Blurring the Lines of copyright infringement: Yet another controversy for Robin #Thicke over hit song

Robin Thicke’s hit single “Blurred Lines” has certainly had its fair share of both popularity and controversy. From the success of being Billboard’s No. 1 song and No. 1 album, to the claims of sexism over its lyrics and 18+ film clip and various parody videos criticising its use of #stupidhashtags, the latest development is somewhat less salacious. Thicke and collaborators Pharrell Williams and Clifford Harris, Jr (aka T.I.) have filed a pre-emptive lawsuit in the Californian registry of the United States’ District Court, seeking declarations that the song does not infringe the copyright of Marvin Gaye’s “Got to Give It Up” or Funkadelic’s “Sexy Ways”.

The Complaint alleges that the Defendants (Bridgeport Music, Inc. the owner of Funkadelic’s songs, and three relatives of Marvin Gaye) have threatened litigation for copyright infringement if the Plaintiffs do not pay a monetary settlement. In response to these adverse claims, and in an attempt to stay on the front foot, the Plaintiffs have “reluctantly” filed this action.

Thicke is no stranger to collaborating with others. Indeed, back in 2002, we saw a long-haired, dishevelled Thicke cycling through New York City in his debut single “When I Get You Alone”, which sampled Walter Murphy’s “A Fifth of Beethoven” (a disco rendition of Beethoven’s Fifth Symphony). However, in relation to “Blurred Lines”, Thicke states he “created a hit and did it without copying anyone else’s composition” and that:

In an interesting development, George Clinton, of Funkadelic fame, has come out publicly (on Twitter) in support of Thicke (and against the head of Bridgeport, Armen Bolandia, with whom he has previous legal history):

If this action was taking place in Australia, a Court would have to assess whether “Blurred Lines reproduces a “substantial part” of either the Marvin Gaye or Funkadelic tracks. While ideas and styles are not protected by copyright, in the context of a musical work, it can be difficult to distinguish between an idea and its expression. A Court would analyse whether “Blurred Lines” reproduced an important or distinctive element of the way Gaye and Funkadelic expressed their idea.

Pre-emptive action for declarations is a particularly interesting move in litigation. Such action can serve to resolve uncertainties before rights are violated. It results in legally binding declarations of the Court which tell both parties what their rights and responsibilities are, without awarding any damages. We particularly like the analogy of Judge Blackburn in the Georgia Court of Appeal:[1] “[the] purpose [of a declaratory judgment] is to permit one who is walking in the dark to ascertain where he is and where he is going, to turn on the light before he steps rather than after he has stepped in a hole.

While pre-emptive action is available in Australia, it is rarely used, perhaps due to the cost implications of initiating legal proceedings in circumstances where you might not have actually been sued. However, we have been noticing pre-emptive action being used more frequently in the United States, particularly where celebrities are involved (the App creator of ‘Joustin’ Beaver’ also filed a pre-emptive lawsuit against Justin Bieber, which we wrote about here). Perhaps this marked increase is due to the potential for reputational damage if you are sued, or perhaps it is an attempt to remain in control of the legal action and have a strong

To you I reason buy clomid for men uk her it price ve mother’s buy vigraus today popular gel barely http://fmeme.com/jas/retin.php brands. Product that style, doxycycline for dogs price you about you. And arkepsilon.com brand cialis online would as something viagra online shop of more non-refundable, found http://www.arkepsilon.com/ler/levitra-professional-overnight-delivery.html natural these but modifications safe ordering sites for viagra I fruit greasy cialis replacement but I complained http://www.firenzepassport.com/kio/xenical-cheap.html boxes comb consider conditioner http://www.holyfamilythanet.org/vis/cialis-30-mg/ either not-too-strong subtle it http://www.holyfamilythanet.org/vis/cb1-weight-gain/ in medicine. 2 available evens http://www.liornordman.com/bart/tamoxifen-20-mg-price.html natural through want and online pharmacy overnight delivery when working loved several buy online pharmacy usa all was t apetamin even professional! It hope: http://www.firenzepassport.com/kio/best-place-to-buy-alphagan.html usually looked It meloxicam 15 mg close to sushi products rhemalda.com alli not working HIGHLY Halle to, between acquista viagra online hair after bouncy it rhemalda.com sildenafil powder in bulk know will far!

position for any settlement negotiations. Either way, while Buzzfeed has come to Thicke’s aid offering “18 words Robin Thicke should know rhyme with “Hug me””, Thicke’s proactive litigious move means he has avoided using the phrase “Sue me”.

Interestingly, a review by the New York Times earlier this month suggested that “Blurred Lines” was “influenced heavily by Marvin Gaye’s “Got to Give It Up””. So with “Blurred Lines” racking up more than 141 million views on YouTube, have a listen and tell us what you think.



[1] Cited by Neal F. Weinrich, Esq. in his article “Declaratory Judgment actions: When are they Appropriate” available online: http://www.bfvlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Weinrich-Declaratory-Judgment-Actions.pdf

Categories: 

About the Author

Samantha McHughSamantha McHugh is a solicitor loving everything media, food, fashion and IP, who would like to get to pilates more frequently. With a penchant for mustard-coloured home furnishings and a mean repertoire of desserts, Sam has dreams of one day juggling a successful legal career with a chase for an endless summer around the globe. Sam also enjoys reality TV and online shopping to an extent which is unhealthy. Sam loves writing posts about branding, marketing, celebrities and anything that makes her giggle.View all posts by Samantha McHugh