New Mike interview in HuffPost

[guitarfool2002]

Something about the original process of registering and crediting these songs still remains a mystery to me. I'm really curious to read some opinions after seeing these documents.

Disclaimer #1: I'm not trying to re-try the case. I wouldn't doubt some of these same questions if not the exact documents were part of the original court proceedings during the lawsuit. I'm just curious about what seems to be a missing piece of the puzzle.

Disclaimer #2: I know these photos and scans are terrible, you can barely read the details and they're very large images, but these are the only copies I have, and you can read the important stuff well enough to consider them. These came from a Beach Boys online auction from the 2000's.

I'm still reading some opinions about what Brian did or didn't do with these credits, still presenting an opinion that his lack of action was to blame. Cam also mentioned Murry Wilson. Crucial part of what's to follow.

These are the original copyright forms submitted for the songs. These came from Murry Wilson, who was in effect running the operations of Sea Of Tunes, and signs several of these as "publisher" and on another one "owner". You'll see Murry's signature as publisher, the principal songwriters, and the signature of a witness.

The process was as follows, it was almost exactly the same process up to the digital age.

The song would be written. You would need to have a "lead sheet" prepared showing the melody, chords, and lyrics so your creation could be registered officially as your own. These lead sheets were often done by either an in-house music copyist or by a music copying service, one of the more famous in LA in the 60's was Bob Ross (not the Joy Of Painting host...), who ran these services and would copy scores, parts, and lead sheets for LA's music community. A musician would either get a demo or acetate, or listen to the song live, and transcribe it into musical script. Brian Wilson did *not* do this, most pro musicians on Brian's or the Beatles' or whoever's level did not write these charts, but handed them off to a pro.

The lead sheet would be filed, along with the signed forms, and depending on what was being filed, an audio recording as well. The package would be sent off, registered and cataloged, and that process established ownership of that song.

As the person running day-to-day at Sea Of Tunes, listed as publisher, again this was Murry's job, or his secretary, whoever did the filing. But apart from signing the documents, the actual writers did not do this nuts-and-bolts kind of paperwork.

A song would be written, the lead sheet would be prepared, the documents would be filled out, the "Boys" and whoever else was a co-writer would then sign the forms, with Murry and the witness, and the package would be sent off.

My question is this:

Mike Love was a musician and songwriter by trade. His being called in to sign documents like this for original songs was part of the job, I'm guessing Murry would have the papers prepared and whoever wrote the songs would then sign whatever documents needed to be filed.

My question is this: If Mike wrote or contributed to a specific song, let's say "I Get Around" as it's mentioned in the news report, at what point did he not think something was wrong with how the song was registered? He'd obviously be signing a handful of forms for tunes he wrote with Brian, Murry would have the papers ready to go and probably be there co-signing them in most cases...did Mike ever question or challenge these credits as he was signing these papers?

He'd be there signing for other songs, he knew the process, it was the same one Murry seems to have used up to the 1969 sale. What happened in that process which led Mike to not challenge why he wasn't listed on certain songs which he knew he had contributed to?

Here's the scans of those original copyright filings. I deliberately included "I Get Around" as it was named in the lawsuit reports, as was "409". Notice "409" has Gary Usher's signature, and Brian's, and Murry's as publisher/owner, and the witness, but not Mike who apparently claimed and won credit. "Don't Worry Baby" similarly has Roger Christian's signature, so it's not like co-writers were being left off other tunes.

Then from the later years, "Do It Again", where both Mike and Brian signed with Murry for ownership. Murry was still the day-to-day administrator of these dealings at Sea Of Tunes, whether or not he was the hands-on manager, he was still running the publishing and administration end of the Boys' songs.

I ask again: Why didn't Mike challenge any of this as he was seeing song after song which he knew he had worked on go uncredited? He knew he wrote "I Get Around", wouldn't he at some point demand from Murry at least an explanation why he didn't receive that credit at the time the forms were being drawn up and signed?

Or did he? And perhaps Murry "steamrolled" his questions with one of his "play ball or else" kind of replies?

