[GuyBarry]

Hi all - I've just started writing songs again after a gap of a couple of decades, and I'm discovering a slight problem.

I imagine a snatch of melody or a chord sequence in my head.  I then think "I can't use that, it sounds too much like so-and-so".  So I change it slightly.  Then I change it again.  Eventually I get something which I'm convinced is genuinely original.

Then after a little while, I think "hmm, that sounds familiar", but I can't think why.  And it dawns on me that the reason why it sounds familiar is that I've written it and have been playing it over and over again in my head so many times that it's become ingrained!  In other words, I can no longer tell what's genuinely original and what isn't.

Has anyone else experienced this problem, and is there a way of solving it?

[GuyBarry]

Interesting that there have been no responses to this yet.  Is accidental plagiarism not something that bothers people here?  I'm not particularly concerned about getting a bill from PRS (well not yet anyway!), but I do like to be confident that I've written something genuinely original.

[delb0y]

Hey Guy

I'm sure accidental plagiarism is on people's minds - in fact only this morning the comment came up in one review that a melody reminded someone of something else.

But the fact that no-one has replied is more testament to busyness, I should imagine. Folks post here and there are few responses to specific threads for weeks, and then a flurry, and then it quiets down again. I think the difference here compared to other subject matter forums is that if one has, say, five minutes to jump online that equates to listening to one song and maybe having time to comment on that one song (or that comment may come at a subsequent five minute window of opportunity). Other forums someone can bash out five topic replies in those five minutes.

From my perspective I suspect every tune I write, every chord sequence I use, every melody note I choose to use upon each chord, every subject matter, every story arc, and most rhymes have already been used, so I'm sure I'm inadvertently and unintentionally plagiarising something every time. My favourite recording statistic that I like to pull out whenever I spy an opportunity is that back in 2008 there were 106000 albums released in the US alone. There were 96000 in 2009 and 75000 in 2010. That's in one country alone. So for those three years that's somewhere in the region of 4 million chord sequences / melodies / lyrics. Add in Europe and Australia and Iceland (Bjork!) and India and Japan... and I'm betting someone somewhere has already written and released my songs :-) It's just they've sung them more in tune than me but I've got better guitar solos!

Cheers
Derek

[GuyBarry]

But the fact that no-one has replied is more testament to busyness, I should imagine. Folks post here and there are few responses to specific threads for weeks, and then a flurry, and then it quiets down again.

Oh, OK.  I'm new to the forum so my head's still buzzing with all sorts of things I want to discuss - I've never had the opportunity to exchange ideas with a group of other songwriters before!  I'll be more patient in future.

Thanks for your comments anyway.  If you copy a chord sequence, is it actually regarded as plagiarism?  I ask because I sometimes encounter "sound-alike" parodies of well-known songs (Richie Webb's "15-Minute Musicals" are a good example), where the chord sequence and rhythmic structure of a song are copied but the melody is altered in such a way that the song is still recognizable.  I assume this is done to get round copyright restrictions.

[delb0y]

No need to be patient, Guy. I'm pretty new here myself, too, and I agree - it's wonderful to be able to discuss song-writing. We need more of it - the critique area is the busy area, but I'm all for more more more discussion on the craft. Keep posting!!

I don't think copying a chord sequence is regarded as plagiarism - but my point is that whatever we come up with musically someone somewhere is likely to have already done something similar. At what point do you say, uh-huh, best I don't use that line / phrase / melody? I'm a massive fan of obscure artists but I couldn't name or identify a single song by the likes of Radiohead / Coldplay / One Direction / or a thousand other popular artists so I may well stumble upon something accidentally that has been used on a platinum seller. Meanwhile I'll discard a line that has been used on a CD that sold maybe 100 copies because I am aware of it. Where does one draw the line? Led Zeppelin clearly weren't worries with The Lemon Song.

Cheers
D

[pompeyjazz]

I guess eventually all chord sequences will be repeated but that's not plagiarism as by the time you've added a melody, bass line, timing, arrangement the song will be totally different. I've started many a song ant thought oh no it sounds like this or that but by the time I get to the finished product it sounds totally different

Cheers John

[tboswell]

I have to blunt here and just say, I don't care about plagiarism one bit. I am happy to use the same old chord sequences again and again.
I don't mind stealing bits of melodies, I seldom do it but if I get that feeling that a bit is familiar then I just carry on.
Lyrically I take inspiration from other songs but they always end up something unique in the end.

