My 8 year old son has heard "Blurred Lines" a bunch of times, not sure if that constitutes child endangerment, so don't alert Children's Services please. Anyway, like most of you, the first time I heard "Blurred Lines", I instantly thought it was a rip off of Marvin Gaye. Just to test it, I played "GTGIU" for my 8 year old. As it began, I said "What song is this?" and he immediately started singing "Blurred Lines" over the Gaye track intro. Case solved, drops mic, wheels out of court room Perry Mason style.
Have listened. It's like a shit interpolation of GTGIU by people with much less talent.
DocMcCoy"Go and laugh in your own country!" 5,917 Posts
Otis_Funkmeyer said:
A ruling in the Gaye estate's favor would be Earth-shattering.
This.
It does not matter one single, solitary fuck if you, me or anyone else (Robin Thicke, Pharrell and T.I. included) thinks it sounds like Got To Give It Up. There are proven methods one can call upon to establish whether it uses the same notes, chords, chord progressions, key, tempo, rhythm arrangement, etc. It's only after you've established that it does use all or some of those elements that you can move on to the business of judging whether Blurred Lines is a product of its creators having utilised the skill, talent and labour of the creators of Got To Give It Up in their song, or whether it's an otherwise original work utilising stylistic elements of Got To Give It Up that are non-copyrightable. (spoiler: it's the second.)
I once had an exasperating phone conversation with the lawyer of a female singer-songwriter with whom I'd been discussing a song on his client's new album, and how she wanted to give some of the publishing on it to Bob Marley's estate. The reason for this? The song used a similar descending chord progression to the first bar of the chorus to No Woman, No Cry - they'd actually looped the Fugees version on the demo, but removed it before tweaking the song further for the finished version. So, it didn't actually sample No Woman No Cry, nor did it use any other recognisable elements from the song apart from those three chords which have, of course, been used in any number of songs both before and since. "But we used Marley's song, we should give him some of the publishing," she insisted. Never mind trying to point out that Marley didn't actually write the song (or at least isn't the credited writer), it was a struggle trying to get it through her head that she wasn't under any obligation to give up a share of her publishing just because the two songs shared a similar chord progression. We managed it eventually, though.
Mani of the Stone Roses once announced during a radio broadcast that their Fool's Gold was inspired by Young MC's Know How, which was one in the eye for all those indie-kids who insisted the source material was Can's I'm So Green rather than a somewhat prosaic rap record that was played at the Hacienda every Friday night for about two years. As far as I'm aware, neither Young MC nor the notoriously litigious Delicious Vinyl have taken legal action over it to date. Point being, you can say whatever you like about what inspired the song, but if it doesn't meet the established criteria for judging whether or not it infringes someone else's copyright, you are legally home free.
Basically, if this goes to court and isn't immediately thrown out, we're facing a possible future where every cloth-eared bastard in the world who doesn't know one end of a Dorian scale from the other can shout out "THAT'S EXACTLY LIKE [X]!!" in a courtroom and get a judgment in their favour, at which point it's goodnight for every Motown pastiche, every JB/funk pastiche, every C&W/rock/blues song that uses the same three chords in the same order, and on and on and on.
Of course you have, it's exactly the same as GTGIU.
:-P
You must have. The first several times I heard it, it was on in the background and I didn't even realize it was a new song. I just thought it must have been on a soundtrack or something and that's why it was getting played.
So MMG is now "The Untouchable Maybach Empire." Hmmm...remind me how long Death Row lasted after it was rechristened "The New and Untouchable Death Row"? Even Rick Ross's failures are fucking bites.
Mani of the Stone Roses once announced during a radio broadcast that their Fool's Gold was inspired by Young MC's Know How, which was one in the eye for all those indie-kids who insisted the source material was Can's I'm So Green rather than a somewhat prosaic rap record that was played at the Hacienda every Friday night for about two years. As far as I'm aware, neither Young MC nor the notoriously litigious Delicious Vinyl have taken legal action over it to date. Point being, you can say whatever you like about what inspired the song, but if it doesn't meet the established criteria for judging whether or not it infringes someone else's copyright, you are legally home free..
thank you Doc for this little knowledge gem.
While Stone Roses S/T is a mainstay in my collection, it's easily been 15+ years since I last checked out "Know How" by Young MC (I think that album actually was my first 'hip-hop' record I ever bought for myself). Needless to say your post peaked my curiosity, and without a doubt, you can hear the similarities. Funny enough, the YouTube comments seem to have several references to the Manchester scene.
This thread prompted me to check out the song. I'd never heard of the guy before. I guess it does sound a bit like Got To Give It Up but I wouldn't think it was close enough to sue. If I had any issue with Blurred Lines is that the production sounds really cheap. Like it was banged out on a crappy Casio keyboard using one of the preset drum patterns in about ten minutes.
to add a whole other meta-layer to this case, supposedly Gaye based the "groove" for "GTGIU" on a Mbuti pygmy stick rhythm he heard on the "music of the rainforest pygmies" LP on lyrichord. mentioned here:
DocMcCoy"Go and laugh in your own country!" 5,917 Posts
ppadilha said:
Winona in the bottom left corner for the extra point.