Guessing and wondering, that's all. Here's the forms, most is unreadable but the signatures are clear:
I Get Around


409


Do It Again

[KittyKat]

I love how the suit wasn't even mentioned in the interview, but people somehow brought it in. Mike won. His suit wasn't thrown out and a jury and judge found merits to his arguments. There is no statute of limitation on his rights to sue. You know damn well why Mike sued when he did, because there was a new pot of money due to the I/A suit filed at the behest of Brian and Landy.

Why do people think Mike should be eternally grateful to Brian to the point of negating his own needs when Mike was an original member of the group? Brian didn't even write that much original material when they started, they did a lot of cover versions. They were a garage band. In the early years, the guys were much more equal. He also grew up with Brian and they slept in each other's houses and used each other's bathrooms, etc. They're relatives. I don't put any of my relatives on a throne, either, even if they had grown up to be geniuses and started a company with me, but had most of the main ideas. Mike has sweat equity in the Beach Boys and that counts for something, too.

[Iron Horse-Apples]

Well, I'm talking about what I would or would not do in a given situation, so yes, I can make that assertion with certainty. My scruples would not allow me to sue the person to whom I owed my success.

Whether you believe me or not is an entirely different matter.

Well as you presumably haven't been in the situation, no you can't.

I'm sure many men before they get married say that their scruples would not allow them to be unfaithful. I'm sure they believe it just as you believe what you're saying. Doesn't make it true though...

You may be a fickle minded, weak willed individual, but that doesn't mean you can judge others by your own standards. 

I've been married 14 years and never have been or will be unfaithful. So not a good analogy in my case, sorry me old mate!

[Sheriff John Stone]

Why didn't Mike challenge any of this as he was seeing song after song which he knew he had worked on go uncredited?

How do we know he didn't?

Unfortunately, Mike was dealing with Murry Wilson and Brian Wilson. I didn't know Murry Wilson, but in many articles I've read about him, he has been referred to as "a sick man".

I don't know Brian Wilson either, but somebody who does, Tony Asher, referred to the Brian Wilson of 1966 as "an amateur human being".

[Nicko1234]

You may be a fickle minded, weak willed individual, but that doesn't mean you can judge others by your own standards. 

I've been married 14 years and never have been or will be unfaithful. So not a good analogy in my case, sorry me old mate!

All depends on circumstances doesn't it...

Anyway, I think Jon Stebbins got it right when he mentioned in his book about Brian having lawyers to defend him (or not in this case as observers of the trial have them down as the true villains of the piece). The Beach Boys stopped being just about the music many decades ago and instead became a corporation with each individual member bringing his lawyer along to group meetings. That seems a laughable situation to me but one which was always likely to lead to periods in court whether it be at Mike's, Al's or whoever's behest.

[Iron Horse-Apples]

I don't know Brian Wilson either, but somebody who does, Tony Asher, referred to the Brian Wilson of 1966 as "an amateur human being".

So if one person says something bad about you, then there's truth in it?

And you're defending Mike?

 

[Iron Horse-Apples]

You may be a fickle minded, weak willed individual, but that doesn't mean you can judge others by your own standards. 

I've been married 14 years and never have been or will be unfaithful. So not a good analogy in my case, sorry me old mate!

All depends on circumstances doesn't it...

Anyway, I think Jon Stebbins got it right when he mentioned in his book about Brian having lawyers to defend him (or not in this case as observers of the trial have them down as the true villains of the piece). The Beach Boys stopped being just about the music many decades ago and instead became a corporation with each individual member bringing his lawyer along to group meetings. That seems a laughable situation to me but one which was always likely to lead to periods in court whether it be at Mike's, Al's or whoever's behest.

Well that's certainly come up before. The idea that without the scum sucking lawyers around these guys might have sorted it out long ago. I don't think that's far from the truth.

And there's NO circumstance I'd ever cheat on my wife. Seriously.

[SurfRiderHawaii]

Quite a different situation than posing for photos in your formal gear. Gee, since BRIMEL nixed you AGD, your nose has turned a Love-ly shade of brown. 

