Verdict sets a dangerous precedent, cripples creativity

Mar 21, 2015 08:54 GMT  ·  By

Earlier this month, a judge ruled in favor of Marvin Gaye’s family in the lawsuit against Pharrell Williams and Robin Thicke, deciding that their hit song “Blurred Lines” was a shameless rip-off of the 1977 classic “Got to Give It Up.”

The Gaye family was awarded $7.4 million (€6.8 million) in damages, a large chunk of which Williams will have to take out of his own pocket, just like Thicke. The next move, while Williams and Thicke will appeal, is for the Gayes to seek an injunction barring all sales of “Blurred Lines.”

For the first time since the verdict, Williams is speaking out on it in an interview with the Financial Times (via Variety), saying that such a ruling sets a very dangerous precedent in that it effectively cripples creativity.

He maintains that “Blurred Lines” was “stolen” and that they didn’t copy Gaye’s song, but were merely inspired by it. Obviously, no one should be able to copyright an inspiration.  

“You can’t own emotions,” he says. “The verdict handicaps any creator out there who is making something that might be inspired by something else. This applies to fashion, music, design… anything.”

If he and Thicke don’t win the appeal, Pharrell predicts a future in which the entire showbiz will be “frozen in litigation,” because anyone who has ever inspired someone else could take them to court over copyright violation claims.

Thicke might have an ulterior motive in speaking of inspiration and how it doesn’t equal copyright: the Gayes are said to be considering filing another lawsuit against him, this time for his big hit of last year, “Happy.” They are convinced it’s a rip-off of “Ain’t That Peculiar,” but they’re yet to file the papers because Gaye didn’t write it (Smokey Robinson did).