The writers of Blurred Lines state that the judge, when examining Blurred Lines and Got to Give It Up, should have “determined that the songs were different if he went by the sheet music”. In other words, the sheet music, or the compositional elements.
Advertisement
Subtract the non-copyrighted recorded percussion, keyboard parts, backup vocals and bass lines, and the appellants assert that the case should not have been tried.
Robin Thicke, Pharrell Williams and T.I. are not backing down over their 2013 hit Blurred Lines.
The artists behind “Blurred Lines” may have lost a lawsuit a year ago, but it looks like they’re just beginning to fight. The lawyers for Gaye’s estate were also allowed to testify about the sound of the “Got to Give it Up” recording, which the brief says should not have happened. “The court then instructed the jury that it could consider all this testimony in its substantial-similarity analysis”.
“If Marvin Gaye’s estate had come to me [with that case], I would have turned them down”.
The brief continues, “At trial, the district court made things worse”.
Similar limitations regarding what, exactly, had copyright protection applied in the recent “Stairway To Heaven” plagiarism case, in which it was ultimately decided that the Led Zeppelin song was not sufficiently similar to the work the band were accused of ripping off.
Analysing the growing number of high-profile plagiarism cases making it to court, music lawyer Robert Horsfall admitted the Blurred Lines ruling was surprising.
If the Court of Appeals refuses to reverse the trial verdict, Thicke and his fellow songwriters are asking lawmakers to reduce the millions of dollars awarded in this case, contending actual damages and profits are not supported by “competent evidence”. They claim the judge gave faulty instructions to the jury.
Advertisement
Find the entire brief below.