I think Miley's gone a bit mental, personally. Obviously, Southern white girls appropriating black popular culture isn't anything new, and much as you'd expect "reasonably attractive young woman cavorting around in skimpy outfit" to be a match-winner under normal circumstances, the fact is she's trying way too hard.
Also I don't wanna get all "elbows" here, but she really isn't built for that kind of game. And if it's the "Wayward Disney/Nickelodeon Princess Slutting It Up For Teh Lulz" sweepstakes she's going for, well, I've seen Spring Breakers and homegirl ain't even at the races.
The cost of litigating is at least 6 figures so I don't begrudge the Gaye family for turning down a 6 figure settlement (I'm sure it was very low 6 figures) based solely on Thicke's interview and the obvious similarities in the songs. I also disagree with anyone who argues that there is an exact science to determining whether there is a copyright infringement. It's not that way at all and if this case gets past the summary judgment stage, anything is possible in the hands of a jury. Realistically though, I would be shocked if the case did not settle very soon because the Gaye family will likely lose and get nothing...and they know this. The lawyers representing Thicke and Co. are also definitely telling Gaye's estate that the longer this case drags on, the LESS money available to settle, given their own legal fees. In short, I don't see this case setting any precedent because it will never get that far.
What may have started as an experiment in twerking, accessorizing with black friends and cultural tourism, has crossed over into a cry for help. Someone needs to tell this person "No." and "Stop."
I would hate for last night's car wreck topped with a plane crash and toxic chemical spill to somehow be attributed to black culture. That was all 'I can do WTF I want because I am wealthy, white, young, website hits and TV ratings wrapped up in one package.' It was as much Madonna on bad acid as it was a couple of degrees away from plushie porn.
Also I don't wanna get all "elbows" here, but she really isn't built for that kind of game. And if it's the "Wayward Disney/Nickelodeon Princess Slutting It Up For Teh Lulz" sweepstakes she's going for, well, I've seen Spring Breakers and homegirl ain't even at the races.
And I love how no one is even talking about Thicke in all this.
There were two people on stage acting all kinds of tacky and inappropriate.
Her complete lack of sexy was off-set by him living up to the creepy lech handle.
to add a whole other meta-layer to this case, supposedly Gaye based the "groove" for "GTGIU" on a Mbuti pygmy stick rhythm he heard on the "music of the rainforest pygmies" LP on lyrichord. mentioned here:
And I love how no one is even talking about Thicke in all this.
There were two people on stage acting all kinds of tacky and inappropriate.
Her complete lack of sexy was off-set by him living up to the creepy lech handle.
I just watched that performance - I'm so clueless about this stuff that only a few hours after a friend posted that Beetlejuice photoshop thing did I understand it was Robin Thicke and Miley Cyrus.
But having watched it, I have to agree about Thicke. Are people supposed to think he's a sex symbol in the same way they're supposed to think Macklemore is a rapper?
And Miley Cyrus has all the moves of a teenage boy who never had sex but thinks this is what sex is like. Was this whole thing the Disney version of raunchy adult entertainment? Is Macklemore the Disney version of rap?
to add a whole other meta-layer to this case, supposedly Gaye based the "groove" for "GTGIU" on a Mbuti pygmy stick rhythm he heard on the "music of the rainforest pygmies" LP on lyrichord. mentioned here:
Comments
Percussion
Closer than Blurred
If not, were they sued?
If not, did they sue Gaye's estate?
If not, why is Thicke et al suing?
I bet Aaliyah paid....they used Gaye in the video.
This.
It does not matter one single, solitary fuck if you, me or anyone else (Robin Thicke, Pharrell and T.I. included) thinks it sounds like Got To Give It Up. There are proven methods one can call upon to establish whether it uses the same notes, chords, chord progressions, key, tempo, rhythm arrangement, etc. It's only after you've established that it does use all or some of those elements that you can move on to the business of judging whether Blurred Lines is a product of its creators having utilised the skill, talent and labour of the creators of Got To Give It Up in their song, or whether it's an otherwise original work utilising stylistic elements of Got To Give It Up that are non-copyrightable. (spoiler: it's the second.)
