Marvin Gaye's Family Is Requesting $3.4 Million from Robin Thicke, Pharrell and T.I.

[marv2]

They are not playing around!

Video and story here :

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/marvin-gayes-family-requesting-34-million-robin-thicke/story?id=36246448

[soulster]

The little lazy-ass money-grubbers! Their father would have never approved of their activities.

[Cosmic Truth]

I admit what I know about business could be written on the back of an acid tab, but as soon as I heard Blurred Line's the first thing I thought was that they had sampled Got To Give It Up.

For an artist to copy another song, but make some slight differences so as to avoid having to pay out any money to the songwriters, seems tantamount to stealing the originals work, in my layman's opinion.

I hope the Gaye family get a payout. It may stop modern artists just copying other artists work. If Thicke had sampled GTGIU he would have had to pay money for it, but he can copy the song, and pay nothing? That doesn't seem right to me.

[theboyfromxtown]

I watched the video...and it carried on to comments from Stevie Wonder who agrees it's not the same song. Whoops!

[theboyfromxtown]

The little lazy-ass money-grubbers! Their father would have never approved of their activities.

It does seem that way to me too. Maybe it's the way that the media portray the story.

[reese]

When cases like this are tried, do they get musical experts to judge? Or do they just go to a normal jury pool? Myself, when I heard BLURRED LINES, I was certainly reminded of GOT TO GIVE IT UP, but IMO, the melodies are totally different.

[marv2]

The little lazy-ass money-grubbers! Their father would have never approved of their activities.


Are you saying that because they are Black?

[marv2]

It does seem that way to me too. Maybe it's the way that the media portray the story.

Yes because we all know that the Gaye Children are not the first to either receive an inheritance from a prominent, deceased parent, nor the first to sue as the estate of a deceased wealthy parent. I think some people are acting as if they are doing something wrong because they are Black. The same way Republicans try to give the impression that only black Americans receive social assistance in the US.

[luke]

Totally agree Cosmic. I thought it was Got to Give It Up rip off from day one. Scary what some people say about the family. If my Dad had written it I'd fight like hell too! They are lazy because the court agreed with them and they want lawyers fees?? Something "weird "going on here.

[marv2]

I admit what I know about business could be written on the back of an acid tab, but as soon as I heard Blurred Line's the first thing I thought was that they had sampled Got To Give It Up.

For an artist to copy another song, but make some slight differences so as to avoid having to pay out any money to the songwriters, seems tantamount to stealing the originals work, in my layman's opinion.

I hope the Gaye family get a payout. It may stop modern artists just copying other artists work. If Thicke had sampled GTGIU he would have had to pay money for it, but he can copy the song, and pay nothing? That doesn't seem right to me.

Totally agree Cosmic TRUTH!

[marybrewster]

I think it's safe to say that "Blurred Lines" perhaps was inspired by "GTGIU", but truthfully, I really don't see how it is a direct copy.

If anything, the Gaye Family should be grateful that this has brought Marvin and some of his music back to the spotlight.

If this truly is the case, I'd say that Diana Ross should be taking Beyonce' to court over "Dreamgirls". You can't tell me that wasn't a direct ripoff. Fortunately Miss Diana had the class to laugh it off and express her thankfulness that she has been able to pave the way for artists like Bey.

At any rate, will the Gaye Family ever settle down over this? "BL" is several years old now.

[marv2]

I think it's safe to say that "Blurred Lines" perhaps was inspired by "GTGIU", but truthfully, I really don't see how it is a direct copy.

If anything, the Gaye Family should be grateful that this has brought Marvin and some of his music back to the spotlight.

If this truly is the case, I'd say that Diana Ross should be taking Beyonce' to court over "Dreamgirls". You can't tell me that wasn't a direct ripoff. Fortunately Miss Diana had the class to laugh it off and express her thankfulness that she has been able to pave the way for artists like Bey.

At any rate, will the Gaye Family ever settle down over this? "BL" is several years old now.

Marvin Gaye's music has never left the spotlight here in America.

Diana Ross has no grounds to sue Beyonce in that the character Beyonce played in the film "Dreamgirls" was not someone that came off as a nasty bitch [[so she could not have possibly been playing a Diana Ross like character). The story of Dreamgirls was more aligned with the life story of Florence Ballard.

No one is claiming that "Blurred Lines" is a direct ripoff of "Got to Give It Up", but apparently many people had the same experience I had when I first heard it and that is I immediately thought of Marvin's "Got to Give It Up"!

All of this could have been avoided had Robin Thicke, Pharrell Williams and TI acknowledge the influence and cut the Gaye Estate in on some of the profits.

