Jury Agrees "Blurred Lines" - Awards Gaye Family

**Ryon6** · 03-10-2015, 05:57 PM

I haven't read the article yet but here it is -

http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/m...dict/24492431/

**marv2** · 03-10-2015, 06:01 PM

I'm just saying'/

**theboyfromxtown** · 03-10-2015, 06:10 PM

Wow.

I remember a SDF posting which showed that Stevie Wonder had suggested to the Gaye family that they drop the case cos it was only the lawyers that would win. Maybe that is still the case!

Thanks for posting.

**theboyfromxtown** · 03-10-2015, 06:14 PM

**jobeterob** · 03-10-2015, 06:22 PM

http://variety.com/2015/music/news/b...ly-1201450117/

**midnightman** · 03-10-2015, 06:46 PM

$7.4 million. Wonder how much would be split, but hopefully whatever monies the Gaye family receives, they spend it wisely.

**theboyfromxtown** · 03-10-2015, 06:46 PM

Does anyone remember a song by Bunny Sigler that was similar to Got To Give It Up.

**MotownSteve** · 03-10-2015, 06:59 PM

Score one for the good guys!

**Guy** · 03-10-2015, 07:38 PM

Glad to hear it. I hope the verdict includes that Gaye will henceforth be listed as a co-writer on the song so that his estate gets future royalties. I felt very bad about this one. The song is a blatant rip-off of "Got To Give It Up." Pharrell doesn't write and cannot read music, he's known for his creative use of samples. It seemed a ridiculous stretch that he 'composed' a song so similar to GTGIU but did not acknwledge its influence. He seems like a good guy and is talented at what he does. This charade allowed Robin Thicke to throw Pharrell under the bus and soil Pharrell's reputation as a writer/producer. I also regret that they did not give Gaye -- an iconic, legendary artist -- the due respect of legal attribution before this had to go all the way to trial.

**midnightman** · 03-10-2015, 07:59 PM

Well if Robin's career wasn't already destroyed by now, it's destroyed for good with this ruling. Pharrell's got struck a blow too.

**luke** · 03-10-2015, 08:28 PM

Simply wonderful! Nona Gaye very poignant! The truth shall set you free!

**arr&bee** · 03-10-2015, 08:32 PM

Heck,even[helen keller]could've heard that it was a rip off.

**soulster** · 03-10-2015, 10:06 PM

Originally Posted by theboyfromxtown

Damn. Whomever made this video had the Marvin Gaye track pitched down.

**soulster** · 03-10-2015, 10:14 PM

Originally Posted by Guy

Glad to hear it. I hope the verdict includes that Gaye will henceforth be listed as a co-writer on the song so that his estate gets future royalties. I felt very bad about this one. The song is a blatant rip-off of "Got To Give It Up." Pharrell doesn't write and cannot read music, he's known for his creative use of samples. It seemed a ridiculous stretch that he 'composed' a song so similar to GTGIU but did not acknwledge its influence. He seems like a good guy and is talented at what he does. This charade allowed Robin Thicke to throw Pharrell under the bus and soil Pharrell's reputation as a writer/producer. I also regret that they did not give Gaye -- an iconic, legendary artist -- the due respect of legal attribution before this had to go all the way to trial.

First: I don't know about Thicke, but Williams can recover from this. I only hope Alan Thicke, his father, can help Robin with some tax relief if he screws up on his taxes.

Second: You would be surprised to find out just how many famous musical stars cannot read or write music, and barely play an instrument. Not even Paul McCartney can read or write music. So, that's a non-issue.

Third: This should send a chill down all musicians to check and get permission before attempting to release a song that sounds too much like another artist's song. But, it also stifles creativity. The odds are good that something someone creates will sound like someone else's song.

Here's the oddest twist about "Got To Give It Up". Marvin didn't create the song or recording. he did the scratch lyrics that form the final master, but he did not create the song. The engineer Art Stewart did.

**Guy** · 03-11-2015, 12:56 AM

Second: You would be surprised to find out just how many famous musical stars cannot read or write music, and barely play an instrument. Not even Paul McCartney can read or write music. So, that's a non-issue.

　
It wasn't a non-issue here. Pharrell preemptively sued the Gaye estate on the grounds that he composed a song that did not infringe the copyright of "Got To Give It Up." However, since he can't read or write music, he was unable to adequately distinguish his process or product from the infringed work, and apparently, failed to convince a jury that he was capable of creating an original composition that did not borrow from Gaye's song.

Third: This should send a chill down all musicians to check and get permission before attempting to release a song that sounds too much like another artist's song. But, it also stifles creativity. The odds are good that something someone creates will sound like someone else's song.

