Blurred Lines lawsuit - We Have A Verdict!

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Breotan**

I really thought this was over and done with.

Associated Press wrote:Deliberations resume in lawsuit alleging hit song 'Blurred Lines' copied Marvin Gaye music

LOS ANGELES – A jury has resumed deliberations in a copyright infringement case in which Marvin Gaye's family claims the 2013 hit "Blurred Lines" copied their father's music.

The eight-person panel resumed deliberations Friday morning, one day after hearing closing arguments. Gaye's children are suing Robin Thicke, Pharrell Williams and the rapper T.I., alleging their song copies Gaye's 1977 hit "Got to Give It Up."

Jurors heard from Thicke and Pharrell, who denied they copied Gaye's song. Much of the trial focused on detailed comparisons of the two songs.

An attorney for the Gaye family told jurors they could award millions of dollars in damages if they determine "Blurred Lines" copied the earlier hit.

"Blurred Lines" was 2013's biggest hit and earned Williams and Thicke more than $5 million apiece.

For those that don't know what this lawsuit is about, here is an educational video.

**sarpedons-right-hand**

I wish the creepy Robin Thicke was over and done with....

**Breotan**

Aaaaaaand we have a verdict. Finally.

http://www.esquire.com/entertainment/music/news/a33589/blurred-lines-decision

John Hendrickson wrote:Robin Thicke and Pharrell Lose 'Blurred Lines' Trial

In a surprise ruling, Marvin Gaye's family will be awarded upwards of $7 million dollars.

A jury in Los Angeles has ruled that Robin Thicke and Pharrell unlawfully copied Marvin Gaye's 1977 hit "Got to Give It Up" in the composition of their song "Blurred Lines." Accordingly, Gaye's family will receive $7.3 million, or a little under half of the estimated $16.6 million that "Blurred Lines" has profited since its 2013 release. During the trial, Thicke admitted that his role in composing the song was minimal, and that he had lied in earlier interviews claiming co-authorship with Pharrell. For his part, Pharrell told the court that he listened to Gaye's music growing up, but that the song was not a direct copy. The AP notes that the verdict may face "years of appeals." Last week, we analyzed the case and predicted (incorrectly) that Gaye's side would lose.

"While we respect the judicial process, we are extremely disappointed in the ruling made today, which sets a horrible precedent for music and creativity going forward," Pharrell's spokesperson told Rolling Stone. "Pharrell created 'Blurred Lines' from his heart, mind and soul and the song was not taken from anyone or anywhere else. We are reviewing the decision, considering our options and you will hear more from us soon about this matter."

**Tannhauser42**

I wonder what this might mean for Weird Al's vastly superior Word Crimes?

**Jihadin**

Tannhauser42 wrote:
I wonder what this might mean for Weird Al's vastly superior Word Crimes?

Probably already in discussion with the family about it

**hotsauceman1**

Wait.....are we finally arresting people for making bad music?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Jihadin wrote:
Tannhauser42 wrote:
I wonder what this might mean for Weird Al's vastly superior Word Crimes?

Probably already in discussion with the family about it

I think that falls under parody, which is not the same effect as copyright

**timetowaste85**

Tannhauser42 wrote:
I wonder what this might mean for Weird Al's vastly superior Word Crimes?

That was my concern too. Thicke and Pharrell get no gaks from me, but I do care about Weird Al. I suspect the family will not go after him, as his could clearly (and easily) be argued as a mistake, plus parody is legal. He asks to use music mostly out of courtesy and to not step on toes. Most people have been said to be honored when he used their music.

**Desubot**

timetowaste85 wrote:
Tannhauser42 wrote:
I wonder what this might mean for Weird Al's vastly superior Word Crimes?

That was my concern too. Thicke and Pharrell get no gaks from me, but I do care about Weird Al. I suspect the family will not go after him, as his could clearly (and easily) be argued as a mistake, plus parody is legal. He asks to use music mostly out of courtesy and to not step on toes. Most people have been said to be honored when he used their music.

Its a 100% parody no? i dont know about this burled lines as i cant listen to it right now but was it a parody?

**Gitzbitah**

No, just a loving homage to semi-consensual sex.

