Community Chat

[Irshgrl31201]

On 3/11/2015 RainCityGirl said:

First of all, I don't think his music WAS used by anyone. Secondly, I doubt that Marvin Gaye himself would be bothered with a lawsuit because he understood the nature of music. Third, someone mentioned sampling as in Vanilla Ice. The members of Queen and David Bowie must have either given permission to lift a line from Under Pressure, OR they didn't care to bother with a lawsuit. There are many, many rap songs that have lifted a riff or actually taken a whole chorus from an actual song to use in their music. The most recent that I can think of is Flo Rida's use of an Etta James riff. I don't remember any lawsuit and this was her actual voice being used, not some nebulous reference to notes or drum lines that are sort of similar.

I am the one who mentioned the sampling and DB and Queen and it settled out of court with Vanilla Ice before it even went to trial. This is different though than the Pharrell/Gay thing. Vanilla Ice very obviously sampled it where Pharrells was reminiscent of it. Big difference. The history of music shows similarities because artists do get inspired by one another. Sampling is completely different and many hip hop artists do pay to sample other artists. IMO this was not comparable at all and I think the jury made the complete wrong decision.

Whoever compared his daughters reaction being comparable to a murder trial verdict. ITA, she was way over the top for an infringement rights verdict and I actually think her father Marvin Gaye would be appalled by his family bring suit because if there was anyone who understood the community of music it was him. He had a very collaborative spirit and career.

[RainCityGirl]

On 3/11/2015 Irshgrl31201 said:

On 3/11/2015 RainCityGirl said:

First of all, I don't think his music WAS used by anyone. Secondly, I doubt that Marvin Gaye himself would be bothered with a lawsuit because he understood the nature of music. Third, someone mentioned sampling as in Vanilla Ice. The members of Queen and David Bowie must have either given permission to lift a line from Under Pressure, OR they didn't care to bother with a lawsuit. There are many, many rap songs that have lifted a riff or actually taken a whole chorus from an actual song to use in their music. The most recent that I can think of is Flo Rida's use of an Etta James riff. I don't remember any lawsuit and this was her actual voice being used, not some nebulous reference to notes or drum lines that are sort of similar.

I am the one who mentioned the sampling and DB and Queen and it settled out of court with Vanilla Ice before it even went to trial. This is different though than the Pharrell/Gay thing. Vanilla Ice very obviously sampled it where Pharrells was reminiscent of it. Big difference. The history of music shows similarities because artists do get inspired by one another. Sampling is completely different and many hip hop artists do pay to sample other artists. IMO this was not comparable at all and I think the jury made the complete wrong decision.

Whoever compared his daughters reaction being comparable to a murder trial verdict. ITA, she was way over the top for an infringement rights verdict and I actually think her father Marvin Gaye would be appalled by his family bring suit because if there was anyone who understood the community of music it was him. He had a very collaborative spirit and career.

I know exactly what sampling is. I've just never followed any litigation involving it. All I know is there is a heck of a lot of it happening and yet people proclaim these samplers geniuses at what they do, (i.e. Flor Rida). On the other hand, the only lifting I can see in Blurred Lines is an actual drum line. There are only so many drum beats and lines. Does that mean that anyone who uses the same drum riff is subject to litigation? We might as well throw in the towel on all music. Blatant stealing of a song would be the George Harrison song My Sweet Lord. Note for note the same melody.

[SydneyH]

I dunno, part of me wonders if Thicke and Pharell were in such a rush for a hit, it never occurred to the to request permission to sample Gaye's work.

[RainCityGirl]

They didn't sample his work. They used a similar drum riff.

[abbeythe 8th]

Why should it make a difference whether or not Marvin Gaye's family members have jobs? What difference does it make whether or not they over-reacted to the verdict? The bottom line is a jury ruled in their favor.

How does anyone here know how Marvin Gaye would feel about this suit?

I wonder if ""Got to Give It Up"" is still one of Robin Thicke's favorite songs.

[Irshgrl31201]

On 3/11/2015 RainCityGirl said:

On 3/11/2015 Irshgrl31201 said:

On 3/11/2015 RainCityGirl said:

First of all, I don't think his music WAS used by anyone. Secondly, I doubt that Marvin Gaye himself would be bothered with a lawsuit because he understood the nature of music. Third, someone mentioned sampling as in Vanilla Ice. The members of Queen and David Bowie must have either given permission to lift a line from Under Pressure, OR they didn't care to bother with a lawsuit. There are many, many rap songs that have lifted a riff or actually taken a whole chorus from an actual song to use in their music. The most recent that I can think of is Flo Rida's use of an Etta James riff. I don't remember any lawsuit and this was her actual voice being used, not some nebulous reference to notes or drum lines that are sort of similar.