I respectfully disagree that this will stifle creativity. If anything it will heighten it. Kanye West is masterful and creative in his use of samples. So is Swizz Beatz. Pharrell, too, has created music that obviously references Prince, James Brown and Michael Jackson but not so closely that he has been accused of infringement. The issue is simply proper attribution of sampled work. Or to create something sufficiently original and distinctive. Most songs reference or recall prior songs but "Blurred Lines" is a sloppy retread of "Got To Give It Up." It may have been a hit but it is far from Pharrell's best work.

**edafan** · 03-11-2015, 10:17 AM

Good for the Gaye's

edafan

**motony** · 03-11-2015, 12:54 PM

the amazing thing to me is that $7.4 million is probably more money that Marvin Gaye ever received in total royalties from Motown.

**GrtGzu** · 03-11-2015, 01:14 PM

Hmm.....Wonder if Pharrell is still "Happy" now?

And how's that "room without a roof" holdin' up?....

**marv2** · 03-11-2015, 07:51 PM

Originally Posted by MotownSteve

Score one for the good guys!

Hear! Hear! I am very happy for them!

**daddyacey** · 03-12-2015, 01:06 AM

Now .........what about Love After War??

**daddyacey** · 03-12-2015, 01:25 AM

Now .........what about Love After War??

**soulster** · 03-12-2015, 02:25 AM

Originally Posted by marv2

Hear! Hear! I am very happy for them!

This will be appealed. You know that!

I just wonder how much of this "Happy" feeling for the verdict around here is simply hatred for Robin Thicke, or today's music, and if any of you can be objective.

**phil** · 03-12-2015, 04:55 AM

Originally Posted by soulster

This will be appealed.

And rightly. Take a look at this very interesting link, an article from Joe Bennett. To me it makes sense : http://joebennett.net/2014/02/01/did...m-marvin-gaye/

**calvin** · 03-12-2015, 07:56 AM

Pharrell Williams and Robin Thicke deliberately created a similar sound and style. But this is common, it's just that artists usually choose a current or recent hit when they do this. Williams and Thicke chose a song that is nearly 40 years old, which makes it stand out. In my opinion [[for whatever it's worth - not much!) it's not the same song [[melody, etc) at all, the jury was wrong.

**sansradio** · 03-12-2015, 09:40 AM

Excellent, thought-provoking article, phil. And now it sounds like the Gayes are reaching a bit with this bombshell:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/after-bl...sten-to-happy/

**dvus7** · 03-12-2015, 10:05 AM

So this begs the question.....HOW MUCH DOES JOBETE RECEIVE???LOL!!

**ralpht** · 03-12-2015, 10:35 AM

I'm no fan of Thicke, but I think he and Pharrell were hosed on that decision.

**jobeterob** · 03-12-2015, 11:18 AM

Haven't been reading this but..............all of this is yet subject to appeal and will go on for a few years I bet.

The lawyers will rip them hard on this one for fees.

And if the decision stands, Jobete or some publishing company will get something.

**kenneth** · 03-12-2015, 01:35 PM

I think "Blurred Lines" is a decent song and fun to listen to, but it wears thin quickly. I think this is because it is, at its essence, an imitation. It's like a copy of a famous painting - you can enjoy it but it isn't like seeing the real thing. It's hard to explain but to me, it's just too derivative and even though Thicke has a decent voice it always sounds like he's posing, trying to sound Black, or trying to sound cool, or something. There's just no "there" there as they say.

**soulster** · 03-12-2015, 01:39 PM

Originally Posted by phil

And rightly. Take a look at this very interesting link, an article from Joe Bennett. To me it makes sense : http://joebennett.net/2014/02/01/did...m-marvin-gaye/

At last: a sensible explaination of the issue.

**soulster** · 03-12-2015, 01:44 PM

Originally Posted by sansradio

Excellent, thought-provoking article, phil. And now it sounds like the Gayes are reaching a bit with this bombshell:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/after-bl...sten-to-happy/

OMG! If anything, Gaye's children, and Jan, are tarnishing his legacy, not Pharrell Williams.

**kenneth** · 03-12-2015, 01:55 PM

Originally Posted by jobeterob

Haven't been reading this but..............all of this is yet subject to appeal and will go on for a few years I bet.

The lawyers will rip them hard on this one for fees.

And if the decision stands, Jobete or some publishing company will get something.

Jobeterob, did you find it strange that Thicke et. al went in to Court first for some sort of Declaratory Judgment that they hadn't infringed on the Gaye song? Who does that? Isn't that like daring someone to sue you? I didn't think Courts usually did Declaratory Judgments of this type to begin with...?

