I'd cry if someone gave me $5m too.

iveivan said:

Blurred Lines has a similar rhythm track to a Marvin Gaye song. A US court has declared IT was copyright theft and awarded $5M. Not sure how much the song made but if $5M is the majority, that's a travesty of justice. Not that I care for Robin Thicke. Nona Gaye was crying after the verdict suggesting she was mistreated by Robin or Pharell. Seems an OTT reaction. [Edited 3/11/15 6:56am] [Edited 3/11/15 7:10am]

.

[Edited 9/11/15 9:02am]

RespectYourPrivacy said:

iveivan said:

Blurred Lines has a similar rhythm track to a Marvin Gaye song. A US court has declared IT was copyright theft and awarded $5M. Not sure how much the song made but if $5M is the majority, that's a travesty of justice. Not that I care for Robin Thicke. Nona Gaye was crying after the verdict suggesting she was mistreated by Robin or Pharell. Seems an OTT reaction. [Edited 3/11/15 6:56am] [Edited 3/11/15 7:10am]

if she has been broke or shruggling its not over the top, its legitimate

just because you were the heir to an empire doesnt mean it will thrive monetarily, you need a team with great business sense who UNDERSTANDS THE MUSIC INDUSTRY & how to work the ends and out of it to build the brand & keep the money flow in, a team who can weed out snakes who are handling money and all sorts of stuff that goes on. This win might have saved her life.

At the very least.........no more working for her.

Are lawsuits taxable?

Graycap23 said:

RespectYourPrivacy said:

if she has been broke or shruggling its not over the top, its legitimate

just because you were the heir to an empire doesnt mean it will thrive monetarily, you need a team with great business sense who UNDERSTANDS THE MUSIC INDUSTRY & how to work the ends and out of it to build the brand & keep the money flow in, a team who can weed out snakes who are handling money and all sorts of stuff that goes on. This win might have saved her life.

At the very least.........no more working for her.

Are lawsuits taxable?

ask sly stone

RespectYourPrivacy said:

NouveauDance said:

I'd cry if someone gave me $5m too.

This is why we love you!!!!

iveivan said:

Blurred Lines has a similar rhythm track to a Marvin Gaye song. A US court has declared IT was copyright theft and awarded $5M. Not sure how much the song made but if $5M is the majority, that's a travesty of justice. Not that I care for Robin Thicke. Nona Gaye was crying after the verdict suggesting she was mistreated by Robin or Pharell. Seems an OTT reaction. [Edited 3/11/15 6:56am] [Edited 3/11/15 7:10am]

Just because she's an heir to an empire doesn't mean that she doesn't have the right to defend what's theirs. Pharrell and Thicke sued them FIRST! It was such a d*ck move. She was mistreated. Why couldn't they pay for a sample, or even ask permission? They sued first to try not to pay. It's not like they couldn't pay the Gaye estate, THEY THOUGHT THEY COULD SAY F_U AND GET AWAY WITH IT because they knew they may not have the resources to fight them. It's amazing what people will do even when they have the means to pay fairly.

Pharelle really screwed himself over, because everyone will look at him differently now, and he brought it on himself.

AND fwiw he'd go to this much trouble rather than write something unique.

terrig said:

iveivan said:

Blurred Lines has a similar rhythm track to a Marvin Gaye song. A US court has declared IT was copyright theft and awarded $5M. Not sure how much the song made but if $5M is the majority, that's a travesty of justice. Not that I care for Robin Thicke. Nona Gaye was crying after the verdict suggesting she was mistreated by Robin or Pharell. Seems an OTT reaction. [Edited 3/11/15 6:56am] [Edited 3/11/15 7:10am]

Just because she's an heir to an empire doesn't mean that she doesn't have the right to defend what's theirs. Pharrell and Thicke sued them FIRST! It was such a d*ck move. She was mistreated. Why couldn't they pay for a sample, or even ask permission? They sued first to try not to pay. It's not like they couldn't pay the Gaye estate, THEY THOUGHT THEY COULD SAY F_U AND GET AWAY WITH IT because they knew they may not have the resources to fight them. It's amazing what people will do even when they have the means to pay fairly.

