an artist one dislikes rips someone off, it's theft :)

Brian should have used that defence against Mike's authorship lawsuit in the 90s. He didn't forget to credit Mike so much as just borrowing his lyrics.

Brian: Part of the folk tradition, Your Honour!
Mike: Don't folk with my formula.

Agreed, with everything you say. My point is that "Boogie Woodie" doesn't sound remotely like "Flight of the Bumble Bee"! ("Bumble Boogie" is a different matter.) Why did someone decide it did? Or does it resemble some other Rimsky piece? It looks suspiciously like cold feet to me, after the Berry business.

And also because "SUSA" and "SLS" are, essentially, the same song with different lyrics. But the poor mode of communication surely doesn't advance your notions.

According to Gary Winfrey, Alan's roomie at the time, Brian came around with a acetate of the final "SUSA" mix to ask Alan's opinion. His response ? "It'll never be a hit, it sounds too much like "Sweet Little Sixteen"".

Olmec Donald is pointing out that Flight of the Bumble Bee was public domain, so nobody would have had any grounds for a lawsuit.

Did they credit Rimsky Korsakov on Jan and Dean Meet Batman? Because they certainly quoted from The Flight of the Bumble Bee on that one.

Okay, fair play.  It's the fact that R-K was credited at all that confuses me.  That said, the left-hand piano part does sound a bit like a bee on amphetamines. ;D   

OK, I now understand your confusion.
The left hand is playing octaves in a light shuffle boogie rhythm, but it's a static part and not following any boogie woogie pattern.
Boogie Woodie's melodic piano part is basically the main piano figure in Boogie Woogie aka Pinetop's Boogie Woogie written and first recorded by Pinetop Smith in 1928 and later given the big band treatment by Tommy Dorsey in 1938.
Listen to TD version at :38    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJgJdv81vhI
As for Boogie Woodie's organ melody, I can't say if that has roots in any other song.
So, it's possible Murry/Brian may have wanted to steer people away from associating the melody with the Pinetop's Boogie Woogie by claiming it was an arrangement based on a public domain work. But, which work? It's not Flight Of The Bumblebee.

It was Andrew (or Tobler perhaps?) who said in the Little Blue Book about "Boogie Woodie" that "FOTB" was "Somewhere in here". I can't for the life of me imagine what other work by Rimsky it could be. The mystery deepens...