**soulster** · 03-12-2015, 01:56 PM

Other thoughts from this: The talented musician/writer/singer Robin Thicke wanted to make a name for himself in R&B music. For many years, he was accepted as a good R&B singer, and made some good albums, but superstardom, and a hit recording eluded him. So, he teams up with record producer/writer Pharrell Williams during a bad time in his life as a substance abuser, and winds up with a hit single that gives him the runaway success he had always wanted. However, his personal life was in shambles, as he was doing drugs, drinking, and messing around on his wife. He slipped up in a very public way, and his fifteen minutes was over. His wife left him with the children, and he publicly humiliated himself trying to get her back with a new album. Again, the irony was that "Paula" was a great album, but it bombed, and did nothing to keep his marriage. And, now this.

I do not hate the guy. There are worse men out there. Even though he screwed up his own life, I feel bad for him, and wish him the best of luck.

I also think Pharrell Williams will keep rolling along, but will be wary of working with others again. As successful as his last album was, in my opinion, it just wasn't that good. It sounds like it was quickly thrown together to capitalize on the success of "Happy".

I wish both men the best of luck, however this case turns out after the appeals, and the Gaye children overreaching for more money.

I do not know anything about T.I..

**kenneth** · 03-12-2015, 02:03 PM

Soulster, are the Pharrell solo albums better than his collaborations or productions on other singers?

**jobeterob** · 03-12-2015, 02:18 PM

Originally Posted by kenneth

Jobeterob, did you find it strange that Thicke et. al went in to Court first for some sort of Declaratory Judgment that they hadn't infringed on the Gaye song? Who does that? Isn't that like daring someone to sue you? I didn't think Courts usually did Declaratory Judgments of this type to begin with...?

I did and do find it very strange.

It was a very strange idea.

This seems to be an area of the law which is developing and which is quite complicated. It also seems to be an area which would be difficult for Judges and Juries to get a good understanding of.

**kenneth** · 03-12-2015, 02:21 PM

Originally Posted by jobeterob

I did and do find it very strange.

It was a very strange idea.

This seems to be an area of the law which is developing and which is quite complicated. It also seems to be an area which would be difficult for Judges and Juries to get a good understanding of.

Thanks for your thoughts, Counselor.

**midnightman** · 03-12-2015, 11:58 PM

Just in case y'all were wondering if an appeal was in the cards, Howard King said Pharrell is up to challenge this.

**midnightman** · 03-13-2015, 12:01 AM

Originally Posted by soulster

OMG! If anything, Gaye's children, and Jan, are tarnishing his legacy, not Pharrell Williams.

Marvin's legacy is fine. The Gaye children and Jan would be tarnishing themselves, not Marvin. Pharrell and Robin weren't tarnishing it either but they should've kept their stories straight.

**soulster** · 03-13-2015, 01:43 AM

It appears that most of the musical community is very upset over this verdict. You have a bunch of laymen who don't understand the technical aspects of music. That, and Pharrell Williams and Thicke put on a lousy defense.

**daddyacey** · 03-13-2015, 03:20 AM

Thick started off playing a sort of "Rock?/Pop?" sound. They were so so. Then he went into R&B with a Curtis flavored track ,using the studio players used on Michael Jacksons "Thriller" sessions . to give it a "authentic sound". That made him some money and a R&B audience took notice. 21st century Blue Eyed Soul. He continued to copy the styles of Curtis, Marvin ,Michael and Prince , while arrogantly claiming that he composed in the spirit of but did not copy those that influenced him. Claimed he was great and created something new. Didn't show any respect for the ARTISTS of the genre. Take for example R. Kelly. Emulator Supreme. He can emulate Jackie , Otis , Michael and Sly. And admits to the fact ,that he is highly respectful of them artistically and is using what he learned from them to express his vision. Jam and Lewis let you know that Prince who is a product of J.B. ,Sly , Motown etc , is the basis for them , and they have built on them , added to the sound , the genre. Never claimed to create something new and you can hear past greats in all their music. Thick just came off disrespectful to me .

**kenneth** · 03-13-2015, 03:56 AM

Remember the James Brown song "Hot [[I Need to be Loved, Loved, Loved)?" It totally copied the riff from David Bowie's "Fame," within a year after "Fame" came out. Yet there was never any lawsuit by Bowie over it. Strange...wonder if Bowie was just flattered that the Godfather of Soul would use his guitar lick and build a different song around it. But "Hot" was as much like "Fame" as "Blurred Lines" was to "Got to Give it Up."

**Guy** · 03-13-2015, 05:53 PM

I still think what played to the jury was Pharrell Williams' inability to give a sufficient account of his creative process. The songs are so similar it must have appeared to a reasonable person that Pharrell copied "Got To Give It Up." But if I understand correctly, the legal minds are saying that because "Blurred Lines" is not a note-for-note copy of any part of "Got To Give It Up" it is not an infringing work. Perhaps, this is not a matter that can be properly decided by a jury of non-musicians.