Just stop worrying about it and write the songs that come out, I say.
You can't help making something unique because you are unique enough to craft it differently from what anyone else would do.

Tom.

[Skub]

Sounds like GuyBarry is overthinking the 'problem'.

I agree with Tom. If I'm moved to write something,then I write it and let others worry about the possibility of the end result being like already existing work. Go with the flow and get it down,the simple fact is,there is nothing out there that hasn't been done before,it's all just reinventing the wheel.

Be content you can make you own music and don't sweat the small stuff.

[Boydie]

This often comes up

From a copyright point of view only melody and lyrics can be protected under copyright so using the chord sequence from another song is fair game - and often a good songwriting technique

However, lines are getting blurred (see what I did there!) as there have been a couple of recent cases where other elements (including the "vibe") have been cited in copyright claims - eg Robin Thick v Marvin Gaye

http://www.theguardian.com/music/2015/mar/10/blurred-lines-pharrell-robin-thicke-copied-marvin-gaye

I personally don't agree with the ruling as I don't think the melody or lyrics have been copied

There is a clear similarity in the rhythm parts and it has definitely "borrowed" from the song so I am happy the Gaye estate got something but was it fair to say it was plagiarism?

[tone]

It depends first of all on your definition of 'original.' You could argue that originality in pop music has been pretty much dead since hip hop arrived (and ironically enough, that was a genre built on sampling). On the other hand, you could say the likes of Bjork or Radiohead are always and deliberately 'original' - whatever that means to you.

But I think there's a fine line to be walked between a desire to avoid plagiarism (healthy and necessary to a point), and being so mindful of how your song compares to other songs that you can't focus on the job at hand: writing the damn thing.

I had a plagiarism crisis while writing a melody just a couple of weeks ago. I found a really nice tune, and thought to myself, hang on a minute - I KNOW THIS TUNE. And it rattled around my head, but I couldn't figure out what it was. I was ready to abandon the song, convinced I'd ripped it off, when suddenly it came to me. I knew what song I'd 'ripped off'. So I looked it up on youtube to confirm, and actually my song sounded nothing like the song I thought I'd ripped off - it simply shared a harmonic change and a held note, and so had a similar feel. I'm also slightly embarrassed to admit the song turned out to be 'keeping the dream alive' by Freiheit.... :/

If the fear of plagiarism is really bothering you, it may help to widen your listening material. Spend some time delving into artists you don't normally listen to, or discover something new that you really love. I find having a varied listening palate can help you move further away from your primary influences as time goes by. When I first began writing songs, they all sounded like I was trying to copy Neil Finn (mainly because I was!) but even though that's still a noticeable influence in some of my songs, they're nowhere near plagiarism (I hope).

One last really important thing: don't forget to have fun!

[Marrianna]

It could be classed as unethical to copy or take parts of someone else's work, especially if the writer's are known to one another. One would surely feel affronted if, after showing or playing the work to a friend or associate, including people in the music-business, those people use ideas or music/lyrics for his, her or someone else's benefit. The question of trust or ethics becomes relevant and it would seem that some people care more about those things than others. Anyone writing what they think is original material and hoping to make it in the music-business is in a Catch 22 situation because, either they show other people their work for consideration and possible publishing etc. or keep it to themselves, which would be of no use for progress in a career etc.

I would not think of myself as being a true composer or lyricist if I had to model my work and ideas on someone else's work already published, and even worse, someone's unpublished work! It would take away my sense of pride in what I have created.
Someone else using my thought process as their own would seem like being unethical and a violation of my own creativity, especially if I know who I have presented work to.

I am not sure that many people would submit their work for publishing and recording if they know they have taken other people's work.The risk of it being recognised would be there, but if it could be the other way round and someone in the business cheats on someone who has submitted their work in trust .. there are no words, not even unethical.

[GuyBarry]

Sounds like GuyBarry is overthinking the 'problem'.

