Discussion in 'Decades, Pop, Rock' started by semipenguin, Jun 8, 2014.
I find those songs are obviously similar.
The lines ain't so blurred now, are they?
I don't. They have a similar "feel", but that can be said of every pop song, including "Give it Up". If all new music has to be entirely novel we will have very little new music.
I agree. I'm sure you can find songs from the 50's and 60's that influenced Marvin Gaye's song. Probably half of all modern popular music has strong influences from older songs. And what about people like Eminem, who basically take an existing song and rap over it? How is this any different than cell phones, or automobiles, or really anything else?
Most importantly, though, is this ridiculous idea that any particular musical pattern has an exclusive and indefinite patent. Drug companies spend billions developing and testing new drugs, and their patent lasts only a few years. Marvin Gaye made his money from that 1977 song, how does the fact that someone made money off that musical line 35 years later affect his estate? If Blurred Lines had not been written, would his estate have otherwise profited from the lack of any similar songs? If anything, I'm sure that sales of Gaye's song have probably shot-up as well. Gaye's estate is just looking for money.
I haven't listened to the two together to really compare them, but it's really close. Not as close as a Coldplay rip-off, but close.
The guys like Eminem are paying the publishers of the songs they sample a pretty penny.
At least they admit it. Vanilla Ice set the precedence.
After 'Blurred Lines' verdict, Brian Wilson talks Chuck Berry and 'Surfin' U.S.A.' - LA Times
Lawyers USED to be very un-rock and roll.
Hail hail rock and roll.
I find Brian Eno's work to be especially derivative.
More on Blurred Lines.
Marvin Gaye's family attempts to stop distribution of 'Blurred Lines' | Fox News
California seems to really favor those who bring these suits.
They got $7.4 million, and Marvin got credit. They should be thrilled and should shut up now.
Actually, they haven't received a penny yet, and I hope it stays that way. I hope the appeal wins. Name me one other thing that earns a lifetime patent against anything similar being sold. This entire legal concept is just hypocritical and wrong.
This kind of explains why they've come to that decision.
Pharrell Talks 'Blurred Lines' Lawsuit for First Time | Rolling Stone
The more I read and hear, the less blurred the lines are to me, and the more I think they shouldn't get anything.
If the real thing don't do the trick, you better make up something quick. You gonna burn, burn, burn, burn, burn to the wick
Oooo, Barracuda, oh yeah
The Machynlleth cottage that inspired Led Zeppelin - BBC News
Link between Machynlleth cottage and Led Zeppelin to be celebrated in new exhibition - Daily Post
'Stairway to Heaven' suit: Jury to hear Led Zeppelin case - CNN.com
They should just add Randy's name on the credits & give his estate a percentage from here on out. This could only get bad if they don't settle
I thought these two videos were nicely explanatory. The dude gets into the musical structure a little without getting too college professor on us. And then he gives us a well-reasoned opinion.