Wore the penguin suit because that was the dress code for Henley. Totally not my choice. As for your amusing insistence that I'm in some/any way being shunned by BriMel, well that would be pretty hard for them to do seeing as there's never been any connection there anyway: quite the reverse, as anyone with any true grasp of the situation knows. But you keep on thinkin' Butch, that's what you're good at. 

Oh, I remember the days when the Doester would brag about talking to Mr. Wilson backstage during his British gigs. I remember when the Doester stated, during a debate about the Fire House footage and the GV promo video, he would ask Brian himself about it (which never came to pass).

My sources tell me you are not well liked in Brian's circles anymore AG "Butch" Doe. And no wonder as you opening insult Mrs. Wilson on this board. And, as you like to say, "they are watching".

I'm sure everyone in Brian's camp now loses massive amounts of sleep to know your now a anit-Wilson, pro Mike Love Brownista. You don't have to think, Chuck, to see that your whole perspective has changed in recent years. 

[Cam Mott]

Something about the original process of registering and crediting these songs still remains a mystery to me. I'm really curious to read some opinions after seeing these documents.

Disclaimer #1: I'm not trying to re-try the case. I wouldn't doubt some of these same questions if not the exact documents were part of the original court proceedings during the lawsuit. I'm just curious about what seems to be a missing piece of the puzzle.

Disclaimer #2: I know these photos and scans are terrible, you can barely read the details and they're very large images, but these are the only copies I have, and you can read the important stuff well enough to consider them. These came from a Beach Boys online auction from the 2000's.

I'm still reading some opinions about what Brian did or didn't do with these credits, still presenting an opinion that his lack of action was to blame. Cam also mentioned Murry Wilson. Crucial part of what's to follow.

These are the original copyright forms submitted for the songs. These came from Murry Wilson, who was in effect running the operations of Sea Of Tunes, and signs several of these as "publisher" and on another one "owner". You'll see Murry's signature as publisher, the principal songwriters, and the signature of a witness.

The process was as follows, it was almost exactly the same process up to the digital age.

The song would be written. You would need to have a "lead sheet" prepared showing the melody, chords, and lyrics so your creation could be registered officially as your own. These lead sheets were often done by either an in-house music copyist or by a music copying service, one of the more famous in LA in the 60's was Bob Ross (not the Joy Of Painting host...), who ran these services and would copy scores, parts, and lead sheets for LA's music community. A musician would either get a demo or acetate, or listen to the song live, and transcribe it into musical script. Brian Wilson did *not* do this, most pro musicians on Brian's or the Beatles' or whoever's level did not write these charts, but handed them off to a pro.

The lead sheet would be filed, along with the signed forms, and depending on what was being filed, an audio recording as well. The package would be sent off, registered and cataloged, and that process established ownership of that song.

As the person running day-to-day at Sea Of Tunes, listed as publisher, again this was Murry's job, or his secretary, whoever did the filing. But apart from signing the documents, the actual writers did not do this nuts-and-bolts kind of paperwork.

A song would be written, the lead sheet would be prepared, the documents would be filled out, the "Boys" and whoever else was a co-writer would then sign the forms, with Murry and the witness, and the package would be sent off.

My question is this:

Mike Love was a musician and songwriter by trade. His being called in to sign documents like this for original songs was part of the job, I'm guessing Murry would have the papers prepared and whoever wrote the songs would then sign whatever documents needed to be filed.

My question is this: If Mike wrote or contributed to a specific song, let's say "I Get Around" as it's mentioned in the news report, at what point did he not think something was wrong with how the song was registered? He'd obviously be signing a handful of forms for tunes he wrote with Brian, Murry would have the papers ready to go and probably be there co-signing them in most cases...did Mike ever question or challenge these credits as he was signing these papers?

He'd be there signing for other songs, he knew the process, it was the same one Murry seems to have used up to the 1969 sale. What happened in that process which led Mike to not challenge why he wasn't listed on certain songs which he knew he had contributed to?

Here's the scans of those original copyright filings. I deliberately included "I Get Around" as it was named in the lawsuit reports, as was "409". Notice "409" has Gary Usher's signature, and Brian's, and Murry's as publisher/owner, and the witness, but not Mike who apparently claimed and won credit. "Don't Worry Baby" similarly has Roger Christian's signature, so it's not like co-writers were being left off other tunes.

