Music Legal: Ed Sheeran Sued for Copying Marvin Gaye - ‘Let’s Get It On’

playahaitian

Rising Star
Certified Pussy Poster
Ed Sheeran Sued (Again) for Copyright Infringement, This Time by ‘Let’s Get It On’ Co-Writer

It's come to the point in teen-idol Ed Sheeran's career for him to go from the belle of the sing-songwriter ball to music's rich, red-headed stepchild, ready for a good lawsuit. On Tuesday, TMZ reported that the family of "Let's Get It On" co-writer Ed Townsend is claiming copyright infringement by the British pop star. The lawsuit reportedly accuses Sheeran of stealing components of the melody, harmony, and rhythm from Marvin Gaye's steamy ’70s hit for his Grammy Award–winning single "Thinking Out Loud." The legal action comes nearly two years after x, the album the song was featured on, was released, and six months after it won "Song of the Year," but only four weeks after a similar case was thrown at Sheeran for allegedly lifting portions of "Photograph" from an earlier song by X-Factor's Matt Cardle. It seems like we'll have to wait until September to find out who he possibly stole "I See Fire" from. Listen to the two songs below for comparison.





:idea:
 
That's not enough for copyright infringement. If it was this easy Stevie Wonder could sue every singer from the 70's on. Everyone copied the way his chord progressions flow. These Mofo (Ed Townsend kids) need to get jobs, Dad died in 2003

HNIC
 
Where are all the music industry experts that got exposed as frauds when they told me the Gaye estate would lose their suit against Pharrell and Robin Thicke? I want their informed expertise again...:lol:
This is a bad trend. Most songs writers borrow from other song writers. If it is not an obvious copy they should let it go. I remember bootsy collins saying prince copied a lot of the parlimemnt/funkadelic sound, and it's true. George Benson once said there is nothing new in music, this is true also.

Very few artist really have their own style, it's usually a variation of the same shit

JMHO - HNIC
 
It was for Blurred Lines which didn't even have the same chords!
I think what screwed Pharrel was when they admitted on the record that they were going for the "got to give it up vibe"
The jury didn't know their ass from a hole in the ground

HNIC
 
I'm a musician, with over 25 years of experience, so I speak with some authority on this issue ...

...that was obviously influenced by "Let's Get It On". Hey, maybe it wasn't deliberate - .... - but you could literally sing the lyrics to LGIO to that track and it would fit.

I don't know what kind of ears you motherfuckers got if you can't hear that.
 
I'm a musician, with over 25 years of experience, so I speak with some authority on this issue ...

...that was obviously influenced by "Let's Get It On". Hey, maybe it wasn't deliberate - .... - but you could literally sing the lyrics to LGIO to that track and it would fit.

I don't know what kind of ears you motherfuckers got if you can't hear that.
Does influenced by get you sued, as a musician aren't most songs somewhat similar to another song. :dunno:

HNIC
 
Does influenced by get you sued, as a musician aren't most songs somewhat similar to another song. :dunno:

HNIC

HNIC, that is "Let's Get It On" played with a guitar. If I had interest in the Gaye estate, I'd definitely sue. That is clearly a rip-off.
 
HNIC, that is "Let's Get It On" played with a guitar. If I had interest in the Gaye estate, I'd definitely sue. That is clearly a rip-off.
He probably should have changed those first few chords because they do sound like LGIO. - HNIC
 
Where are all the music industry experts that got exposed as frauds when they told me the Gaye estate would lose their suit against Pharrell and Robin Thicke? I want their informed expertise again...:lol:
you and the jurors didn't know shit about music- and that decision will be overturned eventually

This Ed Sheehan bullshit though is blatant theft - same beat pattern (ok) but the exact same chords over laying the beat (not ok)

This one will be settled out of court
 
I'm a musician, with over 25 years of experience, so I speak with some authority on this issue ...

...that was obviously influenced by "Let's Get It On". Hey, maybe it wasn't deliberate - .... - but you could literally sing the lyrics to LGIO to that track and it would fit.

I don't know what kind of ears you motherfuckers got if you can't hear that.
This.
 
That's not enough for copyright infringement

It was for Blurred Lines which didn't even have the same chords!

This is a bad trend. Most songs writers borrow from other song writers. If it is not an obvious copy they should let it go. I remember bootsy collins saying prince copied a lot of the parlimemnt/funkadelic sound, and it's true. George Benson once said there is nothing new in music, this is true also.

Very few artist really have their own style, it's usually a variation of the same shit

JMHO - HNIC

I'm a musician, with over 25 years of experience, so I speak with some authority on this issue ...

...that was obviously influenced by "Let's Get It On". Hey, maybe it wasn't deliberate - .... - but you could literally sing the lyrics to LGIO to that track and it would fit.

I don't know what kind of ears you motherfuckers got if you can't hear that.

my band being throwing that medley in our sets for awhile and guess what other song goes with that? at the end of the chord progression of the hook "we found love right where we are" is the same melody as "van morrison" "crazy love" exact cadence ,melody & feel ... though music inspires music , i think its too much of greed and a stretch by marvin's kids, U CANT COPYRIGHT "feel" "groove" or chord progression. even though Ed's folks couldve spiced up the "BEAT" a lil to switch it up a bit
 
This gonna be a very slippery slope. I didnt robin thicke verdict and i am not a fan of this case either
 
This gonna be a very slippery slope. I didnt robin thicke verdict and i am not a fan of this case either

its not a slippery slope
2 cases in 3 years ain't a slippery slope. realize how many songs have come out between these types of suits?
moral is
don't think you're going to borrow from marvin gaye and not pay for it.
 
its not a slippery slope
2 cases in 3 years ain't a slippery slope. realize how many songs have come out between these types of suits?
moral is
don't think you're going to borrow from marvin gaye and not pay for it.

Maybe its my hip hop sensibilities (not a musician)but i was always under the impression that there is a significant gap between borrow/influenced vs outright thief/copyright infringement.

Imo being influenced or borrowing a vibe doesnt constitute copyright infringement. If that is the new precedent then i can see cases like this increasing.
 
its not a slippery slope
2 cases in 3 years ain't a slippery slope. realize how many songs have come out between these types of suits?
moral is
don't think you're going to borrow from marvin gaye and not pay for it.
respectfully - you have no idea why this is or isn't a slippery slope...

Overall its a slippery slope because if Thicke and Pharell lose the appeal on their case it will change existing copyright law as to what can be protected - hollywood, muzak companies, game developers, ad agencies, etc all get opened up to litigation for past work.

Sheehan copied the beat pattern and chords- there is nothing vague or slippery about that and his team should settle this quickly
vs
Pharrell who didn't copy a note a chord not even the beat, he recreated the groove and "feel" - just like commercial ad agencies, just like elevator / telephone hold muzak and TV / movie productions continue to do to a host of songs from Winter Wonderland to Happy Birthday
Eventually there will be cases like the estates of Miles Davis and Coltrane suing Kenny G for Songbird and a bunch of other songs he did.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top