[soulster]

I admit what I know about business could be written on the back of an acid tab, but as soon as I heard Blurred Line's the first thing I thought was that they had sampled Got To Give It Up.

For an artist to copy another song, but make some slight differences so as to avoid having to pay out any money to the songwriters, seems tantamount to stealing the originals work, in my layman's opinion.

I hope the Gaye family get a payout. It may stop modern artists just copying other artists work. If Thicke had sampled GTGIU he would have had to pay money for it, but he can copy the song, and pay nothing? That doesn't seem right to me.

But, they already won a lawsuit over this, and was awarded damages. The kids are just double-dipping now.

[soulster]

Are you saying that because they are Black? I AM Black. What's your point?

[marv2]

I AM Black. What's your point?

My point is that I NEVER hear people criticize and call white folk "little lazy-ass money-grubbers! .." as you called the Gaye Children in post #2 above. Most of the wealth in this and other countries is accumulated by inheritance and it is usually by white families.

In this rare case, the Gaye family can sue to protect the work of their deceased father and their own interests, yet they get called names? If I understand you correctly, the only financial gain a black person gets in this miserable World should only be by the sweat of their brow? Other than that, they do not deserve anything [[whether they have a legal right or not? ) Help me understand what you mean.

[Roberta75]

My point is that I NEVER hear people criticize and call white folk "little lazy-ass money-grubbers! .." as you called the Gaye Children in post #2 above. Most of the wealth in this and other countries is accumulated by inheritance and it is usually by white families. .


Oh I dont know for starters id say all the the Kardashians and Honey Boo Boos Mom and Jon Gosselin and Linda Tripp and Sarah Palins kids are all lazy-a** money-grubbers. Theres a ton more I could mention.

[jobeterob]

I remember Ralph said he thought this case was a crock. But other people think it had some merit.

I agree with Mary Brewster. If you can use Supremes album covers in Dreamgirls that were exact copies and at least use the outline of the Supremes story, defame Berry Gordy, and pay nothing but apologize ~ and give nothing to Florence Ballard, nothing to Mary Wilson, nothing to Cindy Birdsong ~ is Blurred Lines closer to Got To Give It Up than that?

It would be interesting to hear about the jobs of the children of some of the other people that came out of Motown ~ other than Diana Ross's. I'm sure some of them have parental money to live off of and are good souls, but I'm sure many of them don't have any parental money at all to live off of.

[luke]

Well said posts Marv. !! And lol per Ross character. rofl

[Roberta75]

Well said posts Marv. !! And lol per Ross character. rofl

Yeah encourage him to call women bitches and lol Luke. Real classy.

[soulster]

My point is that I NEVER hear people criticize and call white folk "little lazy-ass money-grubbers! .." as you called the Gaye Children in post #2 above. Most of the wealth in this and other countries is accumulated by inheritance and it is usually by white families.

Geez! Neither this situation, or my comment, has anything to do with race. You are the only one trying to insert it into the discussion.


In this rare case, the Gaye family can sue to protect the work of their deceased father and their own interests, yet they get called names?

That's right! They are opportunists. They already won their lawsuit, but they are getting greedy.


Oh I dont know for starters id say all the the Kardashians and Honey Boo Boos Mom and Jon Gosselin and Linda Tripp and Sarah Palins kids are all lazy-a** money-grubbers. Theres a ton more I could mention.

Thank you! And, Sarah Palin is the worst opportunist. And, last I checked, she's lilly-white!

[marv2]

Geez! Neither this situation, or my comment, has anything to do with race. You are the only one trying to insert it into the discussion.
Marv2
In this rare case, the Gaye family can sue to protect the work of their deceased father and their own interests, yet they get called names?

Soulster

That's right! They are opportunists. They already won their lawsuit, but they are getting greedy.



Thank you! And, Sarah Palin is the worst opportunist. And, last I checked, she's lilly-white![/QUOTE]

Marv2
The Gaye's are opportunists but the Rothchilds aren't?

[blackguy69]

All right kids lets settle down

[luke]

Do people know the Gaye children? If not how can they be called names? What kid wouldn't fight for their Dads legacy?? Based on the comments made, Marvs make perfects sense. Everyone here should be offended..

[soulster]

Marv2
The Gaye's are opportunists but the Rothchilds aren't? You keep trying to deflect the issue at hand by introducing red herrings and strawman arguments. Stay focused on the Gaye children.

[soulster]

All right kids lets settle down

Don't call me a kid! I'm not arguing. I'm trying to keep the discussion from being deflected by elements that have nothing to do with the topic at hand.

[midnightman]

Ah mercy mercy me...