Robin Thicke knows you want it.

Which makes Pharrell's statement all kinds of creepy.

I also hope Weird Al manages to stay clear- but I'd guess he has the best copyright lawyers in the business on retainer, and has the law memorized by now. And of course, he behaves honorably with his parody and polka.

**Alpharius**

Weird Al is 100% OK.

And no, I'm not a lawyer.

**Nostromodamus**

Everyone seems to be saying they sound so alike, but I'm not hearing it, certainly not to the point where I would consider it "copyright infringement".

Still, I got my Word Crimes, I could care less about the others. If Weird Al got in trouble I would literally gak a brick. He did so good with that parody. Now I'm getting all flustered, better go get an expresso to calm my nerves...

**Dreadclaw69**

Does this mean the Gaye family will be receiving royalties when 'Blurred Lines' is played?

Tannhauser42 wrote:
I wonder what this might mean for Weird Al's vastly superior Word Crimes?

There are usually legal protections for parody

**sebster**

Now the major creative companies are starting to feel the pinch of modern copyright laws, I wonder if we might see reform taken seriously.

**Stonebeard**

Anything that screws over Thicke is a good thing, in my book.

**Slarg232**

Ok, apparently I'm completely wrong here, but I've never thought the two sounded alike.

**KalashnikovMarine**

Concur with Slarg, but then I can count the number of times I've listened to either song on one hand, as they're both rubbish.

The family is also filing an injunction to stop sales of "Blurred Lines" until a royalties sharing agreement can be worked out. I doubt that will happen however as I fully expect appeals will be getting filed before end of the week.

**Nostromodamus**

You'd think that Gaye's family would be happy that his music is still inspiring artists today.

But no, there's money to be had, so all the happy feels go out the window...

**Orlanth**

Where did all these Pharrell and Robin Thicke rape undertones come from.

**KalashnikovMarine**

The song under discussion?

**Orlanth**

No idea I cant make out the words.

**Dreadclaw69**

Orlanth wrote:
Where did all these Pharrell and Robin Thicke rape undertones come from.

I can't say that I've ever listened to it long enough to find out

This may be a good point of reference though for those unfamiliar with the controversy; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blurred_Lines#Content.2C_banning_and_subject_matter

**Nostromodamus**

Is it just me, or is Robin Thicke what would happen if Ronnie Renton left Mantic towers and started a music career?

**kronk**

Last night I listened to "Blurred Lines" and "Got to Give It Up." "Blurred Lines" had a better video, by far.

Both songs suck.

My give a damn is nonexistent on this issue. Good for the Gaye family, I guess?

**hotsauceman1**

sebster wrote:
Now the major creative companies are starting to feel the pinch of modern copyright laws, I wonder if we might see reform taken seriously.

0
Disney has been playing fast and loose with copyright law, and winning because they take from the little guy, so I doubt it.

**Dreadclaw69**

kronk wrote:
My give a damn is nonexistent on this issue. Good for the Gaye family, I guess?

Their bank balance at least

**kronk**

"Accordingly, Gaye's family will receive $7.3 million, or a little under half of the estimated $16.6 million that "Blurred Lines" has profited since its 2013 release"

Holy feth monkeys. That's a lot of money for a POS song.

**jreilly89**

I'm all for calling musicians on gakky copying, but this seems less about the music, and more about Gaye's family trying to sue for money.

**Ahtman**

kronk wrote:
My give a damn is nonexistent on this issue.

Good because everyone hates things inspired by other things and lawsuits like this will keep people from having inspiration. Soon no new music will exist, just copyright attorneys.

**Slarg232**

jreilly89 wrote:
I'm all for calling musicians on gakky copying, but this seems less about the music, and more about Gaye's family trying to sue for money.

I'm about 95% certain that all suing is based off of trying to get money

**kronk**

Ahtman wrote:
kronk wrote:
My give a damn is nonexistent on this issue.

Good because everyone hates things inspired by other things and lawsuits like this will keep people from having inspiration. Soon no new music will exist, just copyright attorneys.

Now, now. I have my Best of Genesis album and my Best of Neil Diamond Album. I have all the music I'll ever need.