I said the same thing too right after Pharrell lost his case. It was going to set a very dangerous precedent
Music Legal: Ed Sheeran Sued for Copying Marvin Gaye - ‘Let’s Get It On’
- Thread starter playahaitian
- Start date
I said the same thing too right after Pharrell lost his case. It was going to set a very dangerous precedent
The reason you haven't seen more cases is because future litigants are waiting to see what happens to Thicke on appeal. Also, it's not wise to sue until the song makes most of its money.
Say for instance the Curtis Mayfield estate sues John Mayer for "waiting on the world to change". They settle out of court and then six months later Mayer licenses the song to a major Hollywood blockbuster. Now the Mayfield estate loses out on all that extra money.
Suing for copyright infringement is tricky business
Whats hilarious is this is exactly what i told your bitch ass in the first place.
You so called musical experts thought you knew it all tho.
Respectfully, YOU dont know wtf a slippery slope is nor do you know what is and isnt copyright infringement as proven in the similar thread from a few years ago.
Respectfully how is this the indicator of a slippery slope if he copied the beat pattern and chords
and pharrell said they were actually trying to make a song just like the one they copied? lol
if those dudes get up there and say no we weren't trying to make a marvin gaye type song then they don't lose the case. they got under oath and told the truth... they were going for his song, they were listening to his song in the studio and then came up with their hit that was eerily reminiscent of the song that they cited as inspiration in the damn studio session
there is no slippery slope on Sheehan - he copied the work - so copyright applies and as I said it should be settled out of court soon
The slippery slope is the Pharrel Thicke judgment - according to existing copyright law it doesn't matter if they were trying to make a "Marvin Gaye" type song - or how reminiscent their new work is of Gaye's work. All that matters legally - is the melody or counter melody copied / borrowed from another work? how many if any identical notes / chords per measure or are any parts of the new work directly lifted from the original work... A groove or feeling in music can not currently fall under copy write... for some reason the judge did not educate the jury on music or existing copy write law. If what they discussed in the studio was a copy write violation - the lawyers would never have allowed them to say it in deposition nor at trial!
Get ready to pay out ED
People have been suing thieving as hacks call them selves song writers for years. The issue is that
in most cases there were gag orders attached with those settlements or awards, so the public doesn't
get to know who the fuck wadds are that stole from the original song and how much they lost!
But fuck this thievin' no talent ass Honky! I hope the Townsend Family wins the case!
in most cases there were gag orders attached with those settlements or awards, so the public doesn't
get to know who the fuck wadds are that stole from the original song and how much they lost!
But fuck this thievin' no talent ass Honky! I hope the Townsend Family wins the case!
I can see your point, but I don't think Thicke making an offer to settle with the Gaye family before there was even a lawsuit helped him / Pharrell though...
Musician here too. Well over 40 years experience playing professionally. No one said the chord progression wasn't the same. The melody isn't. Nor are the lyrics. Only a section of the song has the same chord progression. Did you listen to the rest of it? It's not enough for a lawsuit in my opinion. The Gaye family are getting quite good at suing (and winning) bullshit cases and being awarded money they didn't fucking earn! So what Pharrell said they were going for the 'vibe'. Only the beat was similar. THAT'S IT. NOTHING ELSE. Not even a sample. I can read music and sight read music extremely well. Both songs were transcribed and were proven to not be the same and the jury ignored it. Are you aware of how many songs share similar chord progressions? Millions! Are we now gonna see folks suing just because "It Sounds Similar"?? This whole thing is BS. Fuck the Gaye family. I have zero respect for them. Thieves!
Last edited:
Bruh, the jury ignored all proof the song was different. The prosecutors picked a bunch of non music knowing mufuckas and that's how they won that case. The case should have gone to an arbitrator with professional musicians and producers as experts. Guarantee it woulda went a different way. Hell, Stevie Wonder himself said it wasn't the same song. Bet that wasn't presented to the jury! But it is what it is! It's still being appealed (again) so we'll see where it goes!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...
