The opinion's factual findings are essentially accurate, but did the court ask the right questions to arrive at its finding of unconscious copying? The musically illiterate Harrison didn't create the score of "My Sweet Lord," a standard melodic analysis of which led the court to its decision. Harrison hired an educated musician to work a couple of banal melodic ideas set to two chords into a marketable visual representation of the song's real locus of economic value: Harrison's quasi-improvisational recorded performance that was entirely responsible for the popularity of this number. The opinion (footnote nine) alludes to Harrison's belief that his song is that which he sings at a particular moment and not something that can be captured on a sheet of paper. The court gave this insight short shrift in its analysis and ultimate determination of misappropriation.
The Columbia Law Library Music Plagiarism Project lists quite a few cases, of which the quite above comes from my favorite - Bright Tunes Music v. Harrisongs Music. George Harrison lost his case, but he turned the loss into This Song:
This song has nothing tricky about it
This song ain't black or white and as far as I know
Don't infringe on anyone's copyright, so . . .
This song we'll let be
This song is in E
This song is for you and . . .
This tune has nothing Bright about it
This tune ain't bad or good and come ever what may
My expert tells me it's okay
As this song came to me
This song could be you could be . . .
This riff ain't trying to win gold medals
This riff ain't hip or square
Well done or rare
May end up one more weight to bear
But this song could well be
A reason to see - that
Without you there's no point to . . . this song
At one point Eric Idle answers: "Could be 'Sugar Pie Honey Bunch'? Naw! Sounds more like 'Rescue Me!'"