I agree with Tom. If I'm moved to write something,then I write it and let others worry about the possibility of the end result being like already existing work.

That's fine if you're not worried about the potential effect on the audience.  The main reason why I'm concerned about accidental plagiarism isn't because I'm worried about being sued, it's because I want the audience to be paying attention to my song and not thinking about another one.  Take the example of Bob Marley's "Buffalo Soldier", which I mentioned in another thread.  There is simply no way I can listen to that song without being reminded of the Banana Splits singing "Tra-la-la, tra-la-la-la" (showing my age here!), and it completely ruins the song for me.  I doubt whether that's what Bob Marley intended.

If the fear of plagiarism is really bothering you, it may help to widen your listening material.

That'd be difficult in my case!  I listen to music of all genres - I sort of absorb it like a sponge.  That's probably why I'm so sensitive to the potential for plagiarism, because I've got so many different tunes in my head.  I wouldn't like to think how many tunes I recognize - it probably runs into the tens of thousands.

And another reason for avoiding plagiarism; if your song becomes better known than the one you've plagiarized, the author of the original work can end up being accused of stealing your material, which isn't very fair.  I believe this is the reason why Gordon Lightfoot threatened to sue Michael Masser over "The Greatest Love of All" (though he subsequently withdrew).

[adamfarr]

Noel Gallagher (occasional genius) used to bang on about how Green Day had copied the chords from Wonderwall in Boulevard of Broken Dreams. I can't see it myself and would shout at the radio "come on Noel you can't copyright a G chord" (usually a bit ruder than that).

Billy Bragg (much more frequent genius) once said that he sometimes took a great song and used that as a wooden framework on which to build a stone arch (bear with me). When the arch is finished you remove the wooden framework and noone even knows it was there.

Jean-Luc Goddard (undoubted genius) once said "it's not where you take things from it's where you take them to".

We are all a product of our pasts and probably consciously or unconciously take little bits from different places. And stuff will always remind people of stuff. I almost never worry about it except when I get a lyrical idea that seems too good to be true and so needs to be Googled...

[Marrianna]

Sounds like GuyBarry is overthinking the 'problem'.

I agree with Tom. If I'm moved to write something,then I write it and let others worry about the possibility of the end result being like already existing work.

That's fine if you're not worried about the potential effect on the audience.  The main reason why I'm concerned about accidental plagiarism isn't because I'm worried about being sued, it's because I want the audience to be paying attention to my song and not thinking about another one.  Take the example of Bob Marley's "Buffalo Soldier", which I mentioned in another thread.  There is simply no way I can listen to that song without being reminded of the Banana Splits singing "Tra-la-la, tra-la-la-la" (showing my age here!), and it completely ruins the song for me.  I doubt whether that's what Bob Marley intended.

If the fear of plagiarism is really bothering you, it may help to widen your listening material.

That'd be difficult in my case!  I listen to music of all genres - I sort of absorb it like a sponge.  That's probably why I'm so sensitive to the potential for plagiarism, because I've got so many different tunes in my head.  I wouldn't like to think how many tunes I recognize - it probably runs into the tens of thousands.

And another reason for avoiding plagiarism; if your song becomes better known than the one you've plagiarized, the author of the original work can end up being accused of stealing your material, which isn't very fair.  I believe this is the reason why Gordon Lightfoot threatened to sue Michael Masser over "The Greatest Love of All" (though he subsequently withdrew).

I seem to remember not enjoying listening to the Greatest Love Of All because I heard parts of more than one other well-known song in it. I remember the similarities issue well.

It is a good point that people can be accused of plagiarism when they actually wrote the song first and then another one becomes better known. They probably couldn't do anything about it and that's when ethics become so important because people who maybe know someone can't afford legal action
can take advantage of that, and so it appears that they have no conscience.

Another reason to avoid plagiarism, is so that people can really have fun, enjoying their writing, and knowing that their work is really their own and drawn from their own talent. Any accidental plagiarism could happen to anyone and that is why it is important to register the date of writing.

[Marrianna]

I meant to mention that I had the experience of having work of mine apparently copied and put on sale. After meetings with the publishers they eventually gave up. I had to produce manuscripts and dates of my work first which was proof without any doubt.

Marrianna