Friday, March 6, 2015

BLURRED LINES - MARCH 6, 2015

Read this article

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/blurred-lines-trial-reveals-how-778884

Comment on whether you believe Robin Thicke, T.I, and Pharell should be sued for the similarities of their song "Blurred Lines" to Marvin Gaye's music. Include comments on what they violated.
MINIMUM of 2 Paragraphs.

86 comments:

  1. If the allegations are true, Robin Thicke, T.I., and Pharell should be sued for the similarities of their song Blurred Lines to Marvin Gaye's music. Blurred Lines is accused of copyright infringement of Got to Give It Up. Intentional copyright infringement should be punished. They should receive the death sentence, except for Pharell because I tolerate him.
    Additionally, there is a second song in contention at trial — Thicke's "Love After War," alleged to have misappropriated Gaye's "After The Dance". I don't like Robin Thicke, he should be sued for existing.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Lexi Stokes
    I think they should be sued. They say it's copyrighted and he wants his cut of the amount of profits they received. Not only that song but another song that Robin Thicke made was also similar to one of Marvin Gaye's songs.
    What they should have done is license the song before releasing it. If they did that, they could have negotiated the distribution of the profits better. Then they wouldn't be in court.

    ReplyDelete
  3. If the allegations are true then with the money made from the song and tour should be split with the gaye family. In actuality it would not hurt the record label or any of the artist. The Gaye family does not need a huge amount just a small portion from the profit. In my opinion that would solve the whole problem. Also Pharrell should continue to wear his beautiful hat everywhere 24/7.

    ReplyDelete
  4. If there was any kind of copyright laws broken in the making and selling of the song, I do believe they should be sued. Copyrights are put in place for a reason and record companies, producers, and artist know they exist. Going into production everyone know what they can and can not do when it comes to using material from someone else's song.
    Now there are some causes where music can be sampled to a certain extinct. Sampling is where you take a small part of someone's song and put it into your own. There are rules in sampling such as how much of the song you can use, but i'm not to sure what they are. If there are just similarities in the two songs and no true copyright infringements then i do not think they should be sued. Marvin Gaye is an inspiration to many artist in modern times and he influences their music daily.

    ReplyDelete
  5. If this is true, I believe they should be sued. Blurred lines is a popular hit but has some copyright issues. There should be a fine and all rights go to the family. Although I'm sure it wasn't intentional, it's about rights. Robin, Pharell and T.I. are getting all the glory, while Gaye isn't being recognized for his work as they are. Marvin Gaye's family is responding in a major way to Robin Thicke's lawsuit claiming that "Blurred Lines" wasn't stolen from Gaye's "Got to Give It Up." The family went with counterclaims that allege that Thicke stole the summer mega-hit and also committed copyright infringement on Gaye's "After the Dance" to create his song "Love After War." Robin Claims his intentions were never to steal this song from Marvin Gaye. He says he was inspired by him being one of his favorites, and wrote the song half an hour later after hearing one of his songs.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I personally don't like what the song says, so I am a little biased towards this topic. However, I do believe that they all already have much money so what is the real reason of this huge ordeal? There is no need for all of this fighting and nonsense. If the song is actually violating Marvin Gaye's music then they should just give them whatever money they need and peacefully walk away. If someone stole parts of any of Pharell's songs he too would probably want compensation. I'm sure that they were intentionally trying to steal his song, but they should still pay if they did in fact use similar copyrighted material. Or we could just do away with the terrible song all together. :)

    ReplyDelete
  7. i don't think they should be sued for the song. its just a song. you see similarity in music everyday but you don't see people suing other people. And the fact that the song is over a year old and they want to sue is ridiculous. i would look at it as inspiration from the original song.
    i really think they just want the money. i dont think its about the music or the production. i think they know every thing pharell produces makes a large amount of money. thats why they want to sue. Thats just real greedy.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Honestly, if they all have gave Marvin Gaye some money or maybe got some permission from him. Then there will be no need for any persecution or problems. Now im not even going to lie the beat from blurred lines compared to Marvin Gaye's beat sounded nothing alike at all. So in general i don't believe that Robin Thicke, T.I. , and Pharell committed no crimes against Marvin Gaye. Honestly the Mr. Gaye should be happy that a lot of people like the song, especially if his music was sampled in "Blurred Lines"

    ReplyDelete
  9. no i don't think they should be sued for the similarities for the song.Songs from back in the day are recreated all the time.The two artist were just trying to add they're own flavor in the song.they did violate copyright laws they should ve gave marvin gaye some credit on the song .

    i dont think its that serious to sue.even though he's suppose to get a chunk of money 11 million to be exact. its just becuase the money that was made