I once had an exasperating phone conversation with the lawyer of a female singer-songwriter with whom I'd been discussing a song on his client's new album, and how she wanted to give some of the publishing on it to Bob Marley's estate. The reason for this? The song used a similar descending chord progression to the first bar of the chorus to No Woman, No Cry - they'd actually looped the Fugees version on the demo, but removed it before tweaking the song further for the finished version. So, it didn't actually sample No Woman No Cry, nor did it use any other recognisable elements from the song apart from those three chords which have, of course, been used in any number of songs both before and since. "But we used Marley's song, we should give him some of the publishing," she insisted. Never mind trying to point out that Marley didn't actually write the song (or at least isn't the credited writer), it was a struggle trying to get it through her head that she wasn't under any obligation to give up a share of her publishing just because the two songs shared a similar chord progression. We managed it eventually, though.
Mani of the Stone Roses once announced during a radio broadcast that their Fool's Gold was inspired by Young MC's Know How, which was one in the eye for all those indie-kids who insisted the source material was Can's I'm So Green rather than a somewhat prosaic rap record that was played at the Hacienda every Friday night for about two years. As far as I'm aware, neither Young MC nor the notoriously litigious Delicious Vinyl have taken legal action over it to date. Point being, you can say whatever you like about what inspired the song, but if it doesn't meet the established criteria for judging whether or not it infringes someone else's copyright, you are legally home free.
Basically, if this goes to court and isn't immediately thrown out, we're facing a possible future where every cloth-eared bastard in the world who doesn't know one end of a Dorian scale from the other can shout out "THAT'S EXACTLY LIKE [X]!!" in a courtroom and get a judgment in their favour, at which point it's goodnight for every Motown pastiche, every JB/funk pastiche, every C&W/rock/blues song that uses the same three chords in the same order, and on and on and on.
Of course you have, it's exactly the same as GTGIU.
:-P
You must have. The first several times I heard it, it was on in the background and I didn't even realize it was a new song. I just thought it must have been on a soundtrack or something and that's why it was getting played.
So MMG is now "The Untouchable Maybach Empire." Hmmm...remind me how long Death Row lasted after it was rechristened "The New and Untouchable Death Row"? Even Rick Ross's failures are fucking bites.
thank you Doc for this little knowledge gem.
While Stone Roses S/T is a mainstay in my collection, it's easily been 15+ years since I last checked out "Know How" by Young MC (I think that album actually was my first 'hip-hop' record I ever bought for myself). Needless to say your post peaked my curiosity, and without a doubt, you can hear the similarities. Funny enough, the YouTube comments seem to have several references to the Manchester scene.
http://thewire.co.uk/in-writing/essays/p=9959
snake ----> tail
Winona in the bottom left corner for the extra point.
I think Miley's gone a bit mental, personally. Obviously, Southern white girls appropriating black popular culture isn't anything new, and much as you'd expect "reasonably attractive young woman cavorting around in skimpy outfit" to be a match-winner under normal circumstances, the fact is she's trying way too hard.
Also I don't wanna get all "elbows" here, but she really isn't built for that kind of game. And if it's the "Wayward Disney/Nickelodeon Princess Slutting It Up For Teh Lulz" sweepstakes she's going for, well, I've seen Spring Breakers and homegirl ain't even at the races.
The cost of litigating is at least 6 figures so I don't begrudge the Gaye family for turning down a 6 figure settlement (I'm sure it was very low 6 figures) based solely on Thicke's interview and the obvious similarities in the songs. I also disagree with anyone who argues that there is an exact science to determining whether there is a copyright infringement. It's not that way at all and if this case gets past the summary judgment stage, anything is possible in the hands of a jury. Realistically though, I would be shocked if the case did not settle very soon because the Gaye family will likely lose and get nothing...and they know this. The lawyers representing Thicke and Co. are also definitely telling Gaye's estate that the longer this case drags on, the LESS money available to settle, given their own legal fees. In short, I don't see this case setting any precedent because it will never get that far.
That Photoshop is kick-ass, though.
I would hate for last night's car wreck topped with a plane crash and toxic chemical spill to somehow be attributed to black culture. That was all 'I can do WTF I want because I am wealthy, white, young, website hits and TV ratings wrapped up in one package.' It was as much Madonna on bad acid as it was a couple of degrees away from plushie porn.
Extra credit for putting Winona in the bottom left
You don't think this is sexy?
There were two people on stage acting all kinds of tacky and inappropriate.
Her complete lack of sexy was off-set by him living up to the creepy lech handle.
Song #1, Elephant Song?
http://www.amazon.com/Music-Rain-Forest-Pygmies-Recordings/dp/B00000228W
I just watched that performance - I'm so clueless about this stuff that only a few hours after a friend posted that Beetlejuice photoshop thing did I understand it was Robin Thicke and Miley Cyrus.
But having watched it, I have to agree about Thicke. Are people supposed to think he's a sex symbol in the same way they're supposed to think Macklemore is a rapper?
And Miley Cyrus has all the moves of a teenage boy who never had sex but thinks this is what sex is like. Was this whole thing the Disney version of raunchy adult entertainment? Is Macklemore the Disney version of rap?
that Beetlejuice photoshop though: GOLD.
The pygmies must feel short-changed in all of this.