Copyrighting ..... etc.   Does it have a harmful effect on the public's acceptance of song variation? It seems that most modern day listeners unfairly resent when an artist changes a previous song, even if it is made substantially better in the process. This seems to be so illogical, especially in folk circles.   Wouldn't we want to preserve the sacred "folk process", where songs are honed to the point of perfection over the years.
   Examples:   
George Harrison's admitted reliance on "She's So Fine" (Ronnettes) for "My Sweet Lord". He was sued for this, of course, when all he really did was admit that this song only got him started on the use of gospel-like call and response. Did some judge actually think that the Ronettes invented repetitive call and response?
The Beach Boys were successfully sued by Chuck Berry because they supposedly "stole" Sweet Little Sixteen in the making of "Surfing' USA". Didn't it matter that thousands of rock&roll songs used the same progression and chug-chugging rhythmic riff.
My favorite ....... Die-hard folkies condemn Bob Dylan for not giving credit on his obvious remake of "Who's Gonna Buy You Ribbons When I'm Gone?" into "Don't Think Twice".   Among these worshipers of the folk process, it doesn't seem to matter that"Don't Think Twice" is obviously a masterful song, and it never would have happened if Dylan didn't "steal" and modify the "original".