    ReplyDelete
  10. I believe that Robin Thicke should be sued for the copyright of Blurred Lines to Marvin Gaye's song "Got to Give It Up". This is not fair to the person who originally made the song and doesn't get credit for it, but since they didn't get get permission they should be punish for this crime.
    Also, what makes matters worst that Robin Thicke also copyright another song ("Love After War') of Marvin Gaye's song called "After The Dance." What Robin Thicke doing is noticeable and should be ready for consequences.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Having to sue these musicians is only necessary if the original musician is acknowledged or mentioned, however if it is not then it is up to the original artist to decide. Violations through the artist claimed to have created a fabricated copy of another similar work should proceed in getting sued based on its similarities. The similarity between the two songs are equal between song to song. The original artist, in my view of the situation, should sue the artists who had copied his original work. It is recommended to sue however it is not required to.

    The violations of the song itself are alleged to a copyright infringement. Marvin Gatye's song has copyright agreements making the song Blurred Lines seen as a copied song of Got to Give It Up.Besides seeking profits, the Gayes are additionally seeking actual damages, or an amount of money to compensate the Gayes for a reduction of the fair market value of the worth of licensing "Got to Give It Up." Testimony on that front will be coming soon. But an accountant for the Gayes testified that the total publishing revenue for "Blurred Lines" is a little over $8 million, and that the Gayes would have negotiated for a 50 percent cut.Richard Busch, the attorney representing the Gayes, tallied the alleged damages at approximately $40 million.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I believe that Robin Thicke,T.I, and Pharell should be sued for the similarities of their song " Blurred Lines." I think it is only right for them to be sued because they used something without asking for permission and giving some of the profits to Marvin Gaye. Also, reports have shown that this is not Robin Thicke's first time sampling music without paying respects to its original owner. I know that if I was in Marvin Gaye's position I would want my money especially if several experts have proven that our songs have very similar beats. I do not think this lawsuit is personal but financial and i completely understand. I just feel that if they were going to sample his song then they should have made sure they were not going to get caught.

    ReplyDelete
  13. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Comment on whether you believe Robin Thicke, T.I, and Pharell should be sued for the similarities of their song "Blurred Lines" to Marvin Gaye's music. Include comments on what they violated. I don't think they should be sued, because if his family isn't complaining then there shouldnt be a problem.
    They should atleast give an compensation for the hassle and brutality theyve been through.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Thicke, as well as the songs co-writers Pharrell Williams and T.I., took pre-emptive action back in August, seeking declaratory relief that their song was "starkly different" from "Got to Give It Up." Gaye's estate then counter-sued, accusing EMI of not protecting the R&B legend's music and actively trying to stop the family from hindering "Blurred Lines"' success (the publishing company's chairman allegedly blasted the family for "ruining an incredible song" and "killing the goose that laid the golden egg").

    I believe that Robin Thicke,T.I, and Pharell should be sued for the similarities of their song " Blurred Lines." I think it is only right for them to be sued because they used something without asking for permission and giving some of the profits to Marvin Gaye. Also, reports have shown that this is not Robin Thicke's first time sampling music without paying respects to its original owner. I know that if I was in Marvin Gaye's position I would want my money especially if several experts have proven that our songs have very similar beats. I do not think this lawsuit is personal but financial and i completely understand. I just feel that if they were going to sample his song then they should have made sure they were not going to get caught.

    ReplyDelete
  16. If there was any kind of copyright laws broken in the making and selling of the song, I do believe they should be sued. Copyrights are put in place for a reason and record companies, producers, and artist know they exist. Going into production everyone know what they can and can not do when it comes to using material from someone else's song.
    Now there are some causes where music can be sampled to a certain extinct. Sampling is where you take a small part of someone's song and put it into your own. There are rules in sampling such as how much of the song you can use, but i'm not to sure what they are. If there are just similarities in the two songs and no true copyright infringements then i do not think they should be sued. Marvin Gaye is an inspiration to many artist in modern times and he influences their music daily.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Truthfully i like the song but i didn't know about this. I can't believe this. But maybe they have a reason for it.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I think maybe they should get sued. The rights to the song belong to Marvin Gaye. The evidence shows that the to songs are very similar . The narrator of "Got To Give It Up" transforms from a wall hugger to an enthusiastic dancer, while in "Blurred Lines," "the 'good girl' will transform into a more sexually liberated girl," said Finell.
    The rap verse in "Blurred Lines" begins and ends at the same point in the song as the Gaye song's "parlando" . Both songs center on transformation. The narrator of "Got To Give It Up" transforms from a wall hugger to an enthusiastic dancer, while in "Blurred Lines," "the 'good girl' will transform into a more sexually liberated girl," said Finell.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I believe Robin Thicke, Pharrell, and T.I. should have to pay for Copy Right infringement for sampling Marvin Gaye's "Got to Give it Up" and selling the song for profit without the approval of his family. I am not sure whether the infringement was intentional; however, the similarity of the songs is obvious.
    Although I believe the artists should give credit to Marvin Gaye and make a pay out to his family, the song was a big hit because of the big names associated with it along with the value of the music. Demanding a portion of the $11 million in tour money is a bit greedy. No one saw them in tour to hear a single song. I think the Gaye family should be satisfied with the money they receive from the money made off the music alone, because that's the only thing that Marvin Gaye can be credited with.