Pharelle really screwed himself over, because everyone will look at him differently now, and he brought it on himself.

AND fwiw he'd go to this much trouble rather than write something unique.

No............they will wake up 2 what he really is about.

I've been saying this 4 years about this guy.

It is just one of the reasons that I find his "work" lacking.

Graycap23 said:

terrig said:

Just because she's an heir to an empire doesn't mean that she doesn't have the right to defend what's theirs. Pharrell and Thicke sued them FIRST! It was such a d*ck move. She was mistreated. Why couldn't they pay for a sample, or even ask permission? They sued first to try not to pay. It's not like they couldn't pay the Gaye estate, THEY THOUGHT THEY COULD SAY F_U AND GET AWAY WITH IT because they knew they may not have the resources to fight them. It's amazing what people will do even when they have the means to pay fairly.

Pharelle really screwed himself over, because everyone will look at him differently now, and he brought it on himself.

AND fwiw he'd go to this much trouble rather than write something unique.

No............they will wake up 2 what he really is about.

I've been saying this 4 years about this guy.

It is just one of the reasons that I find his "work" lacking.

Greycap, I WAS a huge Pharelle fan.....and of course he has so many hits right? He's been robbing back catalogues unfettered. It makes you suspect ALL his work now, and I bet there are tons of laywers and artists now wondering 'do i have a case against pharelle?' as well they should.

the whole 'homage' thing is bs too, because hello you can pay for the sample/sound whatever and attribute properly.

appropriating for reconfiguring in another work is FINE as long as you attribute your source...why the hell will people go so far as to NOT give others what they're due? it's disgusting.

[Edited 3/12/15 10:06am]

terrig said:

iveivan said:

Blurred Lines has a similar rhythm track to a Marvin Gaye song. A US court has declared IT was copyright theft and awarded $5M. Not sure how much the song made but if $5M is the majority, that's a travesty of justice. Not that I care for Robin Thicke. Nona Gaye was crying after the verdict suggesting she was mistreated by Robin or Pharell. Seems an OTT reaction. [Edited 3/11/15 6:56am] [Edited 3/11/15 7:10am]

Just because she's an heir to an empire doesn't mean that she doesn't have the right to defend what's theirs. Pharrell and Thicke sued them FIRST! It was such a d*ck move. She was mistreated. Why couldn't they pay for a sample, or even ask permission? They sued first to try not to pay. It's not like they couldn't pay the Gaye estate, THEY THOUGHT THEY COULD SAY F_U AND GET AWAY WITH IT because they knew they may not have the resources to fight them. It's amazing what people will do even when they have the means to pay fairly.

Pharelle really screwed himself over, because everyone will look at him differently now, and he brought it on himself.

AND fwiw he'd go to this much trouble rather than write something unique.

^^This.

terrig said:

Graycap23 said:

No............they will wake up 2 what he really is about.

I've been saying this 4 years about this guy.

It is just one of the reasons that I find his "work" lacking.

Greycap, I WAS a huge Pharelle fan.....and of course he has so many hits right? He's been robbing back catalogues unfettered. It makes you suspect ALL his work now, and I bet there are tons of laywers and artists now wondering 'do i have a case against pharelle?' as well they should.

the whole 'homage' thing is bs too, because hello you can pay for the sample/sound whatever and attribute properly.

appropriating for reconfiguring in another work is FINE as long as you attribute your source...why the hell will people go so far as to NOT give others what they're due? it's disgusting.

[Edited 3/12/15 10:06am]

And this.

NouveauDance said:

I'd cry if someone gave me $5m too.