Then from the later years, "Do It Again", where both Mike and Brian signed with Murry for ownership. Murry was still the day-to-day administrator of these dealings at Sea Of Tunes, whether or not he was the hands-on manager, he was still running the publishing and administration end of the Boys' songs.

I ask again: Why didn't Mike challenge any of this as he was seeing song after song which he knew he had worked on go uncredited? He knew he wrote "I Get Around", wouldn't he at some point demand from Murry at least an explanation why he didn't receive that credit at the time the forms were being drawn up and signed?

Or did he? And perhaps Murry "steamrolled" his questions with one of his "play ball or else" kind of replies?

According to Mike he did take it up back in the day with his co-author and the alleged co-publisher, Brian Wilson.

My question would be if Brian is the Producer, and the co-author who is also a co-publisher, why did he have these contracts and packages prepared without Mike's credit [where else would the names of coauthors come from but Brian] and also sign so many contracts which very visibly did not list  Mike as a co-author? And then why did he continue to do it. And then decades later why get Mike to help him get back the songs, some of which he didn't credit Mike on, and then stiff Mike for his trouble.  Sure Murry is there, but come on, Brian is the only one with his hands in every part of it and the only one with a sort of triple responsibility to make sure it was right or fix it when it was wrong. Maybe I'm missing the point but are offenders less guilty if the victim doesn't complain in a timely fashion?  I don't think so.

My second question would be why are we still trying to blame the victim, Mike.

PS. If the publisher draws up the forms and you are left off and your co-author/co-publisher doesn't stand up you wouldn't be there to complain since you aren't asked to sign those contracts.

[KittyKat]

Quite a different situation than posing for photos in your formal gear. Gee, since BRIMEL nixed you AGD, your nose has turned a Love-ly shade of brown. 

Wore the penguin suit because that was the dress code for Henley. Totally not my choice. As for your amusing insistence that I'm in some/any way being shunned by BriMel, well that would be pretty hard for them to do seeing as there's never been any connection there anyway: quite the reverse, as anyone with any true grasp of the situation knows. But you keep on thinkin' Butch, that's what you're good at. 

Oh, I remember the days when the Doester would brag about talking to Mr. Wilson backstage during his British gigs. I remember when the Doester stated, during a debate about the Fire House footage and the GV promo video, he would ask Brian himself about it (which never came to pass).

My sources tell me you are not well liked in Brian's circles anymore AG "Butch" Doe. And no wonder as you opening insult Mrs. Wilson on this board. And, as you like to say, "they are watching".

I'm sure everyone in Brian's camp now loses massive amounts of sleep to know your now a anit-Wilson, pro Mike Love Brownista. You don't have to think, Chuck, to see that your whole perspective has changed in recent years. 

I never got the impression that Andrew was an "insider" any more than other folks who've gotten to talk to Brian or had backstage access. Many people get backstage due to Brian's nice band. It has nothing to do with Brian or his minions. In any case, saying hi or asking a question doesn't make anyone an insider and I'm sure AGD doesn't claim otherwise. In any case, if he were a former insider banned by BriMel, he could be eligible to join a nice club that includes David Leaf, Van Dyke Parks, Andy Paley, and even Al Jardine at times.

[SurfRiderHawaii]

Quite a different situation than posing for photos in your formal gear. Gee, since BRIMEL nixed you AGD, your nose has turned a Love-ly shade of brown.  

Wore the penguin suit because that was the dress code for Henley. Totally not my choice. As for your amusing insistence that I'm in some/any way being shunned by BriMel, well that would be pretty hard for them to do seeing as there's never been any connection there anyway: quite the reverse, as anyone with any true grasp of the situation knows. But you keep on thinkin' Butch, that's what you're good at.  

Oh, I remember the days when the Doester would brag about talking to Mr. Wilson backstage during his British gigs. I remember when the Doester stated, during a debate about the Fire House footage and the GV promo video, he would ask Brian himself about it (which never came to pass).

