Copyright laws hinder new artists’ ability to make a career in music by preventing artists from making money off of a song that falls within the same musical feel or sound as another artist. Copyright infringements can be issued to artists if their song is substantially similar to an older track and the artist is known to have had significant access or knowledge of the older recording. Generally, these infringements have been on the basis of substantial similarities in relation to the two song’s chord progression or melody. Unfortunately, this changed in 2016 when Robin Thicke and Pharrell William’s song Blurred Lines was found to have infringed upon the copyright of Marvin Gaye’s song, Got To Give It Up. Unlike traditional copyright infringements where music theory was at the core, Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams were found to have taken the feel of the beat and bass line from Gaye’s Got To Give It Up. In this specific case, there is a lot of evidence between interviews and deposition hearings that Thicke and Williams were trying to create a feel similar to some of Marvin Gaye’s hit songs. Both musicians had depositions that substantially hurt their case as they both referenced Marvin Gaye as a source of inspiration for the track. They tried arguing that this was a tactic to sell records and gain interest from an already established fan base. Eventually, the lawyers were able to catch both artists in a lie during the deposition which significantly affected this specific case. Regardless of the many nuances in this case, the damage that this causes a future generation of musicians is severe nonetheless.
The impact of how this will affect future generations is highlighted by Judge Jacqueline Nguyen who wrote the dissenting opinion for the case. In her opinion she warns the majority of the potential harm this could cause society, as they allowed the Gaye’s to, “Accomplish what no one has before: copyright a musical style.” She believes that this creates “A dangerous precedent that strikes a devastating blow to future musicians and composers everywhere.” When the feel or style of a song can be copyrighted, it can be incredibly difficult for new artists to find their sound without using similar elements and styles as other artists. With this legal precedent in place, new artists will have a more difficult time avoiding copyright claims and legal battles for their work.
In order to get a more complete understanding of the legal elements in this case, we spoke with Justin Laughter, an entertainment attorney, who believes that this case is incredibly problematic. He says that, “The issue that you face is that judges are humans too… In this case you had a judge that wasn’t very familiar with copyright law much less music law. The lawyer for Marvin Gaye deserves a gold star because he convinced this judge of something most people would say the law doesn’t say.” Justin highlights an issue that is very important to copyright law. The lack of musical experts within the legal system make it very difficult to get fair legal precedents for the next generation of artists. Young artists should not have to be worried about accidentally making a similar feel of drums or using a similar progression of two chords because it hinders creativity and takes away from music.
?: Content Warning! Some language used may be found offensive.
We attached both sound recordings of the songs so that you can take a listen and hear for yourself what can constitute a copyright infringement in the modern day.