    ReplyDelete
  20. After listening to Marvin Gaye's "Got To Give It Up" i can conclude that Robin Thicke, Pharell Williams, and T.I.. should definitely be sued. The two songs are undoubtedly similar to each other in many ways. The introduction of both songs being played at the same time sound in unison as well as a few other parts of the songs. The meaning are also different ways but "Blurred Lines" is a definite infringement of Marvin Gaye's song. The should also be sued for not going through with the appropriate procedures for using basing the song of of Gaye"s.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I think Robin thicke, Pharell Williams, an T.I should be sued because they used Marvins Gaye beat with out asking the family. the family is asking for 40 million dollars from the song but the song only made 16 million dollars in total so I think the Marvin Gaye family should get some money just not that much I think 5 million is much reasonable than 40 million because the song only made around 16 million dollars.

    ReplyDelete
  22. when making a song or any type of music you have to be careful about copyrights. if violated then you can be in big trouble. taking someones music can be very costly. in the article it talks about how the trial reviles Thicke and Williams took two songs from another singer Marvin Gaye. the children of Gaye say that they are taking them to trial because the song was copyrighted and it should have been paid for.
    knowing this i believe that they should be paid for a portion of the son. but it looks like they are asking way to much money in terms of 4o million. the song blurred lines didn't even make that much so i don't see why they are charging so much. the "damages" don't quite seem lament to me either, but that's just my opinion. I do believe they should be paid at most half but still, 40 million is a bit of a stretch.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I believe T.I & Robin Thick shouldn't get sued. Why? Because its not like they took the words from his song , they only used the beat , therefore getting sued for a beat is ridiculous. I also believe they just suing because the song became so popular in the world but the words are there's but I believe they should pay for the beat .

    ReplyDelete
  24. I believe they shouldn't get sued. Because its not like they took the words from his song , they only used the beat , therefore getting sued for a beat is ridiculous. I also believe they just suing because the song became so popular in the world but the words are there's but I believe they should pay for the beat . So i do not believe they should get sued . Meco Lucas

    ReplyDelete
  25. I believe they shouldn't get sued. Because its not like they took the words from his song , they only used the beat , therefore getting sued for a beat is ridiculous. I also believe they just suing because the song became so popular in the world but the words are there's but I believe they should pay for the beat . So i do not believe they should get sued . Meco Lucas

    ReplyDelete
  26. If this is true, I believe they should be sued. Blurred lines is a popular hit but has some copyright issues. There should be a fine and all rights go to the family. Although I'm sure it wasn't intentional, it's about rights. Robin, Pharell and T.I. are getting all the glory, while Gaye isn't being recognized for his work as they are. Marvin Gaye's family is responding in a major way to Robin Thicke's lawsuit claiming that "Blurred Lines" wasn't stolen from Gaye's "Got to Give It Up." The family went with counterclaims that allege that Thicke stole the summer mega-hit and also committed copyright infringement on Gaye's "After the Dance" to create his song "Love After War." Robin Claims his intentions were never to steal this song from Marvin Gaye. He says he was inspired by him being one of his favorites, and wrote the song half an hour later after hearing one of his songs.

    ReplyDelete
  27. If what the article says is true, Robin Thicke, Pharrell Williams, and T.I. should be sued for copy wright. It isn't right for them to make all this money from the song if they weren't creative enough to make it on their own. Marvin Gaye should take all the credit for a song he created. While listening to the songs, Blurred Lines and Got To Give It Up, they sound very similar with the beats and Robin Thicke, Pharrell Williams, and T.I. should face consequences.
    The article also says Robin Thicke copied another song from Marvin Gaye. This shows it wasn't an accident because he did it again after being warned the first time. If someone can't make something on their own, such as music, he/she shouldn't be in the music industry. It isn't fair for people to take credit for something that they didn't even do on their own.

