A Tale Of Two Hit Songs Inspired By Past Hits... And The Very Different Way In Which Copyright Holders Reacted
from the one-good,-one-bad dept
There were two very interesting stories last week concerning hit songs allegedly "inspired" by hits from previous decades, but the stories are quite different. First up, was the news that Robin Thicke (along with Pharrell Williams and Clifford Harris Jr.), whose song Blurred Lines appears to be the undisputed hit of the summer this year (with some controversy over the content), had filed for a declaratory judgment against Marvin Gaye's family and Bridgeport Music, after those two claimed that Blurred Lines infringes on Marvin Gaye's Got to Give it Up and Funkadelic's Sexy Ways. You can listen to them below:As for the Funkadelic song, I don't hear it at all. But... this is Bridgeport, we're dealing with here, the company that George Clinton continues to claim forged documents to gain control over his copyrights, and which is without a doubt the single most aggressive of the sample trolls out there, going after anyone who uses even the tiniest snippet of some of the copyrights it controls (even if they were obtained by dubious means). Bridgeport has gone after musicians even when they distorted tiny snippets of music so much that the average listener couldn't recognize the original. So perhaps it claims something similar is happening here.
Either way, the threats came in and Thicke, Williams and Harris decided to strike first with a declaratory judgment. Good for them, but shame on Bridgeport and Marvin Gaye's heirs. Especially with Marvin Gaye, while the songs may have a similar feel, they're different songs. They're both enjoyable in their own ways, and the success of one doesn't take away from the other. In fact, it seems likely that the massive success of Blurred Lines is driving more interest in Got to Give it Up and other Marvin Gaye songs.
However, compare that dispute to another, very similar, dispute. It appears that there was some controversy over the fact that the band One Direction's latest song, entitled Best Song Ever (I'd put a joke here, but it sorta speaks for itself), is conspicuously similar to The Who's classic song Baba O'Riley. Again, to the comparisons:
No! I like the single. I like One Direction. The chords I used and the chords they used are the same three chords we've all been using in basic pop music since Buddy Holly, Eddie Cochran and Chuck Berry made it clear that fancy chords don't mean great music – not always. I'm still writing songs that sound like Baba O'Riley – or I'm trying to!. It's a part of my life and a part of pop's lineage. One Direction are in my business, with a million fans, and I'm happy to think they may have been influenced a little bit by The Who. I'm just relieved they're all not wearing boiler suits and Doc Martens, or Union Jack jackets. The funniest thing is that in Canada this year I met with Randy Bachman once the leader of GUESS WHO who told me that he not only copied Baba O Riley for their hit You Ain't Seen Nothing Yet, but he even called his band after us. Why would I not be happy about this kind of tribute?What a fantastic response in almost every way. And what a stark contrast to the heirs of Marvin Gaye and so many other copyright holders who seem to freak out when others are inspired by their works. Now, if we could just get Townshend to stop blaming Apple for the problems of the recording industry...
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: best song ever, blurred lines, copyright, culture, inspiration, marvin gaye, music, one dimension, pete townshend, pharell williams, robin thicke, the who
Companies: bridgeport
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
"Direction." Just a head's up.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Heirs vs. Artist
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pretty different
[ link to this | view in thread ]
One wants to GIVE the other TAKE
and the "owner" a greedy Estate yet, no involvement in the creation of the material, just looking for a payday.
Go get a job losers!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I wonder...
I wonder if Townsend would have answered this question differently if he hated the single...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Penguin Cafe Orchestra
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I wonder...
He can't seriously like One Dimension, if he does I'm burning my Who collection.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
However, the majority of creators who understand and care for their art, the ones who know better, remain silent. Rarely does anyone see the need to stand up and state the obvious.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
In the second case, it's obvious that some "copying" was involved, but it's still fairly small.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
If "inspired by" now means "diluted and unmemorable shadow of the original", that's really unfortunate.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Oh wait...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Its different
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Randolph Charles "Randy" Bachman, OC, OM (/ˈbækmən/; born September 27, 1943) is a Canadian musician best known as lead guitarist, songwriter and a founding member for both the 1960s–70s rock band The Guess Who, and the 1970s rock band Bachman–Turner Overdrive. Bachman was also a member of the band Brave Belt with Chad Allan, Union and a band called Ironhorse, and has recorded numerous solo albums.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The above quote is bullshit on Townshend's part. I was inspired enough by 'Behind Blue Eyes' to create a pro-Autistic version of it, and when I contacted Townshend for permission to publish it as simple lyrics (not a recording), he said no, claiming that he didn't want his works to be 'destroyed by any distortion'.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Irony and the Who (who are cool)...
Don't think that the song that copied from it was that similar, imo.
The one that was similar to the Who's song was more alike. Good for Pete Townsend though. Have some respect for him for having a good attitude over this.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The law
However, the law is the law.....why argue anything else? In the case of Robin Thicke v. Gaye (Blurred Lines).......the case would have been dismissed had this statute (best kept industry secret) been pointed out.
§ 114 . Scope of exclusive rights in sound recordings 48
(a) The exclusive rights of the owner of copyright in a sound recording are limited to the rights specified by clauses (1), (2), (3) and (6) of section 106, and do not include any right of performance under section 106(4).
(b) The exclusive right of the owner of copyright in a sound recording under clause (1) of section 106 is limited to the right to duplicate the sound recording in the form of phonorecords or copies that directly or indirectly recapture the actual sounds fixed in the recording. The exclusive right of the owner of copyright in a sound recording under clause (2) of section 106 is limited to the right to prepare a derivative work in which the actual sounds fixed in the sound recording are rearranged, remixed, or otherwise altered in sequence or quality. The exclusive rights of the owner of copyright in a sound recording under clauses (1) and (2) of section 106 do not extend to the making or duplication of another sound recording that consists entirely of an independent fixation of other sounds, even though such sounds imitate or simulate those in the copyrighted sound recording. The exclusive rights of the owner of copyright in a sound recording under clauses (1), (2), and (3) of section 106 do not apply to sound recordings included in educational television and radio programs (as defined in section 397 of title 47) distributed or transmitted by or through public broadcasting entities (as defined by section 118(f)): Provided, That copies or phonorecords of said programs are not commercially distributed by or through public broadcasting entities to the general public.
[ link to this | view in thread ]