Following an appeal from lawyers representing Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams, the copyright infringement ruling surrounding “Blurred Lines,” the popular 2013 song by the aforementioned artists, will be upheld as announced by a split panel of judges on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
The court announced that the song does in fact infringe upon elements of Marvin Gaye’s “Got To Give It Up.”
While this ruling means that both Thicke and Williams will be liable for $5.3 million in damages as well as forfeiting 50% of future publishing revenue, it could have further ramifications for the music industry at large as the case represents a nontraditional and controversial approach to copyright regulation.
The lawsuit itself has been steeped in controversy since it first started making headlines in 2015. That’s because “Blurred Lines” hasn’t been accused of copying Gaye’s track note-for-note but rather it was accused of borrowing key elements of Gaye’s musical style. Although the two tracks are in different key signatures and as one of the judges noted, the tracks “differed in melody, harmony, and rhythm,” the “similar feel” to the songs is supposedly what lead the judges to reach their decision in a 2-1 vote.
The full ruling can be found here
Given the supposed subjective nature of this ruling, it could set a precedent for reasserting the bounds for what constitutes copyright infringement under current U.S. Copyright law. Experts in the industry have already begun to speculate what effects this ruling could have including direct harm to songwriters and composers as well as a divestment from the music business because of perceived copyright risk.
The dissenting judge on the panel, Jacqueline Nguyen, was quoted as saying, “This strikes a devastating blow to future musicians.” She added, “the Gayes, no doubt, are pleased by this outcome. They shouldn’t be. They own copyright in many musical works, each of which (including “Got to Give It Up”) now potentially infringes the copyright law of any famous song that preceded it.” She went on to say that the Marvin Gaye Estate “was able to accomplish what no one has before: copyright a musical style.”
This ruling comes in the midst of current copyright laws being reconstructed in the U.S. as lawmakers are preparing bills that could potentially redefine definitions of copyright regulations even further.
This is a developing story with updates to follow