Robin Thicke Burn In HELL

staxwaxstaxwax 1,456 Posts
edited March 2015 in Strut Central
And Pharrel showing his ass for being a complete hypocrite 'its just an homage' no motherfucker you let that ponce thicke badger you into another straight MG rip off - repeat offender too





What. The. Actual. Fuck.
Marvin Gaye’s daughter, Nona Gaye, added: "Right now, I feel free. Free from … Pharrell Williams and Robin Thicke’s chains and what they tried to keep on us and the lies that were told."
«13

  Comments


  • deezleedeezlee 295 Posts
    ^^^ that's real? that's crazy

  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,518 Posts
    Thicke made a strange decision to not settle and go to court instead.
    Settling would have been a lot cheaper.
    Many, many hit songs pay out both legit and bogus claims.

    Among the trial highlights was the revelation that even though his name appears on the writer credits, he did not help write the song. He says he put it there because of ego. More like because of $$$$$$$$. PW says he doesn't care, stars put their names on his songs all the time.

    Thicke also played a medley of pop hits, in court, from the likes of; the Beatles, U2, and Bob Marley. No youtube.

  • phatmoneysackphatmoneysack Melbourne 1,124 Posts
    Bizarre, and irresposible.

    Although that youtube link is from 2009, so whats going on there?

    Is this something that came about before blurred lines and is only being picked up now that he's (more) famous?

  • i'm not sure i get the outrage here (aside from the frivolous, pre-emptive lawsuit which was a publicity stunt that backfired tremendously).


  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,518 Posts
    The old blurred lines thread can not be bumped.
    Is this true of all old threads?

  • crabmongerfunk said:
    i'm not sure i get the outrage here (aside from the frivolous, pre-emptive lawsuit which was a publicity stunt that backfired tremendously).

    Tremendous legal analysis from the Hamilton Burger of Soulstrut.

  • jjfad027jjfad027 1,594 Posts
    Didn't he give Gaye writing credits on MDB?

  • willie_fugalwillie_fugal 1,862 Posts
    looks like M. Gaye did get a credit on that track: http://www.discogs.com/Robin-Thicke-Sex-Therapy-The-Experience/release/2963716

  • staxwaxstaxwax 1,456 Posts
    deezlee said:
    ^^^ that's real? that's crazy

    Yes it's real.
    This one too





    The execrable thicke wasn't just a spoilt fuck who was handed a music career by a rich daddy in the industry, talmbout wealth/white privilege,
    Daddy Gave Me My Career
    he repeatedly bit-copied the holiest of the holy and then had the gall to turn around and deny it in this case.
    Not only to deny, but to smugly appropriate and preemptively sue the Gaye estate is spitting in the face of the Marvin Gaye legacy, and a flagrant offence to lovers of all things good and true everywhere.



  • staxwaxstaxwax 1,456 Posts
    As if that boorish 'hey hey hey' in the chorus wasn't a cause for point blank execution in and of itself

  • DuderonomyDuderonomy Haut de la Garenne 7,240 Posts
    MMmmm, this jizz-bucket should be worried too:




  • phatmoneysackphatmoneysack Melbourne 1,124 Posts
    Possibly the best thing to come out of this whole mess is Robin Thicke's court illustration.



    Its got 1987 private press eccentric smooth jazz LP written all over it.

  • DORDOR Two Ron Toe 9,790 Posts
    Who's got a copy of the list of artist borrowing or taking influences from other artist songs?

    I'm guessing that list is pretty huge...


  • leonleon 883 Posts
    Duderonomy said:
    MMmmm, this jizz-bucket should be worried too:




    Oh that's a rip-off allright. No denying. This wasn't acknowledged in the credits?

  • Jonny_PaycheckJonny_Paycheck 17,825 Posts
    lemme understand you guys.

    you all got into old soul records because of rap music right?

    the guys that sampled lots of old soul records, without clearing most of them, because this shit is an art. right?


    ok

  • HorseleechHorseleech 3,830 Posts
    I understand people not liking Robin Thicke (I can barely look at the guy), but this verdict is complete, 100% bullshit.

    These songs don't even have the same melody or chord progression, which are the accepted benchmarks for copyright claims.

    The same groove? Since when is that a crime? Well, get ready for 10,000+ lawsuits on that basis wherein 95% of the songs people here ride for get taken off the market.



  • jjfad027jjfad027 1,594 Posts
    DOR said:
    Who's got a copy of the list of artist borrowing or taking influences from other artist songs?

    I'm guessing that list is pretty huge...


