Askyip unlock
Question: See the answer
While some may think that the copyright case of Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams versus Marvin Gay’s estate was new (see below for details), copyright infringement cases in music have been going on for some time. In fact, a case just re-opened involving Stairway to Heaven which was produced in 1971 by Led Zeppelin and is claimed to have been copyrighted from a 1968 instrumental song called “Taurus” (or at least the most popular score from that song). This case is now being re-opened even though the alleged copyright happened 49 years ago and the fact that the case was decided in 2016 in Led Zeppelin’s favor. The case is being appealed because it is alleged that the judge gave an improper jury instruction regarding copyright.
In 2013, Thicke and Williams co-produced “Blurred Lines” a song that earned them over $16 million in sales and streaming revenues. The song has been very popular, but Marvin Gaye’s estate claimed that it was very “similar” to Marvin Gaye’s 1977 hit song “Got to Give It Up”. Thicke filed a preemptive lawsuit to prevent the Gaye family from claiming any share of royalties.
Thicke did state that he was influenced by Marvin Gaye and, specifically, “Got to Give It Up” when he co-composed “Blurred Lines” with Williams. In response, the Gaye family sued Williams and Thicke. There was a little bit of contradiction in Thicke’s testimony about whether or not he co-wrote or just co-composed the song. Williams claimed that, although Gaye’s music had influenced him in his youth, he did not copy Gaye’s song in his composition.
In March 2015, a jury ruled in favor of the Gaye estate, stating that while Williams and Thicke did not directly copy “Got to Give It Up,” there was enough of a similar “feel” to warrant copyright infringement. Gaye’s heirs were awarded $7.4 million in damages, the largest amount ever granted in a music copyright case.
Cases like these, cause concern to some about any precedent that this may cause. Robert Fink, for example, stated that this verdict had the potential to set a precedent for “fencing off our shared heritage of sounds, grooves, vibes, tunes, and feels.” Musicians, artists, and writers often note that previous works influence them in their creative process, and that there is very little that is completely original.
Thicke and Williams did not see the musical influence of Gaye as copyright infringement, but rather as inspiration that spurred them to create a new, original single. Case Study – “Blurred Lines” of Copyright
Do you think the Gaye family should own the rights to the “feel” of “Got to Give It Up” in addition to specific lyrics, melodies, harmony, etc.? Why or why not?
This court case is one among many over the past decade (like the Led Zeppelin case) that have placed limits on songwriting and musical composition. Do you think it is important to provide these legal protections for artists even if it means hindering artistic creativity and the new works that might come from musical influence? Explain your reasoning.
Should authors, musicians, and other artists acknowledge all of the influences on their work, regardless of the degree of influence? Why or why not?
If you purchase a song and then recognize that it is appropriating an earlier work, you are not legally obligated to stop listening, but are you obligated ethically? Explain your reasoning.
Answer: images attached