I am the one who mentioned the sampling and DB and Queen and it settled out of court with Vanilla Ice before it even went to trial. This is different though than the Pharrell/Gay thing. Vanilla Ice very obviously sampled it where Pharrells was reminiscent of it. Big difference. The history of music shows similarities because artists do get inspired by one another. Sampling is completely different and many hip hop artists do pay to sample other artists. IMO this was not comparable at all and I think the jury made the complete wrong decision.

Whoever compared his daughters reaction being comparable to a murder trial verdict. ITA, she was way over the top for an infringement rights verdict and I actually think her father Marvin Gaye would be appalled by his family bring suit because if there was anyone who understood the community of music it was him. He had a very collaborative spirit and career.

I know exactly what sampling is. I've just never followed any litigation involving it. All I know is there is a heck of a lot of it happening and yet people proclaim these samplers geniuses at what they do, (i.e. Flor Rida). On the other hand, the only lifting I can see in Blurred Lines is an actual drum line. There are only so many drum beats and lines. Does that mean that anyone who uses the same drum riff is subject to litigation? We might as well throw in the towel on all music. Blatant stealing of a song would be the George Harrison song My Sweet Lord. Note for note the same melody.

Where in there did I say you didn't know what sampling was? I am in agreement with you so I don't know who you are arguing with.

[SydneyH]

On 3/11/2015 abbeythe8th said:

Why should it make a difference whether or not Marvin Gaye's family members have jobs? What difference does it make whether or not they over-reacted to the verdict? The bottom line is a jury ruled in their favor.

How does anyone here know how Marvin Gaye would feel about this suit?

I wonder if "Got to Give It Up" is still one of Robin Thicke's favorite songs.

The employment status of his remaining family members has no bearing on this case, agreed. I hear a lot of similarity between the songs so may be they are deserving of compensation.......

[RainCityGirl]

On 3/11/2015 Irshgrl31201 said:

On 3/11/2015 RainCityGirl said:

On 3/11/2015 Irshgrl31201 said:

On 3/11/2015 RainCityGirl said:

First of all, I don't think his music WAS used by anyone. Secondly, I doubt that Marvin Gaye himself would be bothered with a lawsuit because he understood the nature of music. Third, someone mentioned sampling as in Vanilla Ice. The members of Queen and David Bowie must have either given permission to lift a line from Under Pressure, OR they didn't care to bother with a lawsuit. There are many, many rap songs that have lifted a riff or actually taken a whole chorus from an actual song to use in their music. The most recent that I can think of is Flo Rida's use of an Etta James riff. I don't remember any lawsuit and this was her actual voice being used, not some nebulous reference to notes or drum lines that are sort of similar.

I am the one who mentioned the sampling and DB and Queen and it settled out of court with Vanilla Ice before it even went to trial. This is different though than the Pharrell/Gay thing. Vanilla Ice very obviously sampled it where Pharrells was reminiscent of it. Big difference. The history of music shows similarities because artists do get inspired by one another. Sampling is completely different and many hip hop artists do pay to sample other artists. IMO this was not comparable at all and I think the jury made the complete wrong decision.

Whoever compared his daughters reaction being comparable to a murder trial verdict. ITA, she was way over the top for an infringement rights verdict and I actually think her father Marvin Gaye would be appalled by his family bring suit because if there was anyone who understood the community of music it was him. He had a very collaborative spirit and career.

I know exactly what sampling is. I've just never followed any litigation involving it. All I know is there is a heck of a lot of it happening and yet people proclaim these samplers geniuses at what they do, (i.e. Flor Rida). On the other hand, the only lifting I can see in Blurred Lines is an actual drum line. There are only so many drum beats and lines. Does that mean that anyone who uses the same drum riff is subject to litigation? We might as well throw in the towel on all music. Blatant stealing of a song would be the George Harrison song My Sweet Lord. Note for note the same melody.

Where in there did I say you didn't know what sampling was? I am in agreement with you so I don't know who you are arguing with.

I thought you were explaining the difference to me. Nothing more. I am not arguing at all, just continuing the discussion. Geez.

[MickD]

.....and on a side note I wonder if this whole trial could've been avoided if pharrell and thicke's attorney had met with the other side and settled with whatever amount of royalties.....I think it was immature and unprofessional on their part.

[MickD]

....haha...what did I just type....my DH wouldn't have a job....he's works with patents trademarks copyrights etc.....haha.....