Legality, music culture, and the future of sampling
The lawyer representing the Gaye family estate recently won a $7.4 million lawsuit against Pharrell Williams and Robin Thicke, and the case is further blurring the lines of sampling and copyright in the music industry. The Gaye family challenged the two superstars over the song “Blurred Lines,” espousing it was too similar to Marvin Gaye’s “Got to Give it Up.”
The Gaye family stated that the testimony given by Thicke’s lawyer had “poisoned, perhaps irreparably,” the jury, according to The Hollywood Reporter. But, it did not matter – the jury decided that the song had copyrighted Gaye’s “Got to Give it Up,” believing it was too similar to Gaye’s voice, the backup vocals, and some of the percussion.
The Gaye family first made the lawsuit in August 2013, seeking $25 million in damages – some from the revenue generated from the hit single, and some from Thicke’s touring revenue.
After the case, Janis Gaye, Marvin’s former wife said “I’m really grateful,” she proceeded to tell The Times, “I hope people understand that this means Marvin deserves credit for what he did back in 1977.”
The aftermath of the case has shown its effects already – Jay-Z recently settled a sample dispute outside of court, giving a Swiss jazz musician 50 percent of his royalties for a sample used on his song “Versus.”
Thicke, Williams, and T.I, the three defendants (who all had production credits on the song), released a joint statement reacting to the case.
“While we respect the judicial process, we are extremely disappointed in the ruling made today, which sets a horrible precedent for music and creativity going forward. ‘Blurred Lines’ was created from the heart and minds of Pharrell, Robin [Thicke] and T.I., and not taken from anyone or anywhere else. We are reviewing the decision, considering our options, and you will hear more from us soon about this matter.”
What will this mean for the music industry? What are the implications for this case? Well, to begin with, almost all R&B, hip-hop, and even pop music, is heavily sample-based. Gone are the days of writing piano chords on sheet music and branching off from there. In today’s pop music sphere, artists work solely on their computers, chopping samples from old music, and layering that sample with drums, synths, or even more samples. It’s less about technical writing skill and complete originality, and more about style, feeling, ambience, and emotions blossomed from the state of mind a sample transports one to. Most artists today will hear a beat and then decide what subject matter fits perfectly with the beat – the beat itself finds its foundation in the sample.
So, in short, the “Blurred Lines” case acts like a despotic government, depleting and squeezing all the freedom an artist has in the realm of creativity. Ask any artists – when creativity is limited or imposed upon, the quality of music is affected.
…when creativity is limited or imposed upon, the quality of music is affected.
It’s quite tragic to think about. Even the case, which was almost solely dependant upon sheet music, did not capture the true differences of the songs. The themes, vibrations, and intangible aspects of a track that cannot be captured on sheet music were left out of the case. The differences that are dependent upon how a song makes you move, how you relate to the song, or the place you are taken when listening to the track were not focused upon. And this is why this case is so tricky and unfortunate in the way it concluded.
The question of if a sample is a direct copyright, or if it is something original with a foundation from the immortalized past, will always be up for debate. Some rock purists claim that hip-hop and contemporary R&B is unoriginal for sampling, but, in my opinion, it is not. In fact, I believe sampling is original in its fullest sense. It acknowledges the past, it recognizes the evolution of 20th and 21st century music, and it represents a particular identity by revealing to the world what music one loves. Real recognizes real, so sampling, in my mind, is the ultimate shout out to an old artist, for it continues their legacy. Sampling stamps the influence of an artist in contemporary times. It immortalizes an artist, since their relevance and legacies continues on the radio, and touches generations who may have no clue who an artist like Marvin Gaye was. I can only hope people understand that sampling is an art form, and I hope the music industry is less corrupted with greed, and continues in a direction towards creative freedom.