I'd cry at $50,000....I don't know what I'd do at 5M...

terrig said:

iveivan said:

Blurred Lines has a similar rhythm track to a Marvin Gaye song. A US court has declared IT was copyright theft and awarded $5M. Not sure how much the song made but if $5M is the majority, that's a travesty of justice. Not that I care for Robin Thicke. Nona Gaye was crying after the verdict suggesting she was mistreated by Robin or Pharell. Seems an OTT reaction. [Edited 3/11/15 6:56am] [Edited 3/11/15 7:10am]

Just because she's an heir to an empire doesn't mean that she doesn't have the right to defend what's theirs. Pharrell and Thicke sued them FIRST! It was such a d*ck move. She was mistreated. Why couldn't they pay for a sample, or even ask permission? They sued first to try not to pay. It's not like they couldn't pay the Gaye estate, THEY THOUGHT THEY COULD SAY F_U AND GET AWAY WITH IT because they knew they may not have the resources to fight them. It's amazing what people will do even when they have the means to pay fairly.

Pharelle really screwed himself over, because everyone will look at him differently now, and he brought it on himself.

AND fwiw he'd go to this much trouble rather than write something unique.

Expecting troube, I would have gone to the Gaye family early--before the song became a hit (let alone a Mega-hit of the year).

I think that is what this verdict will change. Even if you do not expect a song to become a Mega-hit, you'd better seek-out who inlfuenced the track's sound (or at least try to), and come to some agreement early.

[Edited 3/15/15 13:49pm]

I havent heard the Marvin Gaye song in question. Is it a blatent rip off?

Rebeljuice said:

I havent heard the Marvin Gaye song in question. Is it a blatent rip off?

It is ridiculous and blatant - I knew it the first time I heard and wondered how he was getting away with it. Apparently, Pharrell consciously decide to blow up his career on Marvin Gaye classics: Blurred Lines < Got to Give It Up. Also, even worse is Happy < Aint That Peculiar. CHeck this mashup and hear it!: https://www.youtube.com/w...FER9-JvKdg

What happened to Nona's looks? SHe was fine enough to be a Prince babe once

terrig said:

Graycap23 said:

No............they will wake up 2 what he really is about.

I've been saying this 4 years about this guy.

It is just one of the reasons that I find his "work" lacking.

Greycap, I WAS a huge Pharelle fan.....

.

Says person who can't spell his name correctly. It's Pharrell: two Rs, no E at the end.

Graycap23 said:

At the very least.........no more working for her.

.

$5 million isn't that much. Perhaps you can live off of the interests of that sum for the rest of your life, but I don't think your monthly income would be that much higher than that of a decent job.

BartVanHemelen said:

Graycap23 said:

At the very least.........no more working for her.

.

$5 million isn't that much. Perhaps you can live off of the interests of that sum for the rest of your life, but I don't think your monthly income would be that much higher than that of a decent job.

I would be just fine for the rest of my life with 5 mil honey...

Ridiculous. The ruling and Nona's reaction - pathetic. As the defendants' atorney argues - "it sets a horrible precedant for music and creativity". Apparently they didn't use elements from "Got to give it up" - they copied the VIBE of marvin Gaye's song(?!). When I saw her crying outside the court saying "justice has been done" - it made me want to throw up. Dorian Lynskey (from the latest Q magazine) has written an excellent column regarding this case, of which this is an extract -

.

"Any honest artist knows that true originality is a myth. If you could copyright rhythms and sequences, songwriting would be almost impossible by now. Even with melodies, many so-called 'imitations' are unintentional. Given the limited number of notes on the scale, it's inevitable that some songs will inadvertantly trespass on old melodies."

.

Howard King (the defendants' atorney) goes on to say "no one owns a genre or a style or a groove" and that "The wrong decision here will stifle musicians." Here, here.

.

This whole episode is sad. I know that the highly irritable Robin Thicke and mega-successful Pharell are hard to sympathise as the wounded party - but I think it's future musicians who are the losers while lawyers and the Gaye family (who I assume are already doing very nicely thank you very much) who emerge from the stink with fatter wallets.