    Basically all art ever.

  • DORDOR Two Ron Toe 9,790 Posts
    jjfad027 said:
    DOR said:
    Who's got a copy of the list of artist borrowing or taking influences from other artist songs?

    I'm guessing that list is pretty huge...


    Basically all art ever.

    Exactly.

  • DORDOR Two Ron Toe 9,790 Posts
    Horseleech said:
    I understand people not liking Robin Thicke (I can barely look at the guy), but this verdict is complete, 100% bullshit.

    These songs don't even have the same melody or chord progression, which are the accepted benchmarks for copyright claims.

    The same groove? Since when is that a crime? Well, get ready for 10,000+ lawsuits on that basis wherein 95% of the songs people here ride for get taken off the market.



    Is Bruno Mars shitting in his loafers right now?

  • ThermosThermos 307 Posts
    Lines are blurred in this argument because Thicke is such an insufferable doof. It feels like he should pay money to Marvin Gaye's family to make amends for every time they're mentioned in the same sentence. Still, the ruling is bogus. If making derivative songs is copyright infringement than 90% of the musicians on this planet are breaking the law daily.


  • the whispers bout to get papered up

  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,518 Posts
    Get a hit, get a writ.

    All hit songs get sued.

  • staxwaxstaxwax 1,456 Posts
    JonnyPaycheck said:
    lemme understand you guys.

    you all got into old soul records because of rap music right?

    the guys that sampled lots of old soul records, without clearing most of them, because this shit is an art. right?


    ok

    Thicke case is a different ball game.
    Imo teens rapping over a loop or samples in the pioneer years 80s / 90s is not the same as setting a precedent as a million dollar pop singer to repeatedly jack or outright 'cover' another singer in the 2000/10's passing it off as his own creation and then preemptively sueing instead of just sampling or recreating, acknowledging and paying publishing rights and moving on.

    Erick Sermon's 'Music' or Oddisee 'aint that peculiar' being examples of how incorporating Marvin should be played in this era.


  • Horseleech said:
    I understand people not liking Robin Thicke (I can barely look at the guy), but this verdict is complete, 100% bullshit.

    These songs don't even have the same melody or chord progression, which are the accepted benchmarks for copyright claims.

    The same groove? Since when is that a crime? Well, get ready for 10,000+ lawsuits on that basis wherein 95% of the songs people here ride for get taken off the market.



    This x100000000000 (and also what Johnny said). This is a horrible precedent for music and really makes no sense (no matter how much you can't stand Thicke). This shouldn't be about him.

  • staxwax said:
    JonnyPaycheck said:
    lemme understand you guys.

    you all got into old soul records because of rap music right?

    the guys that sampled lots of old soul records, without clearing most of them, because this shit is an art. right?


    ok

    Thicke case is a different ball game.
    Imo teens rapping over a loop or samples in the pioneer years 80s / 90s is not the same as setting a precedent as a million dollar pop singer to repeatedly jack or outright 'cover' another singer in the 2000/10's passing it off as his own creation and then preemptively sueing instead of just sampling or recreating, acknowledging and paying publishing rights and moving on.

    Erick Sermon's 'Music' or Oddisee 'aint that peculiar' being examples of how incorporating Marvin should be played in this era.


    except this is about copyright, not creativity. I love Oddisee, but no way he cleared that.

    EDIT: on the discogs page for the Oddisee release it says "This release had legally been offered as a free available download in the world-wide-web." Not sure what that means, but free doesn't mean legal.

  • Jonny_PaycheckJonny_Paycheck 17,825 Posts
    The law doesn't create an exception for people of a particular city and decade (NYC in the 80s, or whatever amorphous "justifiable for da kulcha" shit toward which people feel affectionately), either art is somewhat elastic and is open to include interpretation, influence, or even re-use in creative fashion - or it is some shit that gets decided by poorly informed judges and juries who have little if any understanding of it.

    if you are "for da kulcha, yo" then there is no way this is a good decision for you. no matter how you feel about Thicke, Pharrell, or the song in question.

  • batmonbatmon 27,574 Posts



  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,518 Posts
    I believe in the intelligence of juries.
    Most of the time they do a good job of weighing the evidence given and following the judges instructions.

    If they got it as wrong as people think, there will be no trouble over turning the verdict on appeal.

  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,518 Posts
    The Gaye family has been presented in the press as poor downtrodden victims.
    One member is going around saying they are Free at last from the oppression of Thicke and Williams.
    Millionaires just don't get it.
Sign In or Register to comment.