Beatles-ish Part 2: Fine line between influence and rip-off?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Beatles-ish Part 2: Fine line between influence and rip-off?

    Principally: The Knack.  

    I recently learned that the Knack were accused, back in their day, of ripping off the Beatles, not just in their sound / music, but also in their packaging / marketing.    A backlash followed the release of their blockbuster debut album, "Get the Knack", and the perception that the band had stolen full-out from the Beatles, and the accusation,  hung over the band.  The band, and their managemet, of course, denied the allegations, and refused to speak in public or conduct interviews, which only fed the speculation that the band had indeed taken Beatles-influence too far.    The backlash to the refusal to speak to the media, of course, caused the band to look arrogant, as well as even more guilty, as they did not face the negative press head on.

    The critical backlash persisted for a number of years, apparently.   After a dazzling debut in 1979, they finally fizzled out around 1982.    As history goes, the band did reunite, and with changes, had success later on, so all was not lost.

    But back to the Beatles ripoff history -- were you aware that the Knack had been accused of ripping off the Beatles to this extent?   Was this well-known with consumers, not just industry insiders?    It seems to have been taken quite seriously back in the day, to have ripped off the Beatles (ala a "Knuke the Knack" campaign, etc).  

    Anyone aware of this?   Also, are there any other well-known cases of absolute RIP OFFS, not just influences, for other rock artists, where accusations have been this severe?   

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from polar123. Show polar123's posts

    Re: Beatles-ish Part 2: Fine line between influence and rip-off?

    In a reverse Beatle suit, George Harrison fought a long fight over his song My Sweet Lord, which he was accussed of copyright infrigment by the studio that held the rights to the Chiffon's one big hit, He's so fine, Seems the court sided with the Chiffons here, and awarded them a lot of the songs royalties.. You be the judge.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMgCpb1nli4

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rinz9Avvq6A

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Beatles-ish Part 2: Fine line between influence and rip-off?

    I bought the first LP by the Knack. It never really occured to me that this iswhat they were doing. I just liked the song 'My Sharona' (the big hit, with the catchy beat). Over time this song became worn out, overplayed ( part of the subject of my latest thread) and I didn't really like it anymore , although I can't say I really  hate it. But on reflection, even the title of the album 'Get The Knack' is so similar to the Beatles 1st US LP, 'Meet The Beatles.'

    I can't say it bothered me that they were ripping off the Beatles, because in my mind this had been done by so many groups for so long that you'd have to lump many groups in this category. There really is a fine line between "ripping off" and "influenced by."

    But, really, what became apparent after hearing ( not buying) the 2nd LP was that they basically were a below average band that had only one hit in them and lots of songs that sounded similar.

    I feel bad being so critical, because the music business is tough and you've got to do whatever it takes to make a living. Also , I am not so sure the "ripping off" was 100% intentional. It may not have even been the band's idea, maybe a manager or producer pushed them in that direction. Also , they did hook me originally , so the music was certainly something that had some appeal and merit.

    The title of the 2nd LP was stolen from a Doors song, "But The Little Girls Understand." ( I think it was from Five To One). To me this showed lack of originality...and the 2nd LP really wasn't very different from the first.

    These guys, like the Bay City Rollers suffered from high expectations and too much hype. Being compared to the Fab Four is a fate worse than death in the music industry. Who can live up to that?

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from devildavid. Show devildavid's posts

    Re: Beatles-ish Part 2: Fine line between influence and rip-off?

    In response to ZILLAGOD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    1.) I feel bad being so critical, because the music business is tough and you've got to do whatever it takes to make a living.

    2.)The title of the 2nd LP was stolen from a Doors song, "But The Little Girls Understand." ( I think it was from Five To One).

     

    [/QUOTE]

    1.) Please apply this attitude toward Disco and Hip-Hop.

    2.) This line originates from the song "Back Door Man", written by Willie Dixon and recorded by Howlin' Wolf. The Doors covered this song on their debut album.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Beatles-ish Part 2: Fine line between influence and rip-off?

    Devlidavid"

    1. Sorry, this won't happen ...I don't feel sorry about being critical about most things.

    2. Was pretty sure I had the wrong Doors song, and yes it turns out to be one of their few covers....so the Knack ripped off Willie Dixon. Or were they paying tribute to a Blues legend?

