In light of the verdict against Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams - in favor of Marvin Gaye's heirs - in the "Blurred Lines" case, there has been a lot of hand-wringing in the music business about whether this case will open the floodgates for other claims of uncredited song appropriation.

Well, Charlie Wilson, co-founder of The Gap Band, fueled some unexpected new fires during an interview this week with WBLS in New York. The biggest hit of 2015 has been the 80s-style funk hit "Uptown Funk" by Mark Ronson and Bruno Mars. And music fans immediately recognized the similarities between that song and a number of classic tracks by The Time, particularly "Jungle Love." Others have compared it to Zapp's "More Bounce To The Ounce."

To the audience's surprise, Charlie went an entirely different direction in his interview, first hesitating, then saying about "Uptown Funk," "The musicologist came back and said it was 'Oops Upside The Head' and now they have to pay." Both the opening of "Uptown Funk" and the rap later in the song (around 2:45) do share elements with the 1979 Gap Band smash - though the line between "misappropriated' and "inspired by" here is...umm...kind of blurred (pun intended).


It isn't certain whether Wilson was claiming that the "Uptown Funk" team has agreed to pay or whether a lawsuit will be coming, but this, combined with word that Gaye's heirs also believe the Pharrell's "Happy" bears more than a slight resemblance to Gaye's "Ain't That Peculiar," appears to support the speculation that musicologists are going to have a very busy year testifying in courtrooms.

http://www.soultracks.com...-funk-oops

the floodgates are about to open

it was bound to happen

It steals from The Gap Band, The Time, Cameo, P-Funk, Zapp.... the list goes on.

Militant said:

It steals from The Gap Band, The Time, Cameo, P-Funk, Zapp.... the list goes on.

it's been going on for over 25 years......

I think the artists of authenticity are fed up w/so many people taking their music they are finally speaking out about it which is a great thing

if the artists who rely on sampling, if they made their own music and 10 years down the line, they find their music being sampled by everyone in sight, they would get upset too

music is a very personable form of expression and when you put your heart into crafting something for the ages, and it's being reduced to a sample to generate sales, it's a major insult of sorts

It didn't steal!

It borrowed.

[Edited 3/16/15 7:36am]

If this was a Blues song, people would be treating it like a fine blended wine. Hints of MPLS, some Cincinnati, etc. People borrow from each other all the time.

But yeah, it's pretty obvious that "Uptown, funk you up, Uptown funk you up" is a direct grab from "Oops upside yo head."

It's wild to think if great and legendary artists like Bruce Springsteen were ever taken to court for the riffs they stole and used in their music.

Or does that line borrow from this more which came out the same year as "Oops"?

3 out of 5 words are the same - "Funk you right on up" vs "Uptown funk you up".

.

.

Perhaps those songs from 1979 need to battle each other in the court room first and then the winner can move on to the final to battle "Uptown Funk". This is what music is all about, lawyers having a steady line of lucrative work

Cinny said:

It didn't steal!

It borrowed.

[Edited 3/16/15 7:36am]

No, it acquired...

purplethunder3121 said:

Cinny said:

It didn't steal!

It borrowed.

[Edited 3/16/15 7:36am]

No, it acquired...

I said this in another thread...

thanks to the Blurred Lines lawsuit,we're not gonna hear alot of songs that pay tribute to the past.I think it was great to see artists and bands reaching back and creating music inspired by the good ol' days.We needed to get back to the days of funk,disco and just plain good music...songs with actual grooves! Any time that young music fans can hear something like "Uptown Funk" on the radio,that's a good thing.They desperately need that.But alas,we probably won't get more songs like that anymore.Everyone will be too afraid of getting sued

SoulAlive said:

I said this in another thread...

thanks to the Blurred Lines lawsuit,we're not gonna hear alot of songs that pay tribute to the past.I think it was great to see artists and bands reaching back and creating music inspired by the good ol' days.We needed to get back to the days of funk,disco and just plain good music...songs with actual grooves! Any time that young music fans can hear something like "Uptown Funk" on the radio,that's a good thing.They desperately need that.But alas,we probably won't get more songs like that anymore.Everyone will be too afraid of getting sued

Good. It separates artist from posers.