    ReplyDelete
  28. In hearing the song i believe that they would be sued. Blurred lines was a good hit but had a lot of problems. I think that someone that is using other folks lyrics if they want to use should at least get it approved from owner. But to be honest the songs really don't have similar lyrics but the beats are similar. Marvin Gaye's family are putting a lawsuit on robin thick song "blurred lines" but robin says it wasn't his fault really into having writing the song.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Robin Thicke should not be sued for sampling marvin gaye's song. Many known artist sample past music on a daily basis and do not get bashed for it. Jay z and Kanye west sampled Otis Redding's Song Otis back in 2011 and were not criticized for it. As well as Kanye sampling Smokey robinson on Devil in a new Dress, Travis scott On Sight, and C-Murder on his song Blood on the Leaves.
    As well as plagiarism, artist should give each other credit for using one anothers art, as Robin Thicke did by saying Marvin Gaye inspired him to make the song.

    ReplyDelete
  30. no,i don't think that the three artist should be sewed ,because its not as if the intentionally took the song.In addition they created their own lyrics.Also they did really good on the music charts.even if they did take it the made the song their own.also did Marvin get rights to the beat sewing them would be irrational.whats theirs it theirs.

    ReplyDelete
  31. I think everyone except T.I should be sued because he is my homie and he didn't even really contribute to the song anyways. I agree stealing another artists work is illegal if they did't ask for permission. It doesn't matter if they changed the lyrics and made it their own, it is still stealing. That would be like if i took someones phone and put my info in it, it's still their phone regardless of what I did to it.

    ReplyDelete
  32. I don't think they should be sued. Sure there beat sounded a tad similar to Marvin Gaye's but i don't think it was with malicious intent. Plus it's not really like Marvin Gaye has any use for there money in his current position. His family didn't make the song so they don't really deserve anything. They probably should have asked first in hindsight but the music industry is a pretty crazy business. I think Marvin's family should let it go.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Even though the song "Blurred Lines" sounded similar to one of Marvin Gaye's song, i think that they should at least give credit to Marvin since his song might have been a sample. If they actually did steal the music from Marvin's song then they should be sued for illegally stealing a copy written song. Marvin Gaye was one of the best music artists of his time so stealing his creativity should be a crime itself.

    ReplyDelete
  34. I believe that they should be sued because the beats song almost exactly the same. They basically took Marvin's beats and just changed the lyrics. It would've been different if they used some aspects of it and did something a little different. They also could ask for permission to use it. However, I really don't care about what happens to them. If they get sued then they deserve it and if they don't they just made a song with good profits.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Honestly "Blurred Lines" was likely a copy of one of Gaye's song but i believe that Robin Thicke, T.I, and Pharell shouldn't be sued. The song is over a year old and if they were to be sued it should have been done a long time ago. In actuality it doesn't even seem like their doing this over a song but just to get some money out of it. More then likely Robin was probably sampling the song like most artists do and until there actually evidence of him copying the song then nothing should be done. Blurred Lines has a lot bad rep due to the songs message and content but that doesn't mean that they should be sued.

    ReplyDelete
  36. I don't think they should be getting sued for sampling the song. It wasn't done in a negative manner by any means, and it could be considered as a tribute to Marvin Gaye's work. It's by no means meant to disrespect the artist, but to capture the essence of Gaye's work.
    If anything, this might be just an attempt for his family to return to relevance and gain some free publicity by starting drama.

    ReplyDelete
  37. To be honest... I don't really like either of these songs so I don't care whether they get sued or not. But, I feel like nobody that contributed to the making of Blurred Lines should be sued. I'm sure the song by Marvin Gaye that inspired Blurred Lines (Got to Give It Up) was very popular back in the day, but Marvin Gaye's music is not a trending topic anymore. I feel that instead of trying to sue people, Marvin Gaye's family need to acknowledge and respect how Robin Thicke, Pharrell Williams and T.I. made Marvin Gaye's music relevant again.
    I would also like to add that both songs are annoying and I don't really care who gets sued. Also, Marvin Gaye's family just want to be relevant and the situation is honestly not that serious !!

    ReplyDelete
  38. I feel that in a way they should be sued if they did not go through all of the proper measures when using the music. Even if they did, I feel as though they should still get sued because of the copyright issues. The song was used without permission. Most of time when using music from an artist, you have to get the artist's permission or their family's permission. A good example of this would be the Aaliyah movie, and how they technically couldn't use some of her music because the family denied it. So therefore Lifetime couldn't use her music.
    I think the biggest issue is that the family of Marvin Gaye feels as though something was taken away from them which is understandable. I also think they feel as though the lyrics of "Blurred Lines" misrepresents what Marvin Gaye's song was, so they are angered about that. They are angered at the success of Blurred Lines because they used their father's song without permission, so now they want a cut which is fair. The copyright issue is a big deal in the music industry. When an artist works so hard on a song and it is taken away and misused then it can feel bad.

