Special Edition Of Michael Acoustic
This Is a PRETTY BIG DEAL!
BLUF: Ed Sheeran has won in the litigation over alleged copyright infringement regarding his song, “Thinking Out Loud” versus the plaintiffs, who are copyright holders or interested parties of the Marvin Gaye song “Let’s Get It On”.
Read here:
Marvin Gaye/Ed Sheeran Verdict
Some excerpts (but read the whole thing) and all quotes are
Credit: bloomberberglaw.com:
“[the] trial alleviates some litigation fears in the recording industry and offers a blueprint for how songwriters accused of copyright infringement should testify before a jury.”
“It stands in contrast to the multimillion-dollar 2015 verdict against Pharrell Williams and Robin Thicke over their song “Blurred Lines” that sparked the current litigation frenzy.”
““Had the case gone the other way it would have had a chilling effect on the entire industry,” David Israelite, the president of the National Music Publishers Association, told Bloomberg Law in a statement.”
“While a jury verdict doesn’t set legal precedent…”
Disclaimer: I am a retired lawyer and am no longer in practice and no longer a member of any bar. Nothing I write in this post, or any other for that matter, should be construed as legal advice, merely (at most, and on my best days at that) the benefit of a legal education. Note some images and other material may be copyrighted by the original author or composer and appear here under the “Fair Use” doctrine. Link: Fair Use
So while a Very Good Thing for songwriters who worry that maybe a song they wrote is just a bit too close to an older, copyright protected song, and there’s probably a little breathing room, but for now at least, some issues still remain. An appeal, if any, would be to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The quote above “a jury verdict doesn’t set legal precedent” is accurate, though the verdict, and especially the underlying reasoning supporting it may be “persuasive” in other cases. Decisions at the appellate level are “precedent” for that jurisdiction - a finding by the 2nd Circuit on appeal would be precedent for that circuit, persuasive for other circuits. If it were to make it to the US Supreme Court, a decision there would be binding precedent (but still arguable) across all Federal Courts.
Copyright cases are not heard in state courts primarily because of this Constitutional provision (and that’s why there is a “US” Copyright Office, and not one in every state):
U.S. Constitution
Article I Section 8 | Clause 8 – Patent and Copyright Clause of the Constitution. [The Congress shall have power] “To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.”
The Bloomberg article opines the jury may have been favorably impressed more by Mr. Sheeran’s testimony on the stand, and perhaps somewhat less by the “independent creation” theory of the defense case. That may or may not be accurate across all appellate jurisdictions, “independent creation” doesn’t seem to have the same legal favor as other more solidified doctines. One may wonder how this case would have ended with a less well known and likeable defendant, or in a different jurisdiction such as Nashville or LA. For now, there is reason to be cautiously optimistic, but we’ll have to wait and see where it goes from here.
A couple of links to differing views on the “independent creation” theory:
vs
Independent Creation (Ed. this one will likely be pretty dense for non-lawyers if you read the whole paper, but the “Abstract” portion presents at least a glimpse of an alternate view)
Good news for now, more to developments to come I’m sure!
Cheers and keep playing!
Michael Acoustic