$7.4m hit for Blurred Lines over Marvin Gaye copy

Marvin Gaye's daughter, Nona Gaye, left, and ex-wife Jan Gay after their victory in court. Picture: APMarvin Gaye's daughter, Nona Gaye, left, and ex-wife Jan Gay after their victory in court. Picture: AP
Marvin Gaye's daughter, Nona Gaye, left, and ex-wife Jan Gay after their victory in court. Picture: AP
A JURY awarded Marvin Gaye’s children nearly $7.4 million (£4.9m) on Tuesday after determining singers Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams copied their father’s music to create Blurred Lines, the biggest hit song of 2013.

Mr Gaye’s daughter Nona Gaye wept as the verdict was read. “Right now, I feel free,” she said outside court. “Free from … Pharrell Williams and Robin Thicke’s chains and what they tried to keep on us and the lies that were told.”

Blurred Lines has sold more than 7.3 million copies in the US alone, according to Nielsen SoundScan figures. It earned a Grammy nomination and netted Williams and Thicke millions of dollars.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The case was a struggle between two of music’s biggest names: Williams has sold more than 100 million records worldwide during his career as a singer-producer, while Gaye hits such as Sexual Healing and How Sweet It Is (To be Loved by You) remain popular.

The verdict could tarnish the legacy of Williams, a reliable hit-maker who has won Grammy Awards and appears on NBC’s music competition show The Voice.

He and Thicke are “undoubtedly disappointed,” said their attorney, Howard King. “They’re unwavering in their absolute conviction that they wrote this song independently,” he said. Thicke and Williams earned more than $7m (£4.7m) each on the song, according to testimony.

Mr King has said a decision in favour of Gaye’s heirs could have a chilling effect on musicians who try to emulate an era or another artist’s sound.

Larry Iser, an intellectual property attorney who has represented numerous musicians, was critical of the outcome. “Unfortunately, today’s jury verdict has blurred the lines between protectable elements of a musical composition and the unprotectable musical style or groove exemplified by Marvin Gaye,” Mr Iser said. “Although Gaye was the prince of soul, he didn’t own a copyright to the genre, and Thicke and Williams’ homage to the feel of Marvin Gaye is not infringing.”

Gaye’s children – Nona, Frankie and Marvin Gaye III – sued the two singers in 2013. Their lawyer, Richard Busch, branded Williams and Thicke liars who went beyond trying to emulate the sound of Gaye’s late-1970s music and copied the R&B legend’s hit Got to Give It Up outright.

The family “fought this fight despite every odd being against them,” Mr Busch said after the verdict, which could face years of appeals.

Thicke told jurors he didn’t write Blurred Lines, which Williams testified he crafted in about an hour in mid-2012.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Williams testified that Gaye’s music was part of the soundtrack of his youth. But the seven-time Grammy winner said he didn’t use any of it to create Blurred Lines.

During closing arguments, Mr Busch accused Thicke and Williams of lying about how the song was created. He told jurors they could award Gaye’s children millions of dollars if they determined the copyright of Got to Give It Up was infringed.

Mr King denied there were any substantial similarities between “Blurred Lines” and the sheet music Gaye submitted to obtain copyright protection.

Williams wrote the majority of Blurred Lines and recorded it in one night with Thicke. A segment by rapper T. I. was added later. Williams, 41, also signed a document stating he didn’t use any other artists’ work in the music and would be responsible if a successful copyright claim was raised.