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from devildavid. Show devildavid's posts

    Re: Beatles-ish Part 2: Fine line between influence and rip-off?

    In response to ZILLAGOD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Devlidavid"

    1. Sorry, this won't happen ...I don't feel sorry about being critical about most things.

    2. Was pretty sure I had the wrong Doors song, and yes it turns out to be one of their few covers....so the Knack ripped off Willie Dixon. Or were they paying tribute to a Blues legend?

    [/QUOTE]

    Aw c'mon Zill, sympathy for The Knack? They were nothing special, as you pretty much admit. I think KC and the Sunshine Band made a greater contribution to pop music than The Knack did.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Beatles-ish Part 2: Fine line between influence and rip-off?

    The Knack did one memorable song with My Sharona.  A friend of mine was in a cover band that did that song, with a note-perfect reproduction of the guitar solo.  

    I too am surprised they would be thought of as a Beatles rip-off.   

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from lefig. Show lefig's posts

    Re: Beatles-ish Part 2: Fine line between influence and rip-off?

    I actually liked the Knack. A lot of their songs I could listen too, the one I did not like so much was My Sharona.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Beatles-ish Part 2: Fine line between influence and rip-off?

    In response to polar123's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In a reverse Beatle suit, George Harrison fought a long fight over his song My Sweet Lord, which he was accussed of copyright infrigment by the studio that held the rights to the Chiffon's one big hit, He's so fine, Seems the court sided with the Chiffons here, and awarded them a lot of the songs royalties.. You be the judge.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMgCpb1nli4

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rinz9Avvq6A

    [/QUOTE]

    My judgement on this is: INNOCENT.  Seems ridiculous and preposterous.  Hard to imagine the Chiffons won the case.  Have to wonder if that would happen now, in the name of copyright infringement.  

    I was thinking in terms of artists, not just songs (although instances of songs are good, too) that have been accused severely for ripping off another band / artist.

    I appreciate, now more than ever with the ease of information distribution, seeing the names of bands that influence up-and-coming musicians.   

    I've just never heard of anything as severe as the accusation against the Knack as a whole, not just for one song.    Perhaps, back then, there was more sensitivity, especially true after the unfathomable success of the Beatles.   

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Beatles-ish Part 2: Fine line between influence and rip-off?

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

     The Knack did one memorable song with My Sharona.  A friend of mine was in a cover band that did that song, with a note-perfect reproduction of the guitar solo.  I too am surprised they would be thought of as a Beatles rip-off. 

    From what I'm seeing, their back story is more interesting than the band ever was.  :)

    They seem to have become one of the most hated bands during the time following their breakout.   Most people think of them as a bit of a one-hit wonder with My Sharona, accompanied by other music that wasn't all that inspiring, but certainly wasn't awful.  

    "The Knack were tirelessly hounded by the press, with a venom unrivaled until the Milli Vanilli fiasco" --  that started with the accusation of ripping off / trying to be the latter-day Beatles, and apparently lots more.   

    So there you go.   Makes me curious to listen to "Get the Knack" if anything.  

     

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from polar123. Show polar123's posts

    Re: Beatles-ish Part 2: Fine line between influence and rip-off?

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to polar123's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In a reverse Beatle suit, George Harrison fought a long fight over his song My Sweet Lord, which he was accussed of copyright infrigment by the studio that held the rights to the Chiffon's one big hit, He's so fine, Seems the court sided with the Chiffons here, and awarded them a lot of the songs royalties.. You be the judge.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMgCpb1nli4

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rinz9Avvq6A

    [/QUOTE]


    That still blows my mind.  Its a minor scale backwards starting on the third  - me (pronounced may) re do.  NO one owns that for Christ's sake.

    If I were George's lawyer:

    "Your Honor, over here, we have the Chiffons, aren't they adorable?  And over here, we have a FCKING BEATLE!!!  The defense rests"

    [/QUOTE]


    I agree. Does the guy who wrote While my Guitar Gently Weeps, really need to rip off the Chiffon's? The melody may be similar, but, many songs share the same chord structure. Speaking of similar, listen to the opening riff's of the baby's Isn't it time and Seal's Kiss from a Rose some day .  Almost identical.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from polar123. Show polar123's posts

    Re: Beatles-ish Part 2: Fine line between influence and rip-off?

