sumire
Blueblood
Posts: 1,992
Mar 7, 2005 18:45:40 GMT -4
|
Post by sumire on Mar 12, 2015 13:30:48 GMT -4
Last night's PBS Newshour explained the sheet music thing a little more:
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 11, 2024 9:27:14 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2015 15:23:50 GMT -4
Or the facts as Robin Thicke presented them. His testimony contradicted his previous boastful statements about being involved in the process and wanting his song to sound like the Marvin Gaye song. When he testified that he actually wasn't involved in the process because he was drunk and high and that the song was produced, essentially, without his knowledge that implied a sense of guilt which, in and of itself, gives the perception that there was something done to be guilty about. He couldn't have had a more negative influence on this case if he tried. This entire case doesn't make much sense. If it's based on the music, then base it on the music. What difference does the testimony make at the end of the day? Even if Pharrell got on the stand and said "yeah, I stole the song" that wouldn't make it true. Only the music itself can prove or disprove that.
|
|
|
Post by Ginger on Mar 12, 2015 18:29:36 GMT -4
Yeah, I really did not see the point of Robin's defense at all. "If the song was stolen, it was stolen by Pharell, not me." Maybe he was hoping that should they lose, Pharell would be the one having to give up the lion's share of the royalties...in which case Pharell would just sue Robin for royalties since he was too drunk and high to actually write anything.
|
|
celerydunk
Sloane Ranger
Posts: 2,521
May 3, 2005 21:57:59 GMT -4
|
Post by celerydunk on Mar 12, 2015 18:37:42 GMT -4
I don't write songs, so I know very little about how this works. Is it just the sheet music that people can sue over? Can you sue over lyrics? There are so many songs about cheating former lovers that we now hate, why aren't these artist all suing each other? I can easily think of a couple of ballads where the chorus is some variation of "I'm done crying over you". I also have several songs on my playlist instructing me to get on the dance floor. And why aren't there lawsuits over movies being the exact same plotline? The minute we see a male and female on screen that are opposite personalities and hate each other, we know how the entire movie is going to go. Or the movie where something happens to the main character and they suddenly find themselves transported to a much older/younger body and only go back once they have learned some important life lesson.
I sound like I'm being funny, but I'm really not. I'm really curious as to why there aren't lawsuits over songs about a woman being beautiful.
|
|
|
Post by ratscabies on Mar 12, 2015 19:22:08 GMT -4
Not particularly relevant, but my guitar player and I used to do a folk music duet act back in the 90s. Topical, funny (we thought) folk songs. One bit we cooked up was a 15 minute riff based on the assertion that ALL songs are "Rollin' in My Sweet Baby's Arms", the old bluegrass standard. We crowbarred everything from "Johnny B. Goode" to "Stairway to Heaven" into those changes. That was years before this. I used to write songs a lot more than I do now, and I can tell you it's a fine line between "homage", "quoting" and "stealing". I believe that Sam Smith just might be young and sheltered enough to have unwittingly stolen "I Won't Back Down". I have seen too many web comments claiming "how could he have possibly heard that song that's FIFTEEN years old???" Uh, I dunno, listened to classic rock radio for 2 hours? I agree the jury found AGAINST Thicke, rather than for the Gaye family.
|
|
|
Post by deeconsistent on Mar 12, 2015 21:27:16 GMT -4
Yeah, I really did not see the point of Robin's defense at all. "If the song was stolen, it was stolen by Pharell, not me." Maybe he was hoping that should they lose, Pharell would be the one having to give up the lion's share of the royalties...in which case Pharell would just sue Robin for royalties since he was too drunk and high to actually write anything. Robin was the only one who gave interviews in which he said the song was influenced by Marvin Gaye. Pharell NEVER did. It was an attempt to show that Robin didn't know if the song was influenced by Marvin Gaye because he had no part in creating it. Robin didn't throw Pharell under the bus. It was an obvious lie, but Pharell also participated in it. If it had worked, it would have benefited him, too.
|
|
atwood
Lady in Waiting
Posts: 131
May 20, 2007 8:08:52 GMT -4
|
Post by atwood on Mar 13, 2015 9:11:45 GMT -4
There's also rant about Pachelbel's Canon in D that can be heard in all kinds of modern music.
|
|
Beeelicious
Blueblood
Posts: 1,185
Oct 4, 2005 15:57:15 GMT -4
|
Post by Beeelicious on Mar 13, 2015 12:57:18 GMT -4
There's also rant about Pachelbel's Canon in D that can be heard in all kinds of modern music. I just saw that Pachelbel rant the other day, referenced (I think) in the comments at Jezebel. They called it unfunny, but hell, I loved it. I thought it was hysterical! On topic: I hope this whole thing marks the end of artists collaborating with Robin Thicke, and then ultimately the end of his career. I no like his misogynist ass.
|
|
|
Post by LurkerNan on Mar 13, 2015 13:01:53 GMT -4
So Pharrell's lawyer speaks. He said Pharrell and company made monetary offers to the Gaye family after they repeatedly said they were going to sue, but that they insisted on complete rights being turned over for Blurred Lines, so they were forced to go to court over this. He says the jury never even asked to hear the two sections that were supposed to be similar, and instead relied on one musicologist's paid testimony. He includes a comparative chart that shows no similarities in any of the notes. Honestly, I can only agree that the jury got this one completely wrong. They need to appeal.
|
|
|
Post by prisma on Mar 13, 2015 16:12:16 GMT -4
I really liked this bit from the article:
Nice metaphor! I hope this gets overturned on appeal. The Gaye family sounds greedy. I still am a bit astonished at Robin's "I was too drunk and high to be responsible for my hit" defense. I will now think of this more as Pharrell's song than his since that is the way he portrayed it.
|
|