[REDHOT]

Very good point Marv

[phil]

During the first trial I remember having read a very detailed article about the evident differences between these two songs. Unfortunately I can't find it now, however here is another musicologist's point of view : http://onpoint.wbur.org/2015/03/18/another-musicologists-take-on-blurred-lines

For me GREED is the point though marv is right when he wrote "All of this could have been avoided had Robin Thicke, Pharrell Williams and TI acknowledge the influence and cut the Gaye Estate in on some of the profits. "

[midnightman]

To be honest, Pharrell and Robin have been the greedy ones in this case. The Gaye family tried reaching a settlement. What do Pharrell and Robin do? Sue them first. So all is fair in love and war. *shrug*

As for Stevie, he was best to say "no comment" on the matter since it didn't concern him despite his close friendship with Marvin...

[luke]

Agreed. And doesn't Thicke say he was out of it on drugs in the studio? So how he can testify to anything??

[jobeterob]

I don't follow this case closely, but I've also never seen any evidence of greed other than the filing of the claim. And probably anyone would have filed the claim unless they have millions of dollars and don't care, particularly when many people start acknowledging some kind of similarity.

Many people seem to think that money has rolled into anyone that has had a hit record. We need to remember that 25 years ago people stopped paying for music, CD sales fell astronomically, music companies unloaded employees and consolidated. Some of these artists can't go out and get gigs and make money at concerts. Lots of money is not pouring in for everyone.

[midnightman]

Agreed. And doesn't Thicke say he was out of it on drugs in the studio? So how he can testify to anything??

Yeah he kept claiming he was stoned on Vicodin and alcohol...lol

[marv2]

Yeah he kept claiming he was stoned on Vicodin and alcohol...lol

That is exactly what he claimed in court to deflect all blame for the song onto Pharrell. With friends like that...................

[midnightman]

^ Yeah that was a very sh*tty way on ratting on your friend to try to avoid taking responsibility...

[soulster]

^ Yeah that was a very sh*tty way on ratting on your friend to try to avoid taking responsibility...
But, that's what drug addicts do. They can't be trusted. I can't see anyone wanting to work with him again.

[marv2]

But, that's what drug addicts do. They can't be trusted. I can't see anyone wanting to work with him again.

Both of his parents are good people with good reputations in the industry. What happened to him? Who knows.

[midnightman]

^ He got involved with the drug culture of the hip-hop industry [[from what I heard) so word got around that he was on "everything".

[marv2]

^ He got involved with the drug culture of the hip-hop industry [[from what I heard) so word got around that he was on "everything".

Oh so he's one of those kind of guys.

[soulster]

^ He got involved with the drug culture of the hip-hop industry [[from what I heard) so word got around that he was on "everything".

Just to be sure, drug culture isn't exclusive to the hip-hop community.

[alexstassi]

I agree when I first heard Blurred Lines, I thought "Got to give it up"... but it's not a sample... they've recreated a groove.... I think its a great homage to Marvin and it turned a lot of uneducated youngsters to check out Marvin Gaye.... Cee-Lo's "Bright lights big city" sounds like Billie Jean... why haven't MJ's estate sued him.... cos it wasn't as massive a hit as Blurred Lines?? ...
Bill Withers hit the nail on the head and said "if that's the case the whole of Rock n Roll owes Chuck Berry"

[TheMotownManiac]

I'm not an expert on this topic - Blurred Lines is certainly derivative of Marvin's song, but the legalities I'll leave to the courts. I am disappointed that race was brought up into this thread. Since when did greed and opportunism become associated with skin color? I'm white. I know a lot more white people than black. It's my experience that there are a lot of "white trash" welfare abusers than black. I don't know anyone who thinks blacks are lazy etc. This is 2016 and most folk understand that ignorance and racial stereotyping go hand in hand with the uneducated and ill informed. I live in Southern Illinois and know of a family with 13 "siblings". I use quotations because some are not really siblings, but aunts and uncles. I kid you not. This white family teaches their kids to abuse the system by trying to get on disability, food stamps, welfare at age 16 and even get the state to pay them 2400 per month as caregivers to other family members. None of them need disability or care givers. Several of the mothers do not send their kids to school on Tues & Thurs because bingo begins at 1 and the bus doesn't get the kids home until 2:45. This is 2016 and we have learned that same sex marriage means nothing to society, racial stereotypes are hardly accurate and that climate change is happening. We are evolving as a society. Let's evolve here and not play the race card so quickly.

[midnightman]

Just to be sure, drug culture isn't exclusive to the hip-hop community.

I know. I shouldn't have said that. I thought of editing but it was getting late.

[midnightman]

^^ I understand, MotownManiac, but at the same time though, I still think that they shouldn't have done what they did initially [[sue them first). Maybe if that didn't happen, we would've gotten a different post than this.

