You have to imagine that a performer such as Pharrell Williams has to be a loyal fan of Marvin Gaye. But that doesn't mean the vocalist/producer is holding any punches when it comes to the late R&B icon's familial lawsuit against himself, Robin Thicke and T.I. regarding similarities between last year's smash "Blurred Lines" and Gaye's "Got To Give It Up."
"The only reason Defendants claim infringement here is because Plaintiffs made certain comments in promoting their record about being inspired by Marvin Gaye," states a motion filed by Williams' legal team. "Defendants smelled money and rushed to make their infringement demand, but they chose to ignore that the songs had no similarity in actual notes or phrases."
We can't claim to know for sure, but Thicke and cohorts somewhat invited a lawsuit via their own legal actions. The trio of performers actually filed a lawsuit against the Gaye estate first, in the hope of deterring the lawsuit ongoing now. Although the Gayes had been suggesting they would bring charges, Thicke's initial suit seemed to imply guilt to a degree.
Determining the similarity of songs and the resulting legality is hardly black and white, so musicologists were brought in to examine the two tracks. Ultimately however, it'll be up to the judge to note the closeness/difference between the two songs.
That's where attorney Howard King made a clever move that may be the killing blow to the Gayes' lawsuit.
Technically, the Gayes only own the song composition to "Got to Give It Up" and not the recording, which is held by the record label. That means the judge, for the purposes of the Gaye family's lawsuit, may need to make a decision based on examining the sheet music for the tracks, not actually listening to them. And that is a world of difference.
