Graycap23 said:

Proactive nonsense.

They jacked the track.

NEXT.

This.

Does he really believe that the audience he has spent the majority of his life catering to cannnot recognize the song we've been hearing since we were in diapers and our own parents were young enough to shake their groove thangs to GTGIU? Really, now.

...and that being said, as much as I've liked Robin Thicke's work in the past, it's a little sketchy to see such a lawsuit come to pass given the fact that anyone can easily call up last year's entire season of "Duets", where he spent the majority of the time gushing over Marvin Gaye and his influence on him as an artist, then covering his songs for half the comepetition. Methinks the good Mr. Thicke is feeling himself a little too much now that he's finally crossed over into mainstream success and is all too ready to bite the hand that once fed him for the majority of his career. Very very hollow on his behalf and disappointing...I won't be buying anything more of his work after this.

mjscarousal said:

Very disappointed in Robin. This man is really suing the Marvin Gaye family

He should be kissing the ground they walk on and respectfully giving them the credit since it was obviously sampled or inspired by Got To Give It Up.

I dont know what to think. Robin is cool I guess but these artists out now have no respect for the legendary artists This move by Thicke is straight up tacky... Im actually quite shocked.

Well, when one is to the manor borne, no matter how much they distance themselves from their silver spoons, eventually a sense of entitlement will rear its' ugly head in their lives at some point or another. It's such a whiny rich kid punk move, it sure doesn't look good in terms of charachter or integrity for him.

If George Harrison can be sued (and lose) for the similarity of "My Sweet Lord" to "He's So Fine" then I would think the owners of "Got to Give it Up" have a case here.

RodeoSchro said:

If George Harrison can be sued (and lose) for the similarity of "My Sweet Lord" to "He's So Fine" then I would think the owners of "Got to Give it Up" have a case here.

You're joking, right? "He's So Fine" and "My Sweet Lord" are virtually identical! If ever there were an open-and-shut case, that was it. Comparing this case to that one is like comparing apples to pizzas.

RodeoSchro said:

If George Harrison can be sued (and lose) for the similarity of "My Sweet Lord" to "He's So Fine" then I would think the owners of "Got to Give it Up" have a case here.

That one is so close, it's like... different words.

AlexdeParis said:

RodeoSchro said:

If George Harrison can be sued (and lose) for the similarity of "My Sweet Lord" to "He's So Fine" then I would think the owners of "Got to Give it Up" have a case here.

You're joking, right? "He's So Fine" and "My Sweet Lord" are virtually identical! If ever there were an open-and-shut case, that was it. Comparing this case to that one is like comparing apples to pizzas.

any updates on the hijacker.....

Ottensen said:

Graycap23 said:

Proactive nonsense.

They jacked the track.

NEXT.

This.

Does he really believe that the audience he has spent the majority of his life catering to cannnot recognize the song we've been hearing since we were in diapers and our own parents were young enough to shake their groove thangs to GTGIU? Really, now.

...and that being said, as much as I've liked Robin Thicke's work in the past, it's a little sketchy to see such a lawsuit come to pass given the fact that anyone can easily call up last year's entire season of "Duets", where he spent the majority of the time gushing over Marvin Gaye and his influence on him as an artist, then covering his songs for half the comepetition. Methinks the good Mr. Thicke is feeling himself a little too much now that he's finally crossed over into mainstream success and is all too ready to bite the hand that once fed him for the majority of his career. Very very hollow on his behalf and disappointing...I won't be buying anything more of his work after this.

Y'know, when I first heard the song I immediately thought "GTGIU but I didn't say anything because I thought it was just me. I don't know about the legalities but it sure sounds very similar to me.

I was taken aback by the pre-emptive lawsuit though.

Ottensen said:

mjscarousal said:

Very disappointed in Robin. This man is really suing the Marvin Gaye family

He should be kissing the ground they walk on and respectfully giving them the credit since it was obviously sampled or inspired by Got To Give It Up.

I dont know what to think. Robin is cool I guess but these artists out now have no respect for the legendary artists This move by Thicke is straight up tacky... Im actually quite shocked.

Well, when one is to the manor borne, no matter how much they distance themselves from their silver spoons, eventually a sense of entitlement will rear its' ugly head in their lives at some point or another. It's such a whiny rich kid punk move, it sure doesn't look good in terms of charachter or integrity for him.

I really don't see the pre-emptive lawsuit being a bad idea,and here's why...