[TheMotownManiac]

I agree with you 10000% I didn't take offense at your comment but more at Marv taking it where he did. Ican see he is sensitive about it and I get it totally, but this forum isn't about that and, quite frankly, if the comment had been intended to be racial, no one would cop to it anyway - so.........

[marv2]

I agree with you 10000% I didn't take offense at your comment but more at Marv taking it where he did. Ican see he is sensitive about it and I get it totally, but this forum isn't about that and, quite frankly, if the comment had been intended to be racial, no one would cop to it anyway - so.........

I really do not care if you are offended. That was not my intent and I would ask the exact same question again. If anything that could be viewed as offensive it would be calling people exercising their rights under the law "money grubbing". I believe most members here understood my question in the context in which it was asked!

[Roberta75]

I really do not care if you are offended. That was not my intent and I would ask the exact same question again. If anything that could be viewed as offensive it would be calling people exercising their rights under the law "money grubbing". I believe most members here understood my question in the context in which it was asked!

You also made the following false statement.


http://soulfuldetroit.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by marv2 http://soulfuldetroit.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png [[http://soulfuldetroit.com/showthread.php?p=321295#post321295)
My point is that I NEVER hear people criticize and call white folk "little lazy-ass money-grubbers! .." as you called the Gaye Children in post #2 above. Most of the wealth in this and other countries is accumulated by inheritance and it is usually by white families.



and I went on to tell you that the Kardashians and Honey Boo Boos Mom and Jon Gosselin and Linda Tripp and Sarah Palins kids are all lazy-a** money-grubbers.

Race had had nothing to do with soulster calling the Gaye children lazy a** money-grubbers. You brought race into it.

[nathanj06]

Wasn't this already settled and now they want more? Wasn't Marvin Gaye's name added to the songwriter credits? This has always sounded like a crock from the get go. How many songs sound alike over the last 50 years but yet you hear nothing about it unless it becomes a massive hit. What else but greed would Gaye's family file another suit? Let's not forget the George Harrison, My Sweet Lord / He's So Fine debacle which was not officially settled until March 1998 with George winding up owning the song. He claimed his inspiration came from Oh Happy Day by the Edwin Hawkins Singers. Regardless, people will resort to any means to sue someone for money. If it wasn't a hit you won't hear a thing about it but go back to the 50s & 60s and there's plenty of them including up until today which is even worse. The only color connected to this is complete green GREED.

[phil]

The only color connected to this is complete green GREED.

I agree Marv.

[soulster]

Wasn't this already settled and now they want more? Wasn't Marvin Gaye's name added to the songwriter credits? This has always sounded like a crock from the get go. How many songs sound alike over the last 50 years but yet you hear nothing about it unless it becomes a massive hit. What else but greed would Gaye's family file another suit? Let's not forget the George Harrison, My Sweet Lord / He's So Fine debacle which was not officially settled until March 1998 with George winding up owning the song. He claimed his inspiration came from Oh Happy Day by the Edwin Hawkins Singers. Regardless, people will resort to any means to sue someone for money. If it wasn't a hit you won't hear a thing about it but go back to the 50s & 60s and there's plenty of them including up until today which is even worse. The only color connected to this is complete green GREED.

That's exactly my point! Well stated!

[TheMotownManiac]

MOST money grubbers do it lawfully - that doesn't make greed morally acceptable. And yes, I do believe most members here understood your intention to suggest the reason these people are looked at as greedy is because they are black and I think most would say it has nothing to do with color. Greed knows no racial boundaries. It's a great weay to throw the thread onto another track by suggesting comments are racially motivated. Let's stick to the subject. '

I really do not care if you are offended. That was not my intent and I would ask the exact same question again. If anything that could be viewed as offensive it would be calling people exercising their rights under the law "money grubbing". I believe most members here understood my question in the context in which it was asked!

[soulster]

MOST money grubbers do it lawfully - that doesn't make greed morally acceptable. And yes, I do believe most members here understood your intention to suggest the reason these people are looked at as greedy is because they are black and I think most would say it has nothing to do with color. Greed knows no racial boundaries. It's a great weay to throw the thread onto another track by suggesting comments are racially motivated. Let's stick to the subject. '

Thank you!

[Roberta75]

MOST money grubbers do it lawfully - that doesn't make greed morally acceptable. And yes, I do believe most members here understood your intention to suggest the reason these people are looked at as greedy is because they are black and I think most would say it has nothing to do with color. Greed knows no racial boundaries. It's a great weay to throw the thread onto another track by suggesting comments are racially motivated. Let's stick to the subject. '

Preach themotownmaniacs preach.

[marv2]

I agree Marv.

Thanks Phil !

[jobeterob]

I always thought it was noteworthy that Ralph, who has some musical experience, thought the initial decision was not a good one.