Williams v gaye
The Blurred Line between Inspiration and Infringement: Williams v. Gaye
In Williams v. Gaye,1 the high-profile copyright argument between the heirs of Motown legend Marvin Gaye and the creators of the 2013 chart-topper “Blurred Lines,” a Ninth Circuit panel consisting of Judges Milan Smith, Mary Murguia, and Jacqueline Nguyen recently left undisturbed a jury’s 2015 verdict that “Blurred Lines” infringed on the copyright of Gaye’s 1977 work, “Got To Give It Up.” Although the 2-1 conclusion largely sidestepped the key doctrinal issues at the core of the case—deferring instead to the jury’s verdict and ruling predominantly on procedural grounds—this choice is nevertheless likely to have a significant impact on copyright litigation in the music industry going forward.
Marvin Gaye released the strike song “Got To Give It Up” in 1977. Decades later, Pharrell Williams, Robin Thicke, and Clifford Harris, Jr. (better known as the rapper “T.I.”) released the chart-topping single “Blurred Lines,” which captures a similar sound and employs comparable stylistic elements to thos
Williams v. Gaye
These consolidated appeals stemmed from a jury’s ruling that Pharrell Williams, Robin Thicke, and Clifford Harris, Jr.’s ballad “Blurred Lines,” the world’s bestselling single in 2013, infringed Frankie Christian Gaye, Nona Marvisa Gaye, and Marvin Gaye III’s copyright in Marvin Gaye’s 1977 clap song “Got To Give It Up.” The Ninth Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part the district court’s decision. View “Williams v. Gaye” on Justia Law
Justia provides FREE summaries of cases from all 50 states, the U.S. Courts of Appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court. You can subscribe to receive daily opinion summaries emails at daily.justia.com.
Posted in:Cases
Tagged:Case, Copyright, Entertainment & Sports Rule, Intellectual Property, Opinion, Syndicated and US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Published on:
Updated:
Secondary Content
Secondary Content
Abstract
Part I of this Note outlines the factual and procedural history of Williams and discusses the Ninth Circuit’s examination in its first and second perspectives. Part II discusses the historical background of copyright statute in the Merged States, namely the Copyright Act of 1909 and the Copyright Act of 1976. Additionally, this section explains the structure of a music copyright infringement suit, including the elements required to make a achieving infringement claim.
Part III argues why courts should presume access in music copyright infringement cases, and subsequently, abandon the inverse-ratio rule. The inverse-ratio rule should be abandoned because people’s access to music has never been easier in today’s digital society. A plaintiff’s burden to prove substantial similarity between the plaintiff’s song and the defendant’s anthem, should not be diminished as a result of the defendant’s access to the plaintiff’s lyric. Instead, a defendant’s access to a particular song should be presumed in copyright infringement cases. This Note does not argue that the access requirement is unnecessary in such cases. Access is still necessary for copying because one cannot reproduce what one has neve
Cases
Our Summary
Over five years this case has provided a lot of detail - much for legal commentators to digest and many headlines for the insist to serve up (with the opportunity for puns on the song titles well and truly exhausted). With both songs in question being well-known there is much popular interest.
Rather than providing us with a clearer picture of what constitutes a copyright infringement in music, this ruling has given grow to real concern among composers who have previously drawn on inspiration from earlier artists, that they may now unwittingly contain infringed the copyrights of others.
We all wonder where the needle sits on the imaginary dial between influence and infringement, and it feels as if the needle has moved a few degrees further towards infringement with this judgement.
Further reading
GQ 6th May 2013 interview with Robin Thicke on the origins of Blurred Lines
Sheet melody copy of Got To Give It Up as deposited at the US Copyright Office in 1977, and used at the original 2015 trial
A imitate of the original Williams/Thicke/Harris August 2013 lawsuit claiming declaratory relief, hosted by The Hollywood Reporter.
The Modern Yorker 12th March 2015 "W