    ReplyDelete
  39. If the allegations are true, Robin Thicke, T.I., and Pharell should be sued for the similarities of their song Blurred Lines to Marvin Gaye's music. Blurred Lines is accused of copyright infringement of Got to Give It Up.Copyrights are put in place for a reason and record companies, producers, and artist know they exist. Going into production everyone know what they can and can not do when it comes to using material from someone else's song.I believe that Robin Thicke,T.I, and Pharell should be sued for the similarities of their song " Blurred Lines." I think it is only right for them to be sued because they used something without asking for permission and giving some of the profits to Marvin Gaye.

    ReplyDelete
  40. If the allegations are true then with the money made from the song and tour should be split with the gaye family. In actuality it would not hurt the record label or any of the artist. The Gaye family does not need a huge amount just a small portion from the profit. In my opinion that would solve the whole problem. Also Pharrell should continue to wear his beautiful hat everywhere 24/7.

    ReplyDelete
  41. If this is true, I believe they should be sued. Blurred lines is a popular hit but has some copyright issues. There should be a fine and all rights go to the family. Although I'm sure it wasn't intentional, it's about rights. Robin, Pharell and T.I. are getting all the glory, while Gaye isn't being recognized for his work as they are.I think the biggest issue is that the family of Marvin Gaye feels as though something was taken away from them which is understandable. I also think they feel as though the lyrics of "Blurred Lines" misrepresents what Marvin Gaye's song was, so they are angered about that. They are angered at the success of Blurred Lines because they used their father's song without permission, so now they want a cut which is fair. The copyright issue is a big deal in the music industry. If someone can't make something on their own, such as music, he/she shouldn't be in the music industry. It isn't fair for people to take credit for something that they didn't even do on their own.

    ReplyDelete
  42. I believe that Robin Thicke,T.I, and Pharell should be sued for the similarities of their song " Blurred Lines." I think it is only right for them to be sued because they used something without asking for permission and giving some of the profits to Marvin Gaye. Also, reports have shown that this is not Robin Thicke's first time sampling music without paying respects to its original owner. I know that if I was in Marvin Gaye's position I would want my money especially if several experts have proven that our songs have very similar beats. I do not think this lawsuit is personal but financial and i completely understand. I just feel that if they were going to sample his song then they should have made sure they were not going to get caught

    ReplyDelete
  43. Robin Thicke should not be sued for sampling marvin gaye's song. Many known artist sample past music on a daily basis and do not get bashed for it. Jay z and Kanye west sampled Otis Redding's Song Otis back in 2011 and were not criticized for it. As well as Kanye sampling Smokey robinson on Devil in a new Dress, Travis scott On Sight, and C-Murder on his song Blood on the Leaves. As well as plagiarism, artist should give each other credit for using one anothers art, as Robin Thicke did by saying Marvin Gaye inspired him to make the song.

    ReplyDelete
  44. believe that Robin Thicke,T.I, and Pharell should be sued for the similarities of their song " Blurred Lines." I think it is only right for them to be sued because they used something without asking for permission and giving some of the profits to Marvin Gaye. don't really like either of these songs so I don't care whether they get sued or not. But, I feel like nobody that contributed to the making of Blurred Lines should be sued. I'm sure the song by Marvin Gaye that inspired Blurred Lines Got to Give It Up was very popular back in the day. More then likely Robin was probably sampling the song like most artists do and until there actually evidence of him copying the song then nothing should be done

    ReplyDelete
  45. In hearing the song i believe that they would be sued. Blurred lines was a good hit but had a lot of problems. I think that someone that is using other folks lyrics if they want to use should at least get it approved from owner. But to be honest the songs really don't have similar lyrics but the beats are similar. Marvin Gaye's family are putting a lawsuit on robin thick song "blurred lines" but robin says it wasn't his fault really into having writing the song.

    ReplyDelete
  46. If the accusations are true, I believe that they should be sued. Even though I haven't heard Marvin Gayes version, stealing other peoples songs is illegal. Personally, I don't believe they intentionally stole the song. But anything can happen in music. If it is true, then the Gayes family does deserve a little money, not that much though.

    ReplyDelete
  47. no ion really think much on the situation because either way it go tghe song been out for a long time. but yuh ion think it was right for hm to get sued.but for marvin gay which song was used on the song blurred lines.

    ReplyDelete
  48. If there was any kind of copyright laws broken in the making and selling of the song, I do believe they should be sued. Copyrights are put in place for a reason and record companies, producers, and artist know they exist. Going into production everyone know what they can and can not do when it comes to using material from someone else's song

    ReplyDelete
  49. it could have been a spin off of the song and revamped it so it could be new so mabey it was supposed to be like that

    ReplyDelete
  50. If these allegations are true then I do think that everyone one who was involved should be sued for not following the copyrights rules and regulations. If they wanted to use the sample of the music then they should've gotten permission from the label and from the family of Marvin Gaye.
    They violated the copyright infringement law so once again there should be consequences to pay for the law that they broke.