The Gaye family and that Funkadelic guy were threatening and harassing Robin,but notably,they didn't actually file any lawsuit against him.

by filing his lawsuit,Robin is basically saying "let's take it to court and allow a judge to decide".That seems reasonable to me

If someone was accusing ME of stealing something,I would want the whole matter to be settled in a fair,legal way (i.e.,court of law).I don't like behind-the-scenes harassing and bullying.If you think I did something illegal,sue me and let's get it over with!

Who knows? A judge could very well side with the Gaye family.But I think Robin is doing the right thing.

shorttrini said:

By the way, the only thing that IS sampled on "Blurred Lines", is the MJ's "Yeow" from, "Don't Stop"

Right Robin and Pharrell didn't sample or steal anything from the actual Marvin Gaye recording,so the only issue is if the melody to "Blurred Lines" is too similar to "Got To Give It Up".

Graycap23 said:

Thicke may have opened a can of worms that he will regret with this lawsuit.

Why would he regret it? Thicke's lawsuit was a wise idea.It'll get these issues resolved,one way or the other.I would have done the same thing.

vikfunk said:

Not crazy about the song, but it's frivolous to say that they copied GTGIU or Sexy Ways. Journey would've had a stronger case suing Prince for Faithfully's influence in Purple Rain LOL.

There would be no suit if the song wasn't so successful in the chart. It's money, end of story.

pretty much.It's always about money.

It's funny,nobody can hear any of that Funkadelic song in Robin's song,and yet guy is after a payday,too...lol....it's actually hilarious.

AlexdeParis said:

I agree with virtually every word of his musical analysis. I think he nails exactly why the songs are linked by so many (most importantly his first point, that the bass lines — while different — perform the same function in the songs). We both concluded that they didn't legally steal anything from the song. He just thinks they should pay the Gaye estate anyway. It's a nice sentiment, to be sure. I wouldn't have filed the suit (to avoid bad press), but I also wouldn't have voluntarily paid money for it either. I'm not sure there are many people out there who would.

If I were Robin,I would have filed the pre-emptive lawsuit,regardless of any bad press it received.I'm the type of person who likes to get everything out in the open.I don't like behind-the-scenes harassment and bullying...or demanding a monetary settlement through lawyers.

but that's just me

deebee said:

SoulAlive said:

^^If that was the case,bands like Jamiroquai would be getting sued,left and right.Many of their songs have an Old School feel/influence.But that's not the same thing as copyright infringement.

That's the nub of what would have to be decided upon in the case of this song, as i see it (at least in a courtroom, if it ever got there). The question is: Does this song: a) copy a certain 'feel', 'influence', or 'sound' generic to a certain period or even a certain artist; or b) copy a specific composition (by a specific composer)? There's a compelling prima facie case that it's the latter, in my opinion, given that so many of us have instantly and clearly identified a direct influence from GTGIU, rather than just sounding 'a bit Marvin Gaye-ish' (so presumably a jury could hear that too) and that one of the composers has explicitly said in interviews that they set out to create something that sounded like GTGIU!

I guess then it comes down to whether the sorts of musical elements in play here are covered by copyright law (some people here don't think they are; I'm not convinced that that's the case in law or in practice), and whether Robin, Pharrell et al made sufficient deviations from Marvin's original to convincingly claim it's just 'inspired by' that track and not directly 'copied from' it.

A tricky one, and probably not clear cut in legal terms - even though I think musically it's a no-brainer and they should give Marvin's people a percentage. I have a hunch that it'll end up being settled out of court somewhere down the line, particularly if Thicke keeps getting negative press for it.

It is a tricky case,indeed.Like you said,it could get settled out of court.I predict that it will get settled,one way or the other,very quickly.Robin and Pharrell are extremely busy these days.They're not gonna want to drag this out of many months,which I think is one reason why they took the first step in resolving this case.

...

[Edited 8/21/13 1:53am]

deebee said:

SoulAlive said:

I think Robin,Pharrell and T.I are smart for filing this pre-emptive lawsuit.The Gaye family has spent all of this time "threatening" a lawsuit,and presumably,making these claims unofficially.In essence,they've been "bullying" Robin,behind the scenes.I never like that kind of behavior.If they think that "Blurred Lines" is an example of copyright infringement,they should step forward and file a lawsuit.None of this behind the scenes crap.Let's get it all out in the open and take the battle to court.The fact that they didn't file a lawsuit first,or even responded to Robin's lawsuit,shows that they're probably not very confident in their case.

I have heard about copyright infringement cases in the past where the composer(s) of the track actually comes to court,sets up his equipment,and plays the music for the court....bascially demonstrating how they came up with the groove I wonder if this case would go that far?