SoulAlive said:

I said this in another thread...

thanks to the Blurred Lines lawsuit,we're not gonna hear alot of songs that pay tribute to the past.I think it was great to see artists and bands reaching back and creating music inspired by the good ol' days.We needed to get back to the days of funk,disco and just plain good music...songs with actual grooves! Any time that young music fans can hear something like "Uptown Funk" on the radio,that's a good thing.They desperately need that.But alas,we probably won't get more songs like that anymore.Everyone will be too afraid of getting sued

it would be more of an advantage of the artists of today would learn how to make their own music so they can become the type of artist that don't have to rely on sampling or recreating.....

eventually, the samples will run out

allot of these artists are making tons of money and can do things like open up music schools, study music composition, and the moment that they discover they can make music on their own, it could be their greatest moment and they can achieve the same level of musician ship those the luminaries of yesterday did, and these lawsuits wouldn't occur....

I believe its possible...always did

if the generations of yesterday did it, so can future generations...

and w/that possibility, then we just might discover our next great musical genre because Rap started 40 years ago and that was the last new genre to hit

[Edited 3/16/15 13:31pm]

I sometimes wonder if drum machines were done away with and recording artists stopped sampling, how much new music would be released? Probably not much.

kitbradley said:

I sometimes wonder if drum machines were done away with and recording artists stopped sampling, how much new music would be released? Probably not much.

exactly, they have grown accustomed to relying on both......

it's very enticing because the music of year's past was so good

Scorp said:

SoulAlive said:

I said this in another thread...

thanks to the Blurred Lines lawsuit,we're not gonna hear alot of songs that pay tribute to the past.I think it was great to see artists and bands reaching back and creating music inspired by the good ol' days.We needed to get back to the days of funk,disco and just plain good music...songs with actual grooves! Any time that young music fans can hear something like "Uptown Funk" on the radio,that's a good thing.They desperately need that.But alas,we probably won't get more songs like that anymore.Everyone will be too afraid of getting sued

it would be more of an advantage of the artists of today would learn how to make their own music so they can become the type of artist that don't have to rely on sampling or recreating.....

eventually, the samples will run out

allot of these artists are making tons of money and can do things like open up music schools, study music composition, and the moment that they discover they can make music on their own, it could be their greatest moment and they can achieve the same level of musician ship those the luminaries of yesterday did, and these lawsuits wouldn't occur....

I believe its possible...always did

if the generations of yesterday did it, so can future generations...

and w/that possibility, then we just might discover our next great musical genre because Rap started 40 years ago and that was the last new genre to hit

[Edited 3/16/15 13:31pm]

Well, that cuts to the point of the matter. There are plenty of young single artists and bands that create their own individualistic music but give credit to the artists they grew up listening to... Just like artists of the past--in every artistic genre--have built on what has come before. Some have given credit to the artists who inspire them and some don't. Look at your local music scene and you may find some diamonds there that don't exist on the pop charts now...

oh oh

Graycap23 said:

SoulAlive said:

I said this in another thread...

thanks to the Blurred Lines lawsuit,we're not gonna hear alot of songs that pay tribute to the past.I think it was great to see artists and bands reaching back and creating music inspired by the good ol' days.We needed to get back to the days of funk,disco and just plain good music...songs with actual grooves! Any time that young music fans can hear something like "Uptown Funk" on the radio,that's a good thing.They desperately need that.But alas,we probably won't get more songs like that anymore.Everyone will be too afraid of getting sued

Good. It separates artist from posers.

Exactly.

This may be a good thing that will open the doors again for genuine artists. The suits will be afraid to work with the posers.

Graycap23 said:

babynoz said:

Graycap23 said:

SoulAlive said:

I said this in another thread...

thanks to the Blurred Lines lawsuit,we're not gonna hear alot of songs that pay tribute to the past.I think it was great to see artists and bands reaching back and creating music inspired by the good ol' days.We needed to get back to the days of funk,disco and just plain good music...songs with actual grooves! Any time that young music fans can hear something like "Uptown Funk" on the radio,that's a good thing.They desperately need that.But alas,we probably won't get more songs like that anymore.Everyone will be too afraid of getting sued

Good. It separates artist from posers.

That's ridiculous. Artists in the 70s/ 80s stole LIBERALLY - Barkays ripped everything, nobody was bitching. Prince ripped stuff. Everybody does it. The difference is do you make it your own or not. Uptown Funk was its own thing. I'm sick of people acting like the bands we grew up on didnt do the same exact thing.

[Edited 3/16/15 17:30pm]

MotownSubdivision said:

babynoz said:

Exactly.

This may be a good thing that will open the doors again for genuine artists. The suits will be afraid to work with the posers.

This truly is a Catch 22 isn't it?

It is.

