Get 40% Off
🤯 Perficient is up a mind-blowing 53%. Our ProPicks AI saw the buying opportunity in March.Read full update

Marvin Gaye family prevails in 'Blurred Lines' plagiarism case

Published 03/21/2018, 03:44 PM
© Reuters. FILE PHOTO: Singer, Williams and Thicke perform together at the Walmart annual shareholders meeting in Fayetteville

By Jonathan Stempel

(Reuters) - A federal appeals court on Wednesday upheld a $5.3 million judgment against Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams for copying a Marvin Gaye song to create their 2013 smash "Blurred Lines."

By a 2-1 vote, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Gaye's 1977 song "Got to Give It Up" deserved "broad" copyright protection, and the March 2015 jury verdict in favor of Gaye's three children could stand because there was "not an absolute absence of evidence" of similarity between the two songs.

Circuit Judge Milan Smith also upheld an award of 50 percent of future royalties from "Blurred Lines" to the Gayes. He restored the jury finding that the Interscope record label, part of Vivendi (PA:VIV) SA, and Clifford Harris, the rapper known as T.I. who added a verse to "Blurred Lines," should not be liable.

Jurors had awarded the Gayes $7.4 million, but U.S. District Judge John Kronstadt reduced the sum to $5.3 million, while adding royalties. Kronstadt also said T.I. and Interscope should be liable, but the appeals court disagreed.

The "Blurred Lines" case has transfixed the music industry, prompting debate over the line between plagiarism and honoring works by popular artists like Gaye, whose songs also include "I Heard It Through the Grapevine" and "What's Going On." Gaye was fatally shot by his father in 1984 at age 44.

Wednesday's decision prompted a strong dissent from Circuit Judge Jacqueline Nguyen, who said the decision let the Gayes "accomplish what no one has before: copyright a musical style," and expanded the potential for further copyright litigation.

3rd party Ad. Not an offer or recommendation by Investing.com. See disclosure here or remove ads .

"That is the consequence of the majority's uncritical deference to music experts," she wrote.

Howard King, a lawyer for Thicke and Williams, said the dissent "enhances the prospects" his clients may prevail in an appeal. "These are two entirely different songs," he said.

"We are thrilled," Richard Busch, the Gayes' lawyer, said in an interview. "The decision protects songwriters, and encourages new songwriters to create original works themselves."

Two of Gaye's children, Frankie and Nona, called the decision "a victory for the rights of all musicians."

Williams, whose songs also include "Happy," admitted in court to being a Gaye fan since childhood but said "Blurred Lines" and "Got to Give it Up" were similar in genre only.

Thicke has in interviews acknowledged drawing on Gaye's song but maintained in sworn statements that he exaggerated his contribution to "Blurred Lines."

Song theft lawsuits have proliferated in recent years.

This month, for example, Miley Cyrus was accused of stealing her 2013 hit "We Can't Stop" from a 1988 work by a Jamaican songwriter.

Some artists like Ed Sheeran have settled, while, in contrast, Led Zeppelin persuaded a federal jury in June 2016 it did not steal the opening guitar riff to "Stairway to Heaven."

The case is Williams et al v Gaye et al, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 15-56880.

Latest comments

Risk Disclosure: Trading in financial instruments and/or cryptocurrencies involves high risks including the risk of losing some, or all, of your investment amount, and may not be suitable for all investors. Prices of cryptocurrencies are extremely volatile and may be affected by external factors such as financial, regulatory or political events. Trading on margin increases the financial risks.
Before deciding to trade in financial instrument or cryptocurrencies you should be fully informed of the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, carefully consider your investment objectives, level of experience, and risk appetite, and seek professional advice where needed.
Fusion Media would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. The data and prices on the website are not necessarily provided by any market or exchange, but may be provided by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual price at any given market, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. Fusion Media and any provider of the data contained in this website will not accept liability for any loss or damage as a result of your trading, or your reliance on the information contained within this website.
It is prohibited to use, store, reproduce, display, modify, transmit or distribute the data contained in this website without the explicit prior written permission of Fusion Media and/or the data provider. All intellectual property rights are reserved by the providers and/or the exchange providing the data contained in this website.
Fusion Media may be compensated by the advertisers that appear on the website, based on your interaction with the advertisements or advertisers.
© 2007-2024 - Fusion Media Limited. All Rights Reserved.