Homage or flat-out copying? "Got to give it up" and "Blurred lines".

[marylander1940]

Was it simply an homage? Or flat-out copying? The jury decided Tuesday it was the latter.

 

That's been the issue in the musically packed, big-money Los Angeles trial over the 2013 hit Blurred Lines.

 

For the last year and a half, the music industry has been gripped by a lawsuit over whether Robin Thicke’s 2013 hit “Blurred Lines” was merely reminiscent of a song by Marvin Gaye, or had crossed the line into plagiarism.

 

A federal jury in Los Angeles on Tuesday agreed that “Blurred Lines” had gone too far, and copied elements of Gaye’s 1977 song “Got to Give It Up” without permission. The jury found that Mr. Thicke, with Pharrell Williams, who shares a songwriting credit on the track, had committed copyright infringement, and it awarded more than $7.3 million to Mr. Gaye’s family.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/11/business/media/blurred-lines-infringed-on-marvin-gaye-copyright-jury-rules.html?_r=0

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvin_Gaye

 

Judge by yourselves.

 

[video=youtube;SdcLwm-RCv8]

[marylander1940]

[video=youtube;yyDUC1LUXSU]

[loverboy95]

Blurred Lines is absolute trash.

[mmk123]

I went to youtube and listened to both songs (neither or which I was ever a fan of) and I can see why the judgement was ruled in favor of marvin Gaye's children. It is not as bad as Vanilla Ice blatantly ripping off "Under Pressure" by David Bowie and Queen but I thought it pretty close. I think they would have been better off to just sample part of the Marvin Gaye song at the beginning and go from there.

[bostonman]

It is not as bad as Vanilla Ice blatantly ripping off "Under Pressure" by David Bowie and Queen

 

...which ironically never made it to the court phase.

 

As a musician myself, I'm stuck in the middle of this. Composers "borrow" from each other all the time, in all forms of music, and I think sometimes it's obvious when it's plagiaristic, and sometimes it seems more a matter of "there's only 12 notes" etc, and it can be all too easy to fall into patterns (melodically, rhythmically, and/or chord-wise) that are influenced by things you've heard. And I think that pop music is particularly susceptible to this (even before sampling, which has become a whole other issue IMO). In Vanilla Ice's case, at least he finally admitted he purposely stole that bass riff (after first claiming he didn't). But I think there are many times that songs wind up similar to each other for no other reason than that the genre invites a certain similarity as it is - and I'm sure many writers have earnestly penned a song only to realize later that they've taken ideas from other songs they've heard.

 

There's also the side issue of composers stealing from themselves (which of course is not illegal). Composers like Bach and Handel were not at all afraid to "repackage" a movement of a piece to use in another way in another piece. Rossini was infamous for stealing from himself. (The piece we now know as the overture to The Barber Of Seville was previously an overture to at least 2 other operas). One of Jerry Herman's iconic songs is "Time Heals Everything" (from Mack and Mabel), but he essentially "stole" that song's chord progression to write a song called "I'll Be Here Tomorrow" (from The Grand Tour - only 5 years later), and one also can hear how "I'll Be Here Tomorrow" formed the basis for the title tune for La Cage Aux Folles 4 years after that. Stephen Sondheim has talked about trying to compose his songs in "remote" keys on the piano, in an attempt to avoid having his fingers go to familiar places subconsciously (whether that really works or not).

 

So...it's a tough call. I say, if you're going to steal, steal from the best - and Marvin Gaye is certainly in the "best" category. But I also have to say that just musically in of itself, "Got To Give It Up" is really not all that remarkable - what really makes the song cook is what Gaye and his band bring to the performance. (And in that regard, "Blurred Lines" can't even begin to hold a candle to Gaye's iconic performance. "Blurred Lines" is fun, but to me it's calculated slickness, "Got To Give It Up" feels more organic and genuinely "of the moment", though of course it was surely well-rehearsed.) And I'm also not convinced that Thicke and Williams were as divisive in their "stealing" as the court thinks they were. On the other hand, any case that makes present (and future) musicians aware of these pitfalls is still very valuable.