I hope it settles before an appeal is filed. It seems a shame that the parties cannot reach an amicable resolution, just out of respect for the Gaye artistic legacy. To my ears, the Sam Smith song sounded nothing like the Tom Petty song but they reached an instant settlement. I am sympathetic to the Gaye family because this whole lawsuit felt disrespectful.

**jobeterob** · 03-13-2015, 07:55 PM

One of these cases will need to be appealed to provide some guidance for everyone. Sometimes, on a matter of principle, an appeal is the proper way to go even if it drags the matter on for 5 or 10 years and blows legal fees for all parties through the roof.

I am not clear enough on exactly what happened here but if Thicke/Pharrell or someone advising them STARTED the action asking for a declaration, I think that was very misguided.

But there also appear to be musical matters at stake. I notice musical people like Ralph questioning the result.

So a full airing before a judge who is presented with musical expertise and legal issues might not be a bad thing.

**midnightman** · 03-13-2015, 10:36 PM

I hope one day I read that they have settled matters in a way that would satisfy all parties should an appeal go through.

supremester · 03-14-2015, 09:27 PM

I'm with you on that, Ralph. I'm sure it'll get overturned on appeal now that they know how to fight this BS. I'm happy Marvin's family would get $$$, but not at the expense of this weak claim. I've heard much. much worse than this that never went anywhere. Once Thicke's attys start bringing musicians in for their opinions - the non-industry peeps will have a better view of the situation. I love Marvin just as much now as ever, but this isn't right and it won't stand.

I saw Thicke open for Jennifer Hudson a few years ago, he was pretty good.

Originally Posted by ralpht

I'm no fan of Thicke, but I think he and Pharrell were hosed on that decision.

**bradsupremes** · 03-14-2015, 11:10 PM

Are the Gaye's actually considering going after Pharrell's "Happy?" Seriously?! Marvin had nothing to do with the writing or production of "Ain't That Peculiar" other than singing the lead vocal. How can they possibly have a case? Did "Happy" take away from the sales of "Ain't That Peculiar?" "Blurred Lines" was one thing, but this is ridiculous.

Crystaledwards · 03-14-2015, 11:28 PM

Originally Posted by ralpht

I'm no fan of Thicke, but I think he and Pharrell were hosed on that decision.

This verdict has effectively blurred the lines between protectable elements of a musicians creativity and musical elements that inspire. The unfortunate ruling also makes it nearly impossible for any artist to write a song completely free of the "influence" of earlier performers.

Thankfully, this decision is being appealed.

CE

**midnightman** · 03-15-2015, 06:52 PM

Originally Posted by bradsupremes

Are the Gaye's actually considering going after Pharrell's "Happy?" Seriously?! Marvin had nothing to do with the writing or production of "Ain't That Peculiar" other than singing the lead vocal. How can they possibly have a case? Did "Happy" take away from the sales of "Ain't That Peculiar?" "Blurred Lines" was one thing, but this is ridiculous.

Funny thing is as I keep watching that Nona and 'em thought the song was familiar, I realized how silly the BL verdict was. So I for one am happy it's being appealed. Hearing the songs again, no one ripped anyone off. I do think the verdict was due to probably personal feelings they had towards Robin Thicke and Pharrell. This ruling may be thrown out on a technicality as well. Then maybe once that happens, a settlement of some sort can happen and both sides can move on. The Gaye family have turned things into a circus.

**Jerry Oz** · 03-15-2015, 07:24 PM

Originally Posted by soulster

OMG! If anything, Gaye's children, and Jan, are tarnishing his legacy, not Pharrell Williams.

Not so. 'Happy' is such a similar arrangement, it couldn't have been an accident. I've lost a lot of respect for Pharrell after listening to this. He clearly cribbed the music from 'Ain't That Peculiar'. He didn't even change the key. I'm not saying that the Marvin Gaye should be given credit but have a listen:

**midnightman** · 03-15-2015, 07:30 PM

^ I think what can be argued is Pharrell and a bunch of other modern day producers are just plain lazy. They can't come up with something "original" so they have to rely on the tried and true "borrowed" method. I'm surprised people were raising a stink about "Happy" being similar to "Peculiar" because the talk around online is "black" Twitter and "black" YouTube whining about Ed Sheeran's "Thinking Out Loud" sounding like "Let's Get It On", something Ed himself acknowledged in this video clip:

Like I said on Twitter, the only one who would fight it if he wanted to would be Smokey Robinson and Warren Moore since they wrote the song [[and Marv Tarplin's estate). Only royalties MG gets from Peculiar is artist royalties.