Bright Tunes Music Corp. v. Harrisongs Music, Ltd.
420 F. Supp. 177 (1976)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A party can be liable for copyright infringement even if the copying was done subconsciously and without deliberate intent, provided there was access to the copyrighted work and substantial similarity between the works.
Facts:
- In 1962, a song titled 'He’s So Fine,' composed by Ronald Mack and recorded by The Chiffons, was released.
- The song's musical structure featured a unique pattern of two short musical phrases, or motifs (referred to as Motif A and Motif B).
- 'He’s So Fine' became a major hit, reaching No. 1 on the billboard charts in the United States for five weeks and becoming a top hit in England in 1963.
- George Harrison, a member of The Beatles, was in England and had songs on the charts at the same time 'He’s So Fine' was popular, giving him access to the song.
- In 1970, Harrison composed the song 'My Sweet Lord' while in Copenhagen, starting by vamping guitar chords and fitting words to them during a session with other musicians, including Billy Preston.
- 'My Sweet Lord' utilized the same two musical motifs in a nearly identical pattern as 'He’s So Fine,' including a unique grace note in the same location.
Procedural Posture:
- Bright Tunes Music Corp., the copyright owner of 'He's So Fine,' filed an action for copyright infringement against George Harrison and his music company.
- The case was brought in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
- The court conducted a trial on the issue of plagiarism (liability), bifurcating it from the issue of damages.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a composer commit copyright infringement by subconsciously copying a substantial part of a protected work to which they had prior access?
Opinions:
Majority - District Judge Owen
Yes. A composer commits copyright infringement even if the copying is done subconsciously. The court found that 'My Sweet Lord' is musically the very same song as 'He's So Fine,' with different words. To establish infringement, a plaintiff must prove access and substantial similarity. Here, Harrison's access was conceded, as 'He's So Fine' was a worldwide hit he would have heard. The court determined the songs were not just substantially similar but virtually identical in their core musical structure. The court concluded that Harrison's subconscious, having absorbed the unique pattern of 'He's So Fine,' reproduced it when he was searching for a melody. Therefore, even without deliberate intent to plagiarize, the act of subconscious copying constitutes copyright infringement under the law.
Analysis:
This case is a landmark decision in copyright law, establishing the principle of 'subconscious infringement.' It significantly lowers the burden of proving intent in plagiarism cases, shifting the focus to the more objective elements of access and substantial similarity. The ruling serves as a cautionary tale for creators, demonstrating that liability can arise even from forgotten memories or unintentional inspiration. Future cases involving musical similarity would heavily rely on this precedent, making it more difficult for defendants to argue that similarities were coincidental or the result of independent creation when prior access to the original work is clear.