I think the way these things work is that no party really wants to get all the way to a courtroom, since it's so prohibitively expensive and risky to go that route; so everyone would always prefer to settle out of court - and consequently there's this game-playing as each side tries to get the upper hand. In this case, I wonder if the potential for damage to Robin's 'brand' as the row rolls on - particularly at the moment he's breaking into the mainstream - will mean that his side ultimately caves in and settles. You don't want to be known as 'the (white) guy who ripped off Marvin Gaye', do you?

I agree a trial would be great viewing, though! Interesting to see how they'd actually break it down for a jury, and what else would be played to try and demonstrate it's just a 'generic' influence, etc.

that kinda stuff is interesting to me I like seeing and hearing about how songs are constructed,chords are arranged,etc.I recall Pharrell once saying that,on a song he produced for someone,he actually used an empty paint can to create the beat.

scriptgirl said:

I second what someone said re how "Slave 4 U" sounded damn near exactly like "Nasty Girl". Damn skippy Pharrell better be glad Prince didn't sue his ass off.

This goes back to what I said earlier There are many songs that are reminscent of another song,but that's not always copyright infringement."Slave 4 U" has the same vibe/mood of "Nasty Girl",but it's not a straight rip-off,IMO.

"Pharrell better be glad Prince didn't sue his ass off"

There are actually many Prince songs that remind me of other songs,too.Everyone pretty much agrees that "Housequake" is a James Brown homage,for example.

SoulAlive said:

shorttrini said:

SoulAlive said:

Why would he regret it? Thicke's lawsuit was a wise idea.It'll get these issues resolved,one way or the other.I would have done the same thing.

Right. The lawsuit was done as a precautionary measure, just in case Marvin's estate jumps up and says, "Hey you stole it, and we want half". Very smart move, because, if they want half, they are going to have to go to court. I don't believe, they are going to want to do that, especially with it being a song that is a good song, that has allot of people dancing.

Exactly

shorttrini said:

SoulAlive said:

Why would he regret it? Thicke's lawsuit was a wise idea.It'll get these issues resolved,one way or the other.I would have done the same thing.

Right. The lawsuit was done as a precautionary measure, just in case Marvin's estate jumps up and says, "Hey you stole it, and we want half". Very smart move, because, if they want half, they are going to have to go to court. I don't believe, they are going to want to do that, especially with it being a song that is a good song, that has allot of people dancing.

Some things are more important than money.

I've already started 2 hear folks saying they will stop supporting Thicke because of this.

The court of public opinion matters.

Graycap23 said:

SoulAlive said:

Graycap23 said:

Some things are more important than money.

I've already started 2 hear folks saying they will stop supporting Thicke because of this.

The court of public opinion matters.

In cases like these,it's all about money. Robin is doing what he has to do,plain and simple.If you were in a situation like this,wouldn't you want to get everything clarified and resolved?

As an artist............I wouldn't jack someone else's track.

Graycap23 said:

As an artist............I wouldn't jack someone else's track.

but if you thought that someone stole your track,wouldn't you simply file a lawsuit and settle it? The Marvin Gaye estate could have easily done that Robin is simply bringing everything out in the open so it can get resolved.It's telling that the Gaye estate has still not filed any lawsuit,or even responded to Robin's suit.

SoulAlive said:

His lawsuit is simply asking a judge to intervene,hear his side and declare that his track is not copyright infringement.That is a reasonable request.The other side had the option of filing A lawsuit as well.The point is...bring everything out in the open and let's settle it.That's better than threats and bullying done behind the scenes.

U can justify it in any manner that u wish, and on the surface u would be correct.

That said, dude jacked the track and will probably get away with it.

As a musician, I find is position WEAK at best.

I have no respect 4 this move.

Plain and simple.

Graycap23 said:

SoulAlive said:

Graycap23 said:

U can justify it in any manner that u wish, and on the surface u would be correct.

That said, dude jacked the track and will probably get away with it.

As a musician, I find is position WEAK at best.

I have no respect 4 this move.

Plain and simple.

The judge could very well rule *against* Robin and Pharrell.I like the fact that they're confident and willing to present their case.I don't respect people who make threats and claims behind the scenes.That's what courts are for...to settle disagreements.

Courts should NOT be 4 folks jacking music.

I hear u............I just think this whole thing stinks.

SoulAlive said:

Lol...copyright infringement cases happen all the time in pop music.This is nothing new or shocking. everything will get resolved,one way or the other.

Of course they do........does that make it right?

they should stop calling it sampling and just say what it really is

world league hijacking....