I understand the argument that people incorporate influences into their work all the time, but it looks like where to draw the line will have to be decided on a case by case basis.

Going more in the direction of originality vs formulaic music composition would be a good outcome from all this hoopla.

Zannaloaf said:

Graycap23 said:

Good. It separates artist from posers.

That's ridiculous. Artists in the 70s/ 80s stole LIBERALLY - Barkays ripped everything, nobody was bitching. Prince ripped stuff. Everybody does it. The difference is do you make it your own or not. Uptown Funk was its own thing. I'm sick of people acting like the bands we grew up on didnt do the same exact thing.

[Edited 3/16/15 17:30pm]

Nobody is acting like that though. Everybody knows the BarKays were more shameless than most about stealing but at the same time, you can't deny that they could jam their asses off too.

In the age of widespread sampling it cannot be called the same exact thing either.

The bolded portion of your own reply answers the point we were making....don't get it twisted.

Uptown Funk pays homage but is very much its own thing...I love Uptown Funk and Bruno Mars btw.

I can't believe Charlie got the nerve to open his mouth considering what he does to stay relevant these days.

wow. The gap band lifted so much from george clinton and p-funk back in the day......same as george lifted so much from sly and JB. whatever...i think the song pays homage more than anything. i don't hear any one thing that can be claimed as stolen

babynoz said:

MotownSubdivision said:

babynoz said: This truly is a Catch 22 isn't it?

It is.

I understand the argument that people incorporate influences into their work all the time, but it looks like where to draw the line will have to be decided on a case by case basis.

Going more in the direction of originality vs formulaic music composition would be a good outcome from all this hoopla.

It's funny........it is mostly the button pushers that we are discussing, not actual musicians.

Zannaloaf said:

Graycap23 said:

Good. It separates artist from posers.

That's ridiculous. Artists in the 70s/ 80s stole LIBERALLY - Barkays ripped everything, nobody was bitching. Prince ripped stuff. Everybody does it. The difference is do you make it your own or not. Uptown Funk was its own thing. I'm sick of people acting like the bands we grew up on didnt do the same exact thing.

[Edited 3/16/15 17:30pm]

.

Yup. ALLLL your favourite artists have used someone elses "vibe" before.

.

This is not new.

.

The only new thing is a successful lawsuit based on "vibe" and nothing of substance.

.

Graycap23 said:

babynoz said:

It is.

I understand the argument that people incorporate influences into their work all the time, but it looks like where to draw the line will have to be decided on a case by case basis.

Going more in the direction of originality vs formulaic music composition would be a good outcome from all this hoopla.

It's funny........it is mostly the button pushers that we are discussing, not actual musicians.

That's what zannaloaf doesn't understand.

Scorp said:

Allot of these artists today make way more money than their predecessors with more opportunities to make money with clothing lines, endorsing products and the like, many have started their own labels like the Jay Zs and P Diddys of the world. They can open up music schools and have artists working for them learn music composition like Quincy Jones did during his teenage years. It may take more effort to learn how to do it but they will benefit in the long run and music can be better for it. If past generations can do it, future generations can to. I believe music has no limits. It's infinite in nature

I wish that daggone Prince would turn Paisley Park into a music school.

The reason that the button pushers got their feet in the door in the first place is because the suits wanted to produce music on the cheap.


You get what you pay for...too many souless, assembly line compositions from flavor of the month producers.

Not all, but too many so called artists are more into their "brand" than caring about honing their craft.

Hell, branding used to be something you did to cattle or slaves.

babynoz said:

Scorp said:

Allot of these artists today make way more money than their predecessors with more opportunities to make money with clothing lines, endorsing products and the like, many have started their own labels like the Jay Zs and P Diddys of the world. They can open up music schools and have artists working for them learn music composition like Quincy Jones did during his teenage years. It may take more effort to learn how to do it but they will benefit in the long run and music can be better for it. If past generations can do it, future generations can to. I believe music has no limits. It's infinite in nature

I wish that daggone Prince would turn Paisley Park into a music school.

The reason that the button pushers got their feet in the door in the first place is because the suits wanted to produce music on the cheap.


You get what you pay for...too many souless, assembly line compositions from flavor of the month producers.

Not all, but too many so called artists are more into their "brand" than caring about honing their craft.

Hell, branding used to be something you did to cattle or slaves.

It all started with The Mickey Mouse Club!?!

Seriously, I commented on another thread that a "brand" doesn't apply to human beings, it applies to a lifeless product sold by a corporation. What times we live in...

[Edited 3/16/15 18:41pm]