There are so many songs that have blatantly copied other songs/riffs/etc over the years. This one seems like an odd choice to make a statement with. Why this exact song? Why not Stairway To Heaven, or Creep, or Jet Airliner, or that Coldplay song?
We'll never know if Marvin Gaye's family would even have challenged it on their own, if Pharrell and Thicke hadn't sued Gaye's family first... maybe they wouldn't have taken it to court at all. Who knows...
That was the part that really took the case, that they had the nerve to sue the very man and his music whom Thicke says he beloved. I gather just beloved enough to make some money off them with any thought of compensating the Gaye family.
Peace
*We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
I don't know how closely people followed this case but it was a pre-emptive suit because the Gaye family basically sent them a letter saying they want 100% ownership or they will sue. Thicke has fully credited Gaye in the past. He openly admitted that Million Dollar Baby was basically based on Troubleman and as such gave song writing credits to Gaye (and his estate). I would also like to point out that the Gaye family is now thinking of suing Pharrell again because they say Happy is a ripoff of Ain't it Peculiar. I love Marvin Gaye (and I enjoy Pharrell and Robin Thicke too) but his family not so much.
I don't know how closely people followed this case but it was a pre-emptive suit because the Gaye family basically sent them a letter saying they want 100% ownership or they will sue. Thicke has fully credited Gaye in the past. He openly admitted that Million Dollar Baby was basically based on Troubleman and as such gave song writing credits to Gaye (and his estate). I would also like to point out that the Gaye family is now thinking of suing Pharrell again because they say Happy is a ripoff of Ain't it Peculiar. I love Marvin Gaye (and I enjoy Pharrell and Robin Thicke too) but his family not so much.
I'd love to read more about the letter you're saying the Gaye family originally wrote Thicke. What's your source on that? Thanks.
Sorry not a letter-maybe a poor choice of words. But they were threatened with a lawsuit, they offered them some money (maybe not enough) and eventually filed a pre-emptive lawsuit. It can't be pre-emptive if there is no threat of a lawsuit. Here's one recent article but I read more or less the same thing several times when this whole thing started mainly on pitchfork and stereogum.
Interesting, that is literally the only place I've seen it stated that the Gaye family sent a letter asking for "whole ownership" or whatever they said, first. The lawyer for Thicke & Pharrell says 2 other things that don't really make sense to me... at the end of the day offering $6 figures after you use someone else's work and now you think they're going to sue you, you can't seriously expect to sound "generous" for doing that! Still seems to me the outcome was exactly right.
And on your last point, actually "pre-emptive" is real even if you just THINK the other side has the right to sue. They don't have to have said a peep- if you're worried they can and will (i.e. now that the song is popular it's all over the media how much it sounds like Gaye), that could cause a pre-emptive move. Our very own US government once made "pre-emptive strikes" without proving or showing the country in question actually threatened us... but that's a whole other thread...
To be clear in above, Beasties didn't win a judgement that they didn't steal the sample; they successfully prevented the company representing Trouble Funk from being recognized as having the right to sue.
I think you are taking my point of pre-emptive too literally but whatever-guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I am just saying that in my opinion the arguments made by many people that Thicke and Co got what they deserved because they had the "nerve" to sue the Gayes are somewhat unjustified and ignorant. Moreover, I would like to point out that even George Clinton said that he didn't think that Blurred Lines ripped off his work. I really wonder what Marvin Gaye would have made of it all. And again...here is some proof that the Gayes are not exactly the "victims" everyone seems to think they are. In many ways this reminds me of how staunchly the Marleys "protect" their father's legacy/work which resulted in some real nasty legal battles with Aston Barrett.
Sooo there's a reason there wasn't a ton of people saying "Blurred Lines rips off Funkadelic" when it first came out. I don't know anyone who says Funkadelic was the first band and that song "Sexy Way" (I think that's the title) was the base for Blurred Lines. There IS a reason everyone and their cousin immediately started talking about "Got to Give It Up" though.
Fine, agree to disagree. But hopefully next time... folks will just go ahead and get the rights. That IS the legal way to do it.
As for Gaye's family, maybe you don't know much about his history, but his father was very abusive and Gaye tragically died by his own father's hand. If you don't think there's going to be drama in a family like that, you are living under a rock. But actually still really not getting your point: just because the sisters and ex wife are feuding, anyone and everyone should be able to steal Gaye's music? No one except the family ("no one" includes you, me, and the Daily Mail, by the way) knows what the beef between them is really about, but thank goodness people's legal rights don't (usually) just depend on whether they're fighting with family or not.
Comments
Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
Peace
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
And on your last point, actually "pre-emptive" is real even if you just THINK the other side has the right to sue. They don't have to have said a peep- if you're worried they can and will (i.e. now that the song is popular it's all over the media how much it sounds like Gaye), that could cause a pre-emptive move. Our very own US government once made "pre-emptive strikes" without proving or showing the country in question actually threatened us... but that's a whole other thread...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3008499/Marvin-Gaye-s-family-ugly-feud-7-4m-Blurred-Lines-payout-widow-accuses-penniless-sisters-picking-bones-say-hated-like-this.html
Food for thought.
Fine, agree to disagree. But hopefully next time... folks will just go ahead and get the rights. That IS the legal way to do it.
As for Gaye's family, maybe you don't know much about his history, but his father was very abusive and Gaye tragically died by his own father's hand. If you don't think there's going to be drama in a family like that, you are living under a rock. But actually still really not getting your point: just because the sisters and ex wife are feuding, anyone and everyone should be able to steal Gaye's music? No one except the family ("no one" includes you, me, and the Daily Mail, by the way) knows what the beef between them is really about, but thank goodness people's legal rights don't (usually) just depend on whether they're fighting with family or not.