MOCKINGBIRD

TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD
by Simon Starkey

IN MARCH 1995, a ten year legal battle was finally resolved in the most surprising way. A judge found that Robert John Godfrey was a co-author and joint copyright owner of six titles recorded by Barclay James Harvest, including the bands famous banner song, Mockingbird which he wrote together with John Lees in 1970. The judge found his contribution to this particular song to have been substantial. Godfrey achieved this albeit moral victory in spite of vociferous denials by the band and their record companies that he had made any contributions as a composer at all.

However, the actual judgment was quite extraordinary: although Godfrey had been entirely vindicated in his assertions to be a composer of these works, the judge prevented him from being able to gain any monetary relief at all on the grounds that he had waited too long before taking sufficient action to establish his rights.

Caught in a Catch 22 situation by a money-dominated legal profession, Godfrey was not able to make a claim against Barclay James Harvest until there was something in it for the legal system. It was on the grounds of this delay that the judge estopped Godfrey from asserting his rights or claiming any monetary relief. Ironically, if Godfrey had been credited with co-writing these songs 25 years ago when he first approached a lawyer, his reputation as a composer of the highest calibre would have been established, and his works would have almost certainly been made more accessible.

Although Godfrey believes that his career has been hugely damaged by the legal profession in that he was given very bad advice in the years prior to instructing his current solicitors, he has accepted this judgement without bitterness or rancour. He regards the judges decision as very fair to the band who cannot be held responsible for any failure by the legal profession in dealing with Godfreys claim.

What is not fair is the shameful manner in which Robert John Godfrey has subsequently been treated by the record companies concerned. Prior to the case going to court, a written agreement was entered into by Polydor and EMI, that if there was any finding at all that Godfrey was a composer of this music, he would be given a proper writers credit and acknowledged as such.

Since the trial, there had been no meaningful response from Polydor at all until 6th February 1996, when Mr Godfrey received confirmation from his solicitors that Polydor have absolutely no intention of honouring their agreement. Now Godfrey must either give up or sue Polydor in order to have his name next to his own music. EMI have been much more willing to discuss the matter but have yet to agree to honour the agreement. The whole thing is dragging on and on.

The behaviour of these record companies is mean and churlish. It conveniently overlooks the vast amount of money Robert John Godfreys work has generated for them over the years from which he receives nothing at all.

This situation is made all the more distressing for Robert because his lifes work with his band The Enid has remained in comparative obscurity. Now it seems that Robert, like The Phantom of the Opera, must stand by and watch whilst various members of Barclay James Harvest continue to take the entire credit for his work in spite of a high court finding completely in his favour.

This case highlights the inherent unfairness common in the music industry, and its relationship with the legal system.

It really is time this marvellous and dedicated composer had some recognition for his work in general and more particularly for having co-written one of the greatest progressive rock songs of all time.

See Robert John Godfrey's own account for another perspective.