And again, like i said in the original thread(s)... Experts dont hand down verdicts... Lay persons do. You niggas can draw all the professional distinctions you want... The consumer ear is what counts. Jury will believe your musical mumbo jumbo or their lying eras...And when presented the facts and evidence, its a easy case for the plaintiff. .. Period.
Hey, I can't argue with cats who ignore the facts! Why have laws and experts if folks are just gonna believe what they want to! When it comes to music, you can't have folks who don't understand or know music to determine cases. They basically threw the laws, that were determined by the Supreme Court, right out the window. Like I said.......it is what it is.
Pharrell losing that case was a crime against humanity.
Society has never been known to be just when it comes to the law.
Society has never been known to be just when it comes to the law.
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...
As well, the dramatic transition between verse and chorus on Ed Sheeran's song is similar to "Let's Get It On".
You sound like a dam fool. So all juries need to made up of experts and specialized persons? Do you not understand how patently absurd and counter to the process that is? Again, i explained all of this to to you years ago and fully articulated why they would lose. You thought you knew wtf you were talking about. You didnt. Period.
Pharrell "making" that song for that cac and passing it off as an original thought was the true crime against humanity.
If you can listen to that song and not recognize it as a straight fucking Marvin Gaye ripoff then you're deaf or dumb.
Like I said.....Can't argue with folks who don't give a fuck about the law! Do you bruh!
And we have another one. Can you read music? Go find the transcriptions of the 2 songs and get back to me. Non musicians can't tell me shit!
The law? Man please stop. You're making a complete ass of your self going on 3years now on this topic. Stop digging.
Can the average juror read music? You keep saying stupid shit.
fyi- There are people in this thread who can read music and say you're full of shit... I will let YOU musicians have that discussion. My point has ALWAYS been one of legalities and the case itself. And i told you how it would end. Period.
Peace Brotha DWBass. Good to see you here family.
Lifelong singer here...guitar, keys, bass, percussion, composition, production et al
I always felt that seven consecutive note rule was inadequate and flawed. Basically it means one could copy someone's song almost verbatim - just make sure that no seven notes repeat another song's seven notes. Not cool. The Pharrell/Gaye family case took this under consideration and brought other elements into play - such as uniquely expressed motifs.
Now this current case, I'm on the fence about. To my ears, it's not as clear of a rip to me as "Blurred Lines" (which on first listen I thought was a sample of "Got to Give It Up").
There is such a thing as a "standard chord progression", as you know. That should be considered. Other than that, the way the end of the verse sets up the chorus is similar. I can't call this one.
Last edited:
but people argue that blurred lines is the murky and this one is the open and shut case lol
It's bananas, man. This particular case is hardly cut and dry.
I agree this current tune definitely has part of the chord progressions from Let's Get It On. My band just played the damn thing tonight. LOL. BL had zero parts of GTGIU and they lost their case! It is what it is. Glad I don't write music anymore. I just play it. If this is the current trend, Sheeran is fucked.
I know one thing.........don't fucking write a song with anything even remotely similar to a Marvin Gaye song! They'll steal money from your efforts!
I know one thing.........don't fucking write a song with anything even remotely similar to a Marvin Gaye song! They'll steal money from your efforts!
But the thing is, last time I looked you can't copyright chord progressions. Off top, I can think of a few standard progressions where a single chord progression is the basis for dozens of popular songs. So this definitely isn't an open and shut case.
In fairness, I think "Blurred Lines" was a rip - and not the first rip by Pharrell. That Negro said the song was "written" in 20 minutes. Duh! You just took "Got to Give it Up" - its arrangement and changed a couple notes, then called it a new song!
Exactly.
Took me a close listen but that chord progression by the guitar is carbon copy at certain points. Wish I could just hear the instrumentals.
Considering the Blurred Lines decision, I'm surprised it took them ao long to sue this dude.
Similar threads
