Dani California's Last Dance with Mary Jane in a Purple Haze.

[Lisa0825]

Anyone else notice that? It took me weeks after first hearing "Dani California" by RHCP to figure out why it sounded so damned familiar. It was the first four notes of the riff from "Purple Haze" that I pegged first. Then, I started having flashbacks of Kim Bassinger's limp body slumped against Tom Petty.. A-HA!

I realized this several weeks ago, but finally tonight I got around to googling it, and apparently there is all kinds of speculation of plagiarism, and dozens of discussion boards with passionate arguments on both sides of this extremely critical matter. :tinfoilhat:

Personally, I love the song, and I am not generally huge RHCP fan. I think it was actually a brilliant idea... take a smidgeon of one memorable song, plus a smidgeon of another, and TA-DA! INSTANT EARWORM as people rack their brains trying to figure out why this "new" song sounds familiar!

That's how it worked on me anyway....

So, anyone else notice the famous undertones?

[mark414]

1. i don't think there's anything wrong with that

maybe it is just due to the fact that i am a massive fan of folk music and a devoted follower of its tradition of no ownership over songs and everyone just records whatever the hell they want however the hell they want, but music is music and isn't imitation the sincerest form of flattery?

so an artist takes an idea from someone else and builds on it, uses that influence and makes it their own, what in the world is wrong with that? the short answer? greed.

if copyright laws were what they are back in the 60's, bob dylan's "the times they are a-changin" wouldn't even exist; neither would woody guthrie's "this land is your land" - both are covers of carter family songs (with updated lyrics of course)

[Lisa0825]

2. I'm in the middle on the subject....

I think a lot of leeway should be given, but at the point that it is obvious that the majority of a song was basically copied, then the original artist at least deserves the right to give permission and share any profit.

But I think this use of tiny portions of very memorable songs as a basis for something new and different was genius. I love it, and I love that it basically pays homage to other songs I loved.

[Redstone]

3. Uh, what Carter Family tunes did they borrow?

Redstone

[mark414]

4. dylan took a song called "the wayworn traveler"

he original redid it under the name "paths of victory" but then rewrote the words and switched up the tempo almost to a point where you can't really recognize it (but listen to it and sing the dylan lyrics to it and you can hear it)

guthrie took "when the world's on fire" for 'this land is your land' and he left the melody pretty much identical. he took a lot of carter family tunes for his own - "i ain't go no home," "tom joad," "columbus stockade" all have their origins in the carter family...


PS if yer interested and have MSN or AOL i can send you either of those carter family songs if you want to hear them

[Redstone]

5. Nah, I have lots of Carter Family recordings so I can look them up.

But thanks for the offer.

We do disagree on one thing: As a songwriter, I believe that the 1976 Copyright Act was maybe the single best law ever passed in this country. I've had songs stolen.

People thing that songwriting isn't real work, for some reason. They'd think differently if they'd ever written one, I guarantee you that.

Redstone

[Lisa0825]

6. I understand.

and I think juries usually make the right call. I don't think this song is a rip-off though. More like an allusion.

[mark414]

7. i guess i meant more taking a riff or two than lifting a whole song

i mean i don't support the idea of say, you writing a song, and then me performing said song and claiming i wrote it. that's bad.

but i think back to an interview i saw with tom petty, who was asked about a song by the strokes that appeared on their first album that was basically a total rip of "american girl" (which the strokes completely admitted) and petty said something along the lines of "you know what, i'm too busy to care. they did a good job with it and people know that's my song so what's the big deal?"

i am obviously paraphrasing there but that was the gist of it...i don't know maybe it's just me...sorry your songs got stolen, though

[johnnie]

8. But you also have to keep in mind ...

And I'm sure you understand this, but early folk music was just that "folk music". It was everybody's music and they all had fun with it. Back in those days music wasn't a multi-million dollar industry back then. The Carter family wouldn't have worried for a second if someone copped a riff or a melody, these days it is much different.

[mark414]

9. i think you were addressing me?

and yeah you're right...and i think it's unfortunate that it's that way.

i always loved this little bit that guthrie put on the inside of a book of song lyrics he released though...

"This song is Copyrighted in U.S., under Seal of Copyright #154085, for a period of 28 years, and anybody caught singin' it without our permission, will be mighty good friends of ourn, cause we don't give a dern. Publish it. Write it. Sing it. Swing to it. Yodel it. We wrote it, that's all we wanted to do."

[Lisa0825]

10. Now that's cool:-)

Great quote! :hippie:

[Redstone]

11. Oh, I never had any problem with anyone PERFORMING my songs;

I'd never have pushed for a cent of royalties for that. I never cashed a royalty check for people singing my songs in bars and places like that.

But when people RECORD it and try to weasel out of the royalties, that's another matter indeed.

Redstone