The Gaye family will seek an injunction against "Blurred Lines," which will give them leverage to negotiate for royalties and other concessions such as songwriting credits. "The Gaye verdict is precedential in that whereas prior to today, it was generally understood that paying homage to musical influences was an acceptable, and indeed commonplace way of conducting business and even showing respect for one's musical idols, after today, doubt has been cast on where the line will be drawn for copyright infringement purposes," Rothstein said. "Today's successful verdict, with the odds more than stacked against the Marvin Gaye estate, could redefine what copyright infringement means for recording artists," said Glen Rothstein, an intellectual property attorney with the firm Greenberg Glusker.
FREE BLURRED LINES DOWNLOAD TRIAL
Williams contended during the trial that he was only trying to mimic the "feel" of Gaye's late 1970s music, but insisted he did not use elements of his idol's work. Howard King, lead attorney for Thicke and Williams, told jurors in closing arguments that a verdict for the Gaye family would have a chilling effect on musicians' trying to evoke an era or create an homage to the sound of earlier musicians. The music industry may feel new constraints in the coming years as artists - and lawyers - sort through the verdict and its implications.
Pharrell Williams' and Robin Thicke's chains and what they tried to keep on us and the lies that were told."
Gaye's daughter, Nona Gaye, wept as the verdict was read and later told reporters, "Right now, I feel free. An eight-person jury determined Tuesday that Williams and Thicke copied elements of Gaye's 1977 hit "Got to Give It Up" and ordered the pair to pay nearly $7.4 million to the late singer's three children.