    In response to yogafriend's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to polar123's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In a reverse Beatle suit, George Harrison fought a long fight over his song My Sweet Lord, which he was accussed of copyright infrigment by the studio that held the rights to the Chiffon's one big hit, He's so fine, Seems the court sided with the Chiffons here, and awarded them a lot of the songs royalties.. You be the judge.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMgCpb1nli4

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rinz9Avvq6A

    [/QUOTE]

    My judgement on this is: INNOCENT.  Seems ridiculous and preposterous.  Hard to imagine the Chiffons won the case.  Have to wonder if that would happen now, in the name of copyright infringement.  

    I was thinking in terms of artists, not just songs (although instances of songs are good, too) that have been accused severely for ripping off another band / artist.

    I appreciate, now more than ever with the ease of information distribution, seeing the names of bands that influence up-and-coming musicians.   

    I've just never heard of anything as severe as the accusation against the Knack as a whole, not just for one song.    Perhaps, back then, there was more sensitivity, especially true after the unfathomable success of the Beatles.   

    [/QUOTE]


    To be honest, I was not all that aware of the knack accusation until i read your thread. Makes a little sense now that I googled it. Not sure they did :) 

    I agree the Chiffon's suit is bogus, and should not have been won. Not sure who said it here, but it must be really hard to write a song nowadys without it sounding like something already out there (see above post).

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from RogerTaylor. Show RogerTaylor's posts

    Re: Beatles-ish Part 2: Fine line between influence and rip-off?

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The Get the Knack album cover was DELIBERATELY designed to look like, Meet the Beatles, right down to the black and white.

    The deliberate design was by the record company.  The record company was Capitol Records, who distributed Meet the Beatles as well!!!

    [/QUOTE]

    XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

     

    Again just about anything by Jeff Lynn and in some cases Cheap Trick, christ Cheap Trick even did a Sgt Pepper concert in Vegas! Even they admit the Beatles were a huge influence on them....

     

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iipe7O7336M

     

    Oh, Yah I forget this gem Cheap Trick being John Lennons band....

     

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=im3AUiCGqnk&feature=related

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from jesseyeric. Show jesseyeric's posts

    Re: Beatles-ish Part 2: Fine line between influence and rip-off?

    In response to RogerTaylor's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The Get the Knack album cover was DELIBERATELY designed to look like, Meet the Beatles, right down to the black and white.

    The deliberate design was by the record company.  The record company was Capitol Records, who distributed Meet the Beatles as well!!!

    [/QUOTE]

    XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

     

    Again just about anything by Jeff Lynn and in some cases Cheap Trick, christ Cheap Trick even did a Sgt Pepper concert in Vegas! Even they admit the Beatles were a huge influence on them....

     

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iipe7O7336M

     

    Oh, Yah I forget this gem Cheap Trick being John Lennons band....

     

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=im3AUiCGqnk&feature=related

    [/QUOTE]

    +1

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from jesseyeric. Show jesseyeric's posts

    Re: Beatles-ish Part 2: Fine line between influence and rip-off?

    Enuff Z' Nuff - You be the judge

     

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJ_ZHBPzcRg

     

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6TQKepv_2k

     

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FmLAU_Vq_Y&feature=related

     

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5Kcgi_4kg8&feature=related

     

     

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Beatles-ish Part 2: Fine line between influence and rip-off?

    In response to jesseyeric's comment:
    [QUOTE] Enuff Z' Nuff - You be the judge

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJ_ZHBPzcRg

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6TQKepv_2k

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FmLAU_Vq_Y&feature=related

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5Kcgi_4kg8&feature=related /QUOTE]

     

    The first song, not as much as the other three; those do sound very Beatle-ish.

    But I don't know if Enuff Z'Nuff were ever under fire or accused of ripping off the Beatles, such as the Knack were.   That's the difference.

    With all of the music heavily influenced by the Beatles, and with many vocals that sound remarkably close, they still weren't considered rip-off artists.   What happened to the Knack seems to set them apart in that way.  Seems crazy, but it happened.   

     

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     

Share