Marvin Gaye vs Robin Thicke/Pharrell, Has Begun In Court
Options
_Goldie_
Members, Moderators, Writer Posts: 30,349 Regulator
Legal proceedings finally got underway this week in what’s become one of the most contentious lawsuits in modern pop music. On Tuesday both Robin Thicke and Pharrell appeared in a Los Angeles court room, preparing testimony to rebut the allegation that their 2013 mega-hit “Blurred Lines” blatantly plagiarizes Marvin Gaye‘s 1977 classic “Got To Give It Up” [spoiler alert: Thicke already copped to Marvin’s influence in interviews.
My News LA reports that the late Motown singer’s daughter, Jannis Gaye, was expected to take the stand and testify against Thicke and Pharrell. “Blurred Lines,” the Gaye family asserts, goes beyond merely gesturing at “Got to Give it Up” and outright copies its rhythmic structure, bass lines, harmonic composition and vocal melodies. My News reports that an eight-person federal jury will decide if the Robin Thicke track does in fact steal from Gaye’s work, and if so, what amount of damages money is owed to the Gaye family.
As Billboard reports, yesterday’s testimony bordered on surreal when Robin Thicke busted out a keyboard in the courtroom and performed a live medley in hopes of showcasing his various influences and diluting the connection between the two specific songs. That medley included U2 – “With Or Without You”; The Beatles – “Let It Be”; Alphaville – “Forever Young”; Bob Marley – “No Woman No Cry” and Michael Jackson – “Man in the Mirror.”
But it gets stranger. The legal team representing Thicke and Williams has reportedly cited a copyright law that pre-dates “Got to Give it Up” and only grants a musician full ownership of their songs’ sheet music, rather than the recordings themselves. Meaning, of course, that the very simple written charts may be all that the Gaye family has claim to.
It’s worth recalling that the entire legal circus began, astonishingly, with Thicke and Pharrell suing the Gaye family for advance protection of “Blurred Lines” from exactly the kind of lawsuit that is now unfolding. At that time, the duo alleged that “Gaye defendants are claiming ownership of an entire genre, as opposed to a specific work.”
However, this week’s trial will continue until its jury reaches a verdict, and both legal teams have speculated that as much as $40 million could be paid to the Gaye family, should “Blurred Lines” ultimately be deemed to infringe on the Gaye Estate’s copyright. Are the songs in fact too similar? Did Thicke steal more than just vibe from Gaye’s classic track? You Decide.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXKghTAwFGU#t=89
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyDUC1LUXSU&feature=player_embedded
My News LA reports that the late Motown singer’s daughter, Jannis Gaye, was expected to take the stand and testify against Thicke and Pharrell. “Blurred Lines,” the Gaye family asserts, goes beyond merely gesturing at “Got to Give it Up” and outright copies its rhythmic structure, bass lines, harmonic composition and vocal melodies. My News reports that an eight-person federal jury will decide if the Robin Thicke track does in fact steal from Gaye’s work, and if so, what amount of damages money is owed to the Gaye family.
As Billboard reports, yesterday’s testimony bordered on surreal when Robin Thicke busted out a keyboard in the courtroom and performed a live medley in hopes of showcasing his various influences and diluting the connection between the two specific songs. That medley included U2 – “With Or Without You”; The Beatles – “Let It Be”; Alphaville – “Forever Young”; Bob Marley – “No Woman No Cry” and Michael Jackson – “Man in the Mirror.”
But it gets stranger. The legal team representing Thicke and Williams has reportedly cited a copyright law that pre-dates “Got to Give it Up” and only grants a musician full ownership of their songs’ sheet music, rather than the recordings themselves. Meaning, of course, that the very simple written charts may be all that the Gaye family has claim to.
It’s worth recalling that the entire legal circus began, astonishingly, with Thicke and Pharrell suing the Gaye family for advance protection of “Blurred Lines” from exactly the kind of lawsuit that is now unfolding. At that time, the duo alleged that “Gaye defendants are claiming ownership of an entire genre, as opposed to a specific work.”
However, this week’s trial will continue until its jury reaches a verdict, and both legal teams have speculated that as much as $40 million could be paid to the Gaye family, should “Blurred Lines” ultimately be deemed to infringe on the Gaye Estate’s copyright. Are the songs in fact too similar? Did Thicke steal more than just vibe from Gaye’s classic track? You Decide.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXKghTAwFGU#t=89https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyDUC1LUXSU&feature=player_embedded Comments
-
Add Williams name in there.
-
I can see the Jury nodding their head
The judge snappimg fingers
the prosecutor askin for authographs from both parties
-
All joke aside Pharell and Thickw betta not lose... not a good look imo
-
LEMZWYN_LANISTER wrote: »All joke aside Pharell and Thickw betta not lose... not a good look imo
The ? better lose. They blatantly ripped off the coolest dude of all time RIP TO THE LEGEND -
Will Munny wrote: »LEMZWYN_LANISTER wrote: »All joke aside Pharell and Thickw betta not lose... not a good look imo
The ? better lose. They blatantly ripped off the coolest dude of all time RIP TO THE LEGEND
Its not an easy case. Trufully speaking i really cannot peek sides in that thing...
Music is complicated nowadays. Its hard to decipher musical infrigment from inspiration.
Damn look at all the different sources Thick played!!!. Even if the result have a Marv ? strong flavor how will you prove he is lying ?
-
that ? disrespectful on Robin Thicke part imo
i remember i was listening to the Steve Harvey show one morning driving to work
and he say why dont you rip of them old white arist like the Bee Gees, Micheal Mcdonald etc lol -
Na that's wack, just make them pay for the sample and keep it moving.
-
LEMZWYN_LANISTER wrote: »Will Munny wrote: »LEMZWYN_LANISTER wrote: »All joke aside Pharell and Thickw betta not lose... not a good look imo
The ? better lose. They blatantly ripped off the coolest dude of all time RIP TO THE LEGEND
Its not an easy case. Trufully speaking i really cannot peek sides in that thing...
Music is complicated nowadays. Its hard to decipher musical infrigment from inspiration.
Damn look at all the different sources Thick played!!!. Even if the result have a Marv ? strong flavor how will you prove he is lying ?
Its the same ? song...
-
the dead giveaway to me was when thicke and pharrell sued the Gaye family for advance protection (guilty conscience)
in the OG thread, someone posted an interview where thicke admitted he wanted to remake the song in question - they better loseValentinez A. Kaiser wrote: »GQ interview from May 7, 2013
http://www.gq.com/blogs/the-feed/2013/05/robin-thicke-interview-blurred-lines-music-video-collaborating-with-2-chainz-and-kendrick-lamar-mercy.html#ixzz2cBLRWxUcGQ: What's the origin story behind your new single "Blurred Lines"?
Robin Thicke: Pharrell and I were in the studio and I told him that one of my favorite songs of all time was Marvin Gaye's "Got to Give It Up." I was like, "Damn, we should make something like that, something with that groove." Then he started playing a little something and we literally wrote the song in about a half hour and recorded it. The whole thing was done in a couple hours—normally, those are the best ones. Him and I would go back and forth where I'd sing a line and he'd be like, "Hey, hey, hey!" We started acting like we were two old men on a porch hollering at girls like, "Hey, where you going, girl? Come over here!" That's why, in the video, we're doing all these old men dances. It was great.