My sources tell me you are not well liked in Brian's circles anymore AG "Butch" Doe. And no wonder as you opening insult Mrs. Wilson on this board. And, as you like to say, "they are watching".

I'm sure everyone in Brian's camp now loses massive amounts of sleep to know your now a anit-Wilson, pro Mike Love Brownista. You don't have to think, Chuck, to see that your whole perspective has changed in recent years.  

I never got the impression that Andrew was an "insider" any more than other folks who've gotten to talk to Brian or had backstage access. Many people get backstage due to Brian's nice band. It has nothing to do with Brian or his minions. In any case, saying hi or asking a question doesn't make anyone an insider and I'm sure AGD doesn't claim otherwise. In any case, if he were a former insider banned by BriMel, he could be eligible to join a nice club that includes David Leaf, Van Dyke Parks, Andy Paley, and even Al Jardine at times.

Sorry, but that is the silliest post I've read in a long time. That's like arguing the world is flat. How many times has he name dropped about talking to one of his contacts. Recently he claimed to have picked up the phone and called David Marks. Or he talked to Alan Boyd. Or Mike Love  told him, and no one else before or since, that Brian said "No More". He loves to say he knows A or B told him C but he can't divulge the info cause it would compromise his source. Just read his thread "Trying".

Your analogy of VDP/Paley (Brian collaborators), or former Brian mgt (Leaf) is poor. Think about it.

It is safe to say he, at one time, had special access to the band. Like 1985. Times have changed.

ADD ON: Lorde, he just bragged a page ago in this thread about hanging with Mike Love for more than 10 minutes, he knows Mike, yada., because why? Insinuating, as always, he has special inside access/aka: Insider.

[Nicko1234]

Well that's certainly come up before. The idea that without the scum sucking lawyers around these guys might have sorted it out long ago. I don't think that's far from the truth.

And there's NO circumstance I'd ever cheat on my wife. Seriously.

I wasn't talking specifically about you.

But none of us can say with 100% certainty how we would behave in a situation that we have never experienced. Which is the only relevant thing in this discussion.

Anyway...this thread now appears to have degenerated further so no matter. 

[KittyKat]

AGD wrote a book about them, now out of print. He did research for the book so I'd imagine he met some of those folks, as did others who wrote books. I don't think he ever claimed to have spent that much time with them. David Marks is more accessible than most and I would imagine he's more willing to talk to people, it's just a matter of someone asking. Spending ten minutes with Mike isn't a lot. I've always had the impression AGD thinks the Beach Boys are a band instead of Brian Wilson (and some other guys). That's an area not everyone agrees on. I sort of lean towards the Beach Boys being a band and the members having something significant to contribute. I don't think Mike has suffered for the Brian-centric view, though, as much as Carl Wilson or Al Jardine has. Only Dennis seems to rate in the world of the most Brian-centric view of the Beach Boys.

[SurfRiderHawaii]

AGD wrote a book about them, now out of print. He did research for the book so I'd imagine he met some of those folks, as did others who wrote books. I don't think he ever claimed to have spent that much time with them. David Marks is more accessible than most and I would imagine he's more willing to talk to people, it's just a matter of someone asking. Spending ten minutes with Mike isn't a lot. I've always had the impression AGD thinks the Beach Boys are a band instead of Brian Wilson (and some other guys). That's an area not everyone agrees on. I sort of lean towards the Beach Boys being a band and the members having something significant to contribute. I don't think Mike has suffered for the Brian-centric view, though, as much as Carl Wilson or Al Jardine has. Only Dennis seems to rate in the world of the most Brian-centric view of the Beach Boys.

It is no slight to AGD that he knows Boyd, Love, Bruce, lots of people. I understand he attended some of the BB 85 sessions. Nothing bad about having inside connections with the band. Compared to me, he is an insider.

For whatever reason, he is on the outs with BRIMEL. And that is quite evident from his comments about Mrs. Brian Wilson.  No blame attributed there to AGD. Hell, Brian was tight with Joe Thomas. Then they were estranged and sued each other. Now buds again. Which way is the wind blowing? AGD may be writing liner notes for the new BAD album as far as I know.

