Blurred Lines

[Phatboy317]

Blurred Lines jury awards Marvin Gaye family $7m

Marvin Gaye will be rolling in his grave.

I know the music industry needs a good shake-up, but this is not the way to do it.
Too many people are getting away with suing others for vast amounts of money on the flimsiest of evidence.

This has the potential to kill music stone dead.

I for one will ensure that the bloodsuckers never again receive a penny in royalties from me, and I can only hope that others follow suit.

[conkerman]

Can I be reimbursed for being subjected to that dross?

[Asterix]

conkerman said:

Can I be reimbursed for being subjected to that dross?

The video is worth the price of admission alone, well one of the versions is.

[GCH]

Has set a dangerous precedent this one.

What amazes me, is there are no samples, and no melody parts or lyrics copied.
It seems to be based solely on the notion that they have copied the 'feel' of the track.

Even more amazing, is that the original marvin gaye recording was not copyrighted- only the sheet music, which makes the 'feel' argument even more flawed, as the most immediately obvious similarity in the tracks (the percussion) is not part of the music that is copyrighted and was not heard by the jury!

Edited by GCH on Thursday 12th March 10:00

[Steamer]

Asterix said:

conkerman said:

Can I be reimbursed for being subjected to that dross?

The video is worth the price of admission alone, well one of the versions is.

While not my usual listening - it never fails to perk my mood up.

I'm going to have to hold my hand up hear and ask for a bit of guidance on two matters: - which was the original Gaye song that was in question here? (I only know about two of his songs I'm sorry to say).

While on the topic, I saw the Gaye family outside of the court yesterday (one of the daughters I think) Dressed like she was due to attend a funeral, in floods of tears with dark glasses on, claiming 'We are now free from the shackles of Farrell and Thicke'.... Am I right in thinking shes a nutty as squirrel poop an making a slight over reaction?


ETA: Ignore me! Just read the BBC article in the first post.

Edited by Steamer on Thursday 12th March 10:52

Also ETA: This answered my question perfectly (both songs in question, mixed):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziz9HW2ZmmY

Jeebus H - I can hear a similar beat, I'd go as far as to say 'possibly inspired by..' but bugger me I would expect to pay $7mill for using it

Edited by Steamer on Thursday 12th March 10:57

[droopsnoot]

Steamer said:

While on the topic, I saw the Gaye family outside of the court yesterday (one of the daughters I think) Dressed like she was due to attend a funeral, in floods of tears with dark glasses on, claiming 'We are now free from the shackles of Farrell and Thicke'.... Am I right in thinking shes a nutty as squirrel poop an making a slight over reaction?

I thought that. Considering they'd just won the case and many millions of dollars in compo, I felt she could have cheered up a bit. And I don't really "get" why they've applied to halt all sales of "Blurred Lines" while they decide how the royalties are shared out - surely that's just stupid?

[Getragdogleg]

Did anyone else notice that the volume on the BBC player thing goes up to 11 ?

[conkerman]

Spotted that, someone at the beeb has a sense of humour.

[Bradgate]

I'm not a musician, but it sounds to me like the Blurred Lines bass line, which is such a fundamental part of the song's appeal (almost as much as Ms Ratajkowski ), has been 'borrowed' almost note for note from 'Got to Give it up'.

[Phatboy317]

Bradgate said:

I'm not a musician, but it sounds to me like the Blurred Lines bass line, which is such a fundamental part of the song's appeal (almost as much as Ms Ratajkowski ), has been 'borrowed' almost note for note from 'Got to Give it up'.

Trust me, it's not.
And I'm a bass player.

[Mastodon2]

As much as "Blurred Lines" irritates me when I hear it, this is an incredibly tenuous link to make and the ruling is ridiculous. This sets a precedent that anyone with an old song which sounds vaguely similar to a new song will be calling their lawyer, rubbing their grubby mits together hoping for some money.

[Mr Pointy]

Does this mean that Weird Al is going to have to cough up as well?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Gv0H-vPoDc

[hidetheelephants]

The way the Gayes' shyster explained it on the telly was that Thicke and Farrell sued them, not the other way round; Thicke and Farrell are fking nuggets of the first water.

It appears that the prick and the hat wearer got upset when the Gaye family accused them of plagiarism so they sued; the Gaye family then decided to countersue for the plagiarism having previously been satisfied with just slagging them off in the press. They may be successful musicians but they are utter tts.

[Phatboy317]

I don't think it matters who sued who, or who started it.
It's the fact that they were allowed to get away with this - that it even got as far as court, and that it then wasn't thrown out with great speed - that's the worrying thing.

Edited by Phatboy317 on Friday 13th March 07:12

[HaroldBishop]

Was listening to the radio the other day and this came on:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mp7qWfDANrU

Which is a complete rip-off of this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3EG4olrFjY

However both borrow heavily from this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZDrNUPrlGY

To me the Murs song is influenced by Dion but the Trainor song plagiarises the Murs song.

A lot of grey areas in this sort of thing.

[mp3manager]

Mr Pointy said:

Does this mean that Weird Al is going to have to cough up as well?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Gv0H-vPoDc

No, it's a parody.

[audidoody]

Watch out Sam Petty

[audidoody]

Watch out Sam Petty

[qube_TA]

What I don't understand is that it's the family of MG that has sued, not MG's label who presumably own the publishing rights to his music.