    ReplyDelete
  51. They could be sued for the song. The problem is that they're not the same thing. They are very similar in tone but not the same thing. Both songs were hits in different time periods. They would get sued if they were the exact same song. And, prior to the songs release a studio exec wouldn't have approved the songs production.
    Then they addressed the tone they were going for in the promotion. In one interview Thicke explained, " that is the tone that I want to recreate". So, in other words he gave credit to the late performer. Therefore I do not think that they will be sued..

    ReplyDelete
  52. I think that both songs sound somewhat similar, but I don't think Pharrell's intentions were to copy the song by Marvin Gaye. I think it is a stretch to sue Pharrell for making Blurred Lines, because it isn't identical to Got to Give it Up. Although I think Pharrell and Robin Thicke have been greatly influenced by Marvin Gaye. But if the allegations are true then I think it is because he sampled parts of the song from Marvin Gaye. But there are many artist who use samples from other artists but I think that the reason Pharrell is being sued for it is because he didn't give Marvin Gaye any credit for it.

    ReplyDelete
  53. I hear a lot of similarities and can say that he plagiarized it. Even if you disagree think about it, If your dad made a song before he died then later on you hear a hit song that sounds the same wouldn't you want justice? 

    ReplyDelete
  54. I believe that Robin Thicke, T.I, and Pharell should be used similarities of "Blurred Lines". The reason they should be considered in the similarities is because according to Marvin Gaye's song both songs technically use the same beat. Reports state that this not Robins first time sampling someone's song without showing them the proper respect.

    ReplyDelete
  55. I think that the songs do seem similar, but it is pretty far fetched to believe that the song was stolen from a Marvin Gaye song. The ideas are similar but they do say great minds think a lot. So that being said, I feel like they shouldn't really be making a law suit out of this. The only thing that could justify this law suit would be the sampling of Marvin Gaye's song that was put into Robin Thicke's song. Hopefully they will be able to work something out and this case isn't drawn out for very long.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Robin Thicke is generally a wad of gum on the sole of the shoe of life, but this goes beyond that. I believe that they should be sued. They are capitalizing on the hard work of another. Thicke should have gone about the proper licensing route. Further, they were completely aware of what they were doing,

    Gaye's family has the right to sue. They shouldn't be expected to stand by and watch record companies and music industry big-shots stuff their pockets by way of stealing.

    ReplyDelete
  57. i do not feel as if the artist of "Blurred Lines" should be sued for having a song similar to Marvin Gayes song. As a culture we are influenced by the generations that comes before us. The noticed the affect and success that Marvin Gaye had and wanted to give our generation that same feeling and type of music.
    But if they did "steal" some of the music they should be penalized of some sort and some of the music proceeds should go to the family of Marvin Gaye

    ReplyDelete
  58. Having to sue these musicians is only necessary if the original musician is acknowledged or mentioned, however if it is not then it is up to the original artist to decide. Violations through the artist claimed to have created a fabricated copy of another similar work should proceed in getting sued based on its similarities. The similarity between the two songs are equal between song to song. The original artist, in my view of the situation, should sue the artists who had copied his original work. It is recommended to sue however it is not required to.

    The violations of the song itself are alleged to a copyright infringement. Marvin Gatye's song has copyright agreements making the song Blurred Lines seen as a copied song of Got to Give It Up.Besides seeking profits, the Gayes are additionally seeking actual damages, or an amount of money to compensate the Gayes for a reduction of the fair market value of the worth of licensing "Got to Give It Up." Testimony on that front will be coming soon. But an accountant for the Gayes testified that the total publishing revenue for "Blurred Lines" is a little over $8 million, and that the Gayes would have negotiated for a 50 percent cut.Richard Busch, the attorney representing the Gayes, tallied the alleged damages at approximately $40 million.

    ReplyDelete
  59. I feel like they used Marvin gay as a reference to their song. I was watching an interview on the song but Pharell said he was thought of but his movie was not copied

    ReplyDelete
  60. I would not know because I do not pay attention to the media.

    ReplyDelete
  61. There are no similarities between Marvin gay composition and those the claimants allege they own, other than commonplace musical elements,” states the lawsuit. “Plaintiffs created a hit and did it without copying anyone else’s composition.but if they did then It wasn't done in a negative manner , and it could be considered as a tribute to Marvin Gaye's work

    ReplyDelete
  62. I do think that Robin Thicke should be sued for the copyright of Blurred Lines to Marvin Gaye's song "Got to Give It Up". All credit should be given to Marvin's family for the track but I don't believe they intentionally stole the song. They most likely heard the beat , loved it and started writing , not knowing who song it was. It is still right? No. If the honestly stole the song, they should be sued.