[Patricia Ferrelli]

Hey guys,

Do you mind if I jump in here?  I just want to clear things up about the lawsuit.  I'm seeing some information that is correct and not correct and I'd like to clear it up for the record if I may.

When Brian was suing to get the rights back to his songs, he asked if Mike would testify on his behalf.  Mike did so under the promise that he would get his songwriting credit for "California Girls".  That's all he wanted.  He would continue to forgo the credits he didn't have just for that one song.  When Brian's case was over and Mike asked about "California Girls", Brian and his people went back on their word and said no to the credit. 

Mike, who was also told at this time that the statue of limitations had passed and there was no way he could ever get his credits for anything he wrote, was very discouraged.  Finally, through his family and friends, his resolve to right this wrong became very strong.  He found a lawyer who told him that it wasn't too late.

There was about 80 songs but Mike only named 35 in the suit.  When the verdict came down, it came in the form of a 25 page document stating multiple counts of fraud by Brian Wilson.  The jury's awarded Mike $55 million dollars. 

But why didn't Mike take the $55 million from Brian?  Because that would have bankrupt him and Brian would be forced to work for the rest of his life.  And Mike just didn't want to do that to him.  Brian in his prior case received $10 million - Mike asked for $5 million. 

And, yes, Mike and Brian were, in fact, hugging each other when it was all over.

[Nicko1234]

Hey guys,

Do you mind if I jump in here?  I just want to clear things up about the lawsuit.  I'm seeing some information that is correct and not correct and I'd like to clear it up for the record if I may.

When Brian was suing to get the rights back to his songs, he asked if Mike would testify on his behalf.  Mike did so under the promise that he would get his songwriting credit for "California Girls".  That's all he wanted.  He would continue to forgo the credits he didn't have just for that one song.  When Brian's case was over and Mike asked about "California Girls", Brian and his people went back on their word and said no to the credit. 

Mike, who was also told at this time that the statue of limitations had passed and there was no way he could ever get his credits for anything he wrote, was very discouraged.  Finally, through his family and friends, his resolve to right this wrong became very strong.  He found a lawyer who told him that it wasn't too late.

There was about 80 songs but Mike only named 35 in the suit.  When the verdict came down, it came in the form of a 25 page document stating multiple counts of fraud by Brian Wilson.  The jury's awarded Mike $55 million dollars. 

But why didn't Mike take the $55 million from Brian?  Because that would have bankrupt him and Brian would be forced to work for the rest of his life.  And Mike just didn't want to do that to him.  Brian in his prior case received $10 million - Mike asked for $5 million. 

And, yes, Mike and Brian were, in fact, hugging each other when it was all over.

Thanks for the interesting post.

The interesting thing for me when discussing the lawsuit is that soooo many people don't seem to care about what Brian's lawyers did to him. The focus is all about 'Big Bad Mike Love' when witnesses of the trial have stated that Brian's lawyers were screwing him. It is also utterly absurd that they didn't settle out of court when Brian had already admitted that Mike had co-written California Girls.

[Iron Horse-Apples]

These guys want to lose their lawyers then.

That's some interesting points there Patricia. Not quite sure who you are and what your connection is to this, but it all sounds plausible. How happy I am that my family disagreements aren't played out in public, with scum sucking lawyers involved!

To reiterate. I don't hate Mike. He is the sort of person I find quite unpleasant though, a fact I doubt he loses much sleep over.  Suing the person to whom I owe my success is still something I'd never do, but putting it in the context of a family argument which was played on by lawyers makes it more understandable for me. I refuse to blame a mentally ill man who has been taken advantage of and wronged far more than Mike ever has been.

Also.......

Cam Mott. I'm sorry I called you a moron, and accused you of inanely rambling. You weren't.  I did it because you told me I was wrong to have a subjective opinion, which pisses me off greatly. Name calling is not on though and I apologise.

