Blurred Lines...........GUILTY!

They should have done right in the first place and given the family a cut.

I know this is a dangerous precedent, but u can't tell me Pharell didn't know he was copying the whole vibe of got to give it up.

I'm a big Marvin fan, so I know I'm biased.
 
Rekordhead said:
But you can't copyright a vibe
Click to expand...
Ya well the court just said otherwise.
"To demonstrate copyright infringement, Busch instead leaned on the musicologists, who testified of similarities in signature phrase, hook, keyboard-bass interplay, lyrics and theme of the songs.

I know its a badd precedent for musicians and it will be appealed, but this was a case where I was rolling with the Gaye family.
 
Last edited:
All Pharrell has to do is to keep appealing. He has enough money to legally outmaneuver Marvin Gaye's family. Keep the case in court until the family gives up. They will eventually settle for pennies on the dollar. That is what true rich and powerful people do. Donald Trump wouldn't pay. He would keep paying lawyers and have them appealing until the copyright of the song went into public domain. Fight until death + 70 years!
 
Last edited:
mwandishi said:
Ya well the court just said otherwise.
"To demonstrate copyright infringement, Busch instead leaned on the musicologists, who testified of similarities in signature phrase, hook, keyboard-bass interplay, lyrics and theme of the songs.

I know its a badd precedent for musicians and it will be appealed, but this was a case where I was rolling with the Gaye family.
Click to expand...
It's a very bad precedent. What's to stop everybody from suing everybody else because of similar styles, rhythm, arrangement, instrument selection, etc... It's not a sample, most definitley influenced by the song, but no sample non the less. At this rate every song on the radio could be up for lawsuit because of sounding similar to something else.
 
sets a horrible precedence and it reminds me of the movie idiocracy, where in the future everybody is really stupid. They got a jury of morons who don't know what music notes are. I'm sure we've all experienced that time where a friend will hear a song on the radio and say "that sounds like that other song" while we as musicians can clearly hear the differences. This jury is made up of those people who just hear the whole song and not the notes. A true jury of peers would be a jury of other musicians who would throw the case out without any deliberation. And they used Thicke's own words against him where he said he was going for a similar sound to that song. That's what influences are all about. Iggy Azalea wanted the "fancy" producers to use a DJ mustard sound. I bet DJ Mustard could now sue and use those words to say that fancy infringed on one of his songs. I just can't believe how stupid this case was from the beginning. Many songs sound alike because we take on influences while not infringing by making different melodies and using different notes.

And this quote is ridiculous
"To demonstrate copyright infringement, Busch instead leaned on the musicologists, who testified of similarities in signature phrase, hook, keyboard-bass interplay, lyrics and theme of the songs.

similarities are not infringement. And keyboard-bass interplay?? so we can't play a couple of instruments the way somebody else did? Hopefully they get an appeal and get a jury of intelligent people, though you can go on facebook and see in the comments that more and more people are idiots, which makes this countries jury process a bad idea.
 
Lol @ FPers worrying about using a sample no one outside their block would hear enough to "only make stuff from scratch". I've told you guys this type of thing happens for years. I've always used the Verve/Rolling Stones example.

I'm not saying it's right, but it's just as "right" as getting sued for a sample someone has to "unmangle" in front of a court full of people before they can hear the original. I'm sure the main reason they lost was because the jury was hating, alot of people grew to hate that song as it went into repetitive rotation.
 
Last edited:
That is some bullshit. Couldn't you technically sue for anything that falls within your genre as long as it comes first? So because it sounds like a song Marvin would've made it's not allowed?
 
mwandishi said:
Ya well the court just said otherwise.
"To demonstrate copyright infringement, Busch instead leaned on the musicologists, who testified of similarities in signature phrase, hook, keyboard-bass interplay, lyrics and theme of the songs.

I know its a badd precedent for musicians and it will be appealed, but this was a case where I was rolling with the Gaye family.
Click to expand...

I don't think you understand how serious this is. No one invented music, everything is a bite of something. Should Jimmy Nolen's family sue the hole world for that "chank" guitar? How bout those TSOP disco drums everyone's been biting for decades?

Marvin Gaye was going for that Toto vibe when he made "Sexual Healing" and the guy who wrote the lyrics got no credit whatsoever

For a while, Gaye had reassured Ritz that he would resolve the matter. But it eventually became clear to Ritz that his only recourse was to file a lawsuit against Gaye. "The straw that broke the camel's back was when I saw him at the hospital (to celebrate the birth of Gaye's brother Frankie's baby)," said Ritz. "He was curt and dismissive to me. That's when I knew he wasn't going to credit me on the song. Finally, after consulting with my agent and business friends, I initiated the suit. He was served the suit before one of his concerts."
Click to expand...
 
LMAO at the preset guy.

I do think this is a bit of a joke... But hey... We knew the industry was screwed a decade ago, right?

I completely disagree with everything I've read about the court case and it sounds like it should've been thrown out a long time ago. I'm a big fan of Marvin Gaye and the song in question, and there's no doubt there's similarities... But to sue for them is in my mind, ridiculous.

The amount of times, like others have pointed out, I've heard or friends have heard songs which SOUNDED like something else or reminded them of another artists style (no samples) is every other day.

Who's to decide if a song sounds like something else? A bunch of randoms who have no idea about music?