    ReplyDelete
  63. In their suit, the Gayes accuse Thicke of writing a similar chorus, melody and more in his song "Love After War," with regard to Gaye's "After the Dance." They also accuse Thicke of "including the similar bridge and identical lyrics from Marvin Gaye's 'I Want You' in [his] similarly-themed work, 'Make U Love Me.'" They have not yet filed any claims over that song yet.


    ReplyDelete
  64. Before i started this blog , i heard the Marvin Gaye song "Got To Give It Up". Its almost a carbon copy of Robin Thicke's "Blurred Lines". The first time i heard about the lawsuit i thought maybe he took a line or to , maybe the beat. He took the WHOLE SONG ! Most of the lyrics , the beat everything. If i was Marvin Gaye's family i would definitely sue.

    ReplyDelete
  65. The violations of the song are copyrighted.Therefore,they should be sued for using someone else creations. Its better to come up with your own design of music versus using someone else's. As well, no matter how many remixes you do to the original song it cannot sound like the original one.
    Mia Reddick

    ReplyDelete
  66. They should be sued because if the song is copyrighted they are taking others peoples ideas. It is not fair to the original makers of the song because they are making money off of them. At least give them money because your taking them profit otherwise state that it is a remix. However, I really don't care about what happens to them. If they get sued then they deserve it and if they don't they just made a song with good profits and got away with it

    ReplyDelete
  67. I believe Robin Thicke, T.I, and Pharell should be sued . There taking much of the glory for the song and forgetting about Marvin Gaye. Their making a load sum of money off of this and not giving credit where credit is due. That is a copyright and if no one else can do it they shouldnt be able too.

    ReplyDelete
  68. I believe Robin Thicke, T.I, and Pharell should be sued . There taking much of the glory for the song and forgetting about Marvin Gaye. Their making a load sum of money off of this and not giving credit where credit is due. That is a copyright and if no one else can do it they shouldnt be able too.

    ReplyDelete
  69. According to the allegations, unfortunately, Robin Thicke, T.I., and Pharell rightfully deserve to be sued for copyright infringement. By not offering compensation of supporting and relatively close soundtracks, the group of artists now interfere with copying the musical components from Marvin Gaye's original.
    'Known as "sound biting," as slang the musical artist are clearly guilty of this. This can be understood when comparing the two similar songs. However Robin Thicke claims his intentions were not to steal from Marvin Gaye, but rather explains he was merely inspired by him being one of his favorites.

    ReplyDelete
  70. David Carter
    Well I think the 3 men should face the charges against them or they should give a cut to Gaye. This shouldn't even be a big deal. We have copyrights for this very reason, so just sue them if they didn't give you a cut and take more money than could be given and move on.
    If this is that bad and oh so shocking then it must be worse that robin did it again with another one of Gaye's songs. People just aren't creative and original as they once were. I liked Robin Thicke but he is apparently a copy cat, no one likes a copy cat

    ReplyDelete
  71. I don't feel that it's necessary for Robin Thicke, T.I and Pharell to be sued. Not to be biased, i don't see that he completely copied Marvin Gaye's song. Pharell's intentions was to show a tribute to Marvin Gaye and what better way to do that than by incorporating some similarities to his past songs. However, it wasn't that similar, the beats did correspond but the tempo was different. This matter is being taken out of proportion. The only thing i must say is that they should've gave a little more credit to Marvin Gaye and his family.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Honestly, if they all have gave Marvin Gaye some money or maybe got some permission from him. Then there will be no need for any persecution or problems. Now im not even going to lie the beat from blurred lines compared to Marvin Gaye's beat sounded nothing alike at all. So in general i don't believe that Robin Thicke, T.I. , and Pharell committed no crimes against Marvin Gaye. Honestly the Mr. Gaye should be happy that a lot of people like the song, especially if his music was sampled in "Blurred Lines"

    ReplyDelete
  73. i believe that they would be sued. Blurred lines had a lot of problems. I think that Robin Thicke should have gotten copyright. But to be honest the songs really don't have similar lyrics but the beats are similar. Marvin Gaye's family are putting a lawsuit on robin thick song "blurred lines"

    ReplyDelete
  74. If the allegations are true, Robin Thicke, T.I., and Pharell should be sued for the similarities of their song Blurred Lines to Marvin Gaye's music. Blurred Lines is accused of copyright infringement of Got to Give It Up.Copyrights are put in place for a reason and record companies, producers, and artist know they exist. Going into production everyone know what they can and can not do when it comes to using material from someone else's song.I believe that Robin Thicke,T.I, and Pharell should be sued for the similarities of their song " Blurred Lines." I think it is only right for them to be sued because they used something without asking for permission and giving some of the profits to Marvin Gaye.