Really my final word. I will not be dragged back in under any circumstance 

[Robbie Mac]

Patricia is familiar to  long-standing fans as the president of Mike's official fan club.


http://mikelovefanclub.com

[SurfRiderHawaii]

Patricia is familiar to  long-standing fans as the president of Mike's official fan club.


http://mikelovefanclub.com

Nice to get an unbiased perspective on the lawsuit 

[Nicko1234]

Patricia is familiar to  long-standing fans as the president of Mike's official fan club.


http://mikelovefanclub.com

Nice to get an unbiased perspective on the lawsuit 

Thankfully we already have one:

http://www.cabinessence.net/essays/lovevwilson1.html

[SurfRiderHawaii]

Patricia is familiar to  long-standing fans as the president of Mike's official fan club.


http://mikelovefanclub.com

Nice to get an unbiased perspective on the lawsuit 

Thankfully we already have one:

http://www.cabinessence.net/essays/lovevwilson1.html

Looks like a good read.

[Cam Mott]

Not Brian's or Brian's lawyers/conservators shiniest moments.

[Cam Mott]

Cam Mott. I'm sorry I called you a moron, and accused you of inanely rambling. You weren't.  I did it because you told me I was wrong to have a subjective opinion, which pisses me off greatly. Name calling is not on though and I apologise.

We're cool. For the record I thought we were being ironic telling each other we were wrong.

[KittyKat]

I looked up the Beach Boys discography on Wikipedia, and it showed that most of the Beach Boys' major hits were co-authored by Mike, including the first one, "Surfin." Most of them were always credited to Mike, only a couple of them were shown to have credits added after the lawsuit, "California Girls" and "Be True to Your School." I tend to believe Mike wrote most or all of the words to "School," because it's not quite Brian's style, not to mention it's a topic that seems right up Mike's alley. In any case, I can understand why Mike doesn't think he owes all of his success to Brian. A great deal of it, yes, but maybe those songs wouldn't have been hits without Mike's lyrics to help make them more commercial. Or Mike's voice on certain tracks making them more commercial, because his sound and style fit in with those times, just like Brian's falsetto fit in with the radio back then, too.  I'm sure the rest of the Beach Boys were grateful to Brian, but also proud of the vocal harmony sound they gave those records, and the lead vocals the rest of them took that helped make those songs so successful.

[filledeplage]

I looked up the Beach Boys discography on Wikipedia, and it showed that most of the Beach Boys' major hits were co-authored by Mike, including the first one, "Surfin." Most of them were always credited to Mike, only a couple of them were shown to have credits added after the lawsuit, "California Girls" and "Be True to Your School." I tend to believe Mike wrote most or all of the words to "School," because it's not quite Brian's style, not to mention it's a topic that seems right up Mike's alley. In any case, I can understand why Mike doesn't think he owes all of his success to Brian. A great deal of it, yes, but maybe those songs wouldn't have been hits without Mike's lyrics to help make them more commercial. Or Mike's voice on certain tracks making them more commercial, because his sound and style fit in with those times, just like Brian's falsetto fit in with the radio back then, too.  I'm sure the rest of the Beach Boys were grateful to Brian, but also proud of the vocal harmony sound they gave those records, and the lead vocals the rest of them took that helped make those songs so successful.

Kitty Kat - agree 100% with that analysis.  Mike does have a sort of easy-breezy, capture with lyrics that sort of identifies a person, much like fingerprints.  And, being born into a somewhat musical family (his own, not Brian's) I think that it gave him a base for his later work. He probably didn't consider it work, because the lyrics sort of "wrote themselves" in a way that only someone who has a writing gift can churn out.   I like to think of Mike as "Brian's best translator" and that will earn me some criticism (bring it on!  ) but, much of the great appeal of the music is that the words "fit" the melody like a glove.

And, I'd venture that the larger number of songs merited attribution.  It is not surprising that it took so long to get a resolution.  No one wants to sue a relative.  It is too messed up on a million levels.  No one can ever believe that a relative (Murry) would defraud a son or nephew.  But, Hollywood and Music industry people used their kids as chattel. 

No one dared challenge a parent's rights in those days.  Looking at everyone's position objectively, and separately, makes it easier to see the problems.  It was "entity" based and not personal.  It was the times that they started out in.  It must have been amazing to see the evidence presented.