This is going to mean that in a few years there's going to be a court case where a rapper uses the same phrase as someone else and bam... Court case. I can see Drake already preparing to sue for the rappers that used YOLO in their songs.

But didn't something similar to this happen before? Didn't Gang Starr/DJ Premier get sued for using a sample in the same way as another artist? I think that got thrown out though.
 
At first I thought this whole case was "unfair", but after I compared the songs a couple of times, I can clearly here the "inspiration" from Marvin Gaye's song.

It is possible though that Pharrell was listening to the song, say a week prior to the studio session, and then unintentionally got inspired by it. At least this has happened to me a couple of times. I have found myself in this situation once where I figured I had almost copied something enterily from another song without the clear intention to do so.

Regardless, I think Pharrell should not let himself be in a situation like that, considering his rank.
 
beats.pro said:
At first I thought this whole case was "unfair", but after I compared the songs a couple of times, I can clearly here the "inspiration" from Marvin Gaye's song.

It is possible though that Pharrell was listening to the song, say a week prior to the studio session, and then unintentionally got inspired by it. At least this has happened to me a couple of times. I have found myself in this situation once where I figured I had almost copied something enterily from another song without the clear intention to do so.

Regardless, I think Pharrell should not let himself be in a situation like that, considering his rank.
Click to expand...

Before the case, there was no actual law to say he was infringing... So being "influenced" by a whole songs vibe has been been done a number of times. He didn't copy notes, he "copied" the drums vibe...

I'm going to start suing anyone who dresses like me.
 
next up is Chuck Berry's estate being sued by WC Handy's estate (or any one of a few hundred thousand artists from the early days of blues, ragtime and jazz) for ripping his use of arpeggiated chord basslines - that is essentially what bass-keyboard interplay will be taken to mean in any future lawsuits

the rest is just wrong

it is, perhaps, notable that this is probably the civil suit as Sony's payout to the Gaye family included a limitation on them bringing any more criminal suits in relation to these two songs or any other song in their father's catalogue and any other song past, present or future
 
Exclusivo said:
Before the case, there was no actual law to say he was infringing... So being "influenced" by a whole songs vibe has been been done a number of times. He didn't copy notes, he "copied" the drums vibe...

I'm going to start suing anyone who dresses like me.
Click to expand...

I do not think your comparison with how you dress is accurate. I would not compare the process of creating music (art) with the way someone dresses...I am pretty sure you won't lose in court (just kidding) :))

Moreover, it is not just the drums vibe he's copied. The bass line is also pretty similar, even if the notes are different, the vibe is the same.

Last but not least, do not forget these are all industry people and it is not just "being influenced" here in this case:

 
beats.pro said:
I do not think your comparison with how you dress is accurate. I would not compare the process of creating music (art) with the way someone dresses...I am pretty sure you won't lose in court (just kidding) :))

Moreover, it is not just the drums vibe he's copied. The bass line is also pretty similar, even if the notes are different, the vibe is the same
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was taking the mick. But I think it's just as ridiculous.

That's true about the bass line, but my point is... Where's the line? How far is it going to go?

I can guarantee Marvin Gaye has done something similar...

And the way I've seen the family acting in interviews and things, they seem to be wanting to destroy Mavins legacy for the paper they can get rather than extending it... So from day one, I was against it. Still am.

Great story I can think of on sampling:

J Dilla sampled Thomas Bangalter from Daft Punk for a Slum Village track (Raise It Up)... He didn't sue... He said they liked the track and wanted to remix a Slum Village record in return as Daft Punk.
 
Exclusivo said:
Yeah, I was taking the mick. But I think it's just as ridiculous.

That's true about the bass line, but my point is... Where's the line? How far is it going to go?

I can guarantee Marvin Gaye has done something similar...

And the way I've seen the family acting in interviews and things, they seem to be wanting to destroy Mavins legacy for the paper they can get rather than extending it... So from day one, I was against it. Still am.

Great story I can think of on sampling:

J Dilla sampled Thomas Bangalter from Daft Punk for a Slum Village track (Raise It Up)... He didn't sue... He said they liked the track and wanted to remix a Slum Village record in return as Daft Punk.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree with your point and what you are saying about Gaye's family.

There is really no clear line, I guess, which is why musicians sue each other - some win, others lose :)))

The unfortunate thing is that in most cases all this is done for the money and publicity. Like what happened with Baauer's Harlem Shake - as soon as it became an international hit, people appeared claiming rights to the vocal samples. I am not saying the claims were not legit, but many copyright claims are a way for some people to get publicity and try to get some money. :)
 
beats.pro said:
The unfortunate thing is that in most cases all this is done for the money and publicity. Like what happened with Baauer's Harlem Shake - as soon as it became an international hit, people appeared claiming rights to the vocal samples. I am not saying the claims were not legit, but many copyright claims are a way for some people to get publicity and try to get some money. :)
Click to expand...

Yep, tomorrow I'm going to start work on a new record, an instrumental album. All Marvin Gaye samples and I will put it out for free. I'll make sure to find the address of the son and send him a copy upon release. I can't wait for his aggravated response. I'm sure I'll be all over CNN in minutes.

I also look forward to the cease and desist letters I'll get from his lawyer which I'll politely disregard just so they take me to court to sue me for the big fat ZERO I made off the record and the pennies I made from the "related" publicity revenue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top