    ReplyDelete
  75. I believe Robin Thicke, Pharrell, and T.I. should have to pay for Copy Right infringement for sampling Marvin Gaye's "Got to Give it Up" and selling the song for profit without the approval of his family. I am not sure whether the infringement was intentional; however, the similarity of the songs is obvious.
    Although I believe the artists should give credit to Marvin Gaye and make a pay out to his family, the song was a big hit because of the big names associated with it along with the value of the music. Demanding a portion of the $11 million in tour money is a bit greedy. No one saw them in tour to hear a single song. I think the Gaye family should be satisfied with the money they receive from the money made off the music alone, because that's the only thing that Marvin Gaye can be credited with.

    ReplyDelete
  76. I believe they shouldn't get sued. Because its not like they took the words from his song , they only used the beat , therefore getting sued for a beat is ridiculous. I also believe they just suing because the song became so popular in the world but the words are there's but I believe they should pay for the beat . So i do not believe they should get sued . Meco Lucas

    ReplyDelete
  77. Having to sue these musicians is only necessary if the original musician is acknowledged or mentioned, however if it is not then it is up to the original artist to decide. Violations through the artist claimed to have created a fabricated copy of another similar work should proceed in getting sued based on its similarities. The similarity between the two songs are equal between song to song.I believe Robin Thicke, Pharrell, and T.I. should have to pay for Copy Right infringement for sampling Marvin Gaye's "Got to Give it Up" and selling the song for profit without the approval of his family.

    ReplyDelete
  78. i don't think they should be sued for the similarities on the song. That just it, it is only a similarities. Its not like the completely ripped him off, there are similarities music all the time. it is just apart of music but you shouldn't sue other people because they are influenced by you. The fact that the song has been out for awhile, being played everywhere and now they want to sue is messed up. it seems like one day there said to themselves hey hoe can we get some easy money. i would look at it as inspiration from the original song.
    They just want the money, they don't care about the music. And what really irks me is that its not even Marvin Gaye who is complaining (hes dead) its his kids who had nothing to do with the song.

    ReplyDelete
  79. I think the fact that are being sued for so much money is absolutely outrageous. But nonetheless, you should never , as an artists, let your music sound like another artists music. From featuring a song, to simply having the same tune, an artist should know how important music is to its creator and how unappreciated copying is. Eve if the artists doesn't think their music sounds like another's music, they should still take the necessary precautions to prevent a lawsuit.
    Also. an artists should consider how money-hungry people are these days. Given the economy, people are always looking for ways to make extra cash. So when an artists makes a song that sounds like theirs, they will jump at the opportunity to get some money. Robin and Pharrel should pay for what they did, but no as much as they will.

    ReplyDelete
  80. I feel that in a way they should be sued if they did not go through all of the proper measures when using the music. Even if they did, I feel as though they should still get sued because of the copyright issues. The song was used without permission. Most of time when using music from an artist, you have to get the artist's permission or their family's permission. A good example of this would be the Aaliyah movie, and how they technically couldn't use some of her music because the family denied it. So therefore Lifetime couldn't use her music.
    I think the biggest issue is that the family of Marvin Gaye feels as though something was taken away from them which is understandable. I also think they feel as though the lyrics of "Blurred Lines" misrepresents what Marvin Gaye's song was, so they are angered about that. They are angered at the success of Blurred Lines because they used their father's song without permission, so now they want a cut which is fair. The copyright issue is a big deal in the music industry. When an artist works so hard on a song and it is taken away and misused then it can feel bad.

    ReplyDelete
  81. k the biggest issue is that the family of Marvin Gaye feels as though something was taken away from them which is understandable. I also think they feel as though the lyrics of "Blurred Lines" misrepresents what Marvin Gaye's song was, so they are angered about that. They are angered at the success of Blurred Lines because they used their father's song without permission, so now they want a cut which is fair. The copyright issue is a big deal'

    ReplyDelete
  82. I don't think they should be sued for making that song because its not really similar to his music. Marvin Gaye just want money from anybody he can. The lyrics are different and they wrote the song completely different from his song and they wrote it by themselves. No need to be suing for something so clueless.

    ReplyDelete
  83. I personally don't think they should be sued for this. They used the song with the artists permission also. I understand if they would've asked but they didn't. They should rightfully be sued for copyright infringement. Even though, some or alot of people say the song was good and so called a success.

    Honestly all Marvin Gaye's family wanted is the money, they don't really care for the music in my opinion. Even though he's dead which is very unfortunate who ruins such a great song just money? I'm flabbergasted.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Honestly i think that they shouldnt be sued. The song has been out for a while and they are bringing back a song was once a huge hit and all of a sudden they wanna try and take money from the people who made because it sounds like the once alive Marvin Gaye.

    ReplyDelete