 

Still, I can be sure that Mr. Williams is not particularly "happy" right now...(sorry, I couldn't resist...)

[bigvalboy]

...which ironically never made it to the court phase.

 

As a musician myself, I'm stuck in the middle of this. Composers "borrow" from each other all the time, in all forms of music, and I think sometimes it's obvious when it's plagiaristic, and sometimes it seems more a matter of "there's only 12 notes" etc, and it can be all too easy to fall into patterns (melodically, rhythmically, and/or chord-wise) that are influenced by things you've heard. And I think that pop music is particularly susceptible to this (even before sampling, which has become a whole other issue IMO). In Vanilla Ice's case, at least he finally admitted he purposely stole that bass riff (after first claiming he didn't). But I think there are many times that songs wind up similar to each other for no other reason than that the genre invites a certain similarity as it is - and I'm sure many writers have earnestly penned a song only to realize later that they've taken ideas from other songs they've heard.

 

There's also the side issue of composers stealing from themselves (which of course is not illegal). Composers like Bach and Handel were not at all afraid to "repackage" a movement of a piece to use in another way in another piece. Rossini was infamous for stealing from himself. (The piece we now know as the overture to The Barber Of Seville was previously an overture to at least 2 other operas). One of Jerry Herman's iconic songs is "Time Heals Everything" (from Mack and Mabel), but he essentially "stole" that song's chord progression to write a song called "I'll Be Here Tomorrow" (from The Grand Tour - only 5 years later), and one also can hear how "I'll Be Here Tomorrow" formed the basis for the title tune for La Cage Aux Folles 4 years after that. Stephen Sondheim has talked about trying to compose his songs in "remote" keys on the piano, in an attempt to avoid having his fingers go to familiar places subconsciously (whether that really works or not).

 

So...it's a tough call. I say, if you're going to steal, steal from the best - and Marvin Gaye is certainly in the "best" category. But I also have to say that just musically in of itself, "Got To Give It Up" is really not all that remarkable - what really makes the song cook is what Gaye and his band bring to the performance. (And in that regard, "Blurred Lines" can't even begin to hold a candle to Gaye's iconic performance. "Blurred Lines" is fun, but to me it's calculated slickness, "Got To Give It Up" feels more organic and genuinely "of the moment", though of course it was surely well-rehearsed.) And I'm also not convinced that Thicke and Williams were as divisive in their "stealing" as the court thinks they were. On the other hand, any case that makes present (and future) musicians aware of these pitfalls is still very valuable.

 

Still, I can be sure that Mr. Williams is not particularly "happy" right now...(sorry, I couldn't resist...)

 

Don't you think that this sets a dangerous precedence, and stifles creativity? I would think a lot of record companies will be nervous about crossing or even paralleling artistic lines now.

[bostonman]

Don't you think that this sets a dangerous precedence, and stifles creativity? I would think a lot of record companies will be nervous about crossing or even paralleling artistic lines now.

 

I don't. This is hardly the first time such a suit has been brought, and will surely not be the last - but on the other hand, there are plenty of instances where a tune has been noted or accused of being lifted from another, and nothing has been done about it at all. Music will continue to go on, similarities will always be noticed, and occasionally there will be a case like this. But I don't think that all of a sudden we're going to see record producers getting more wary, just from this particular case.

[bigvalboy]

I don't. This is hardly the first time such a suit has been brought, and will surely not be the last - but on the other hand, there are plenty of instances where a tune has been noted or accused of being lifted from another, and nothing has been done about it at all. Music will continue to go on, similarities will always be noticed, and occasionally there will be a case like this. But I don't think that all of a sudden we're going to see record producers getting more wary, just from this particular case.

 

Interesting, Thanks...

[BabyBoomer]

Probably the most famous case was "He's So Fine" by The Chiffons. vs. "My Sweet Lord" by George Harrison. Harrison lost and was

ordered to pay 1.5 mil.

 

~ Boomer ~

[+ dutchmuch]

Great decision. If you want to make money off a song, write one.