Search for: "Williams v. Gaye"
Results 21 - 40
of 45
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Sep 2016, 10:00 pm
"Got To Give It Up‚¬ The Court refused to allow the jury to compare the Marvin Gaye version of "Got to Give it Up,"with the Williams/Thicke version of"Blurred Lines‚¬. [read post]
10 Aug 2016, 2:26 pm
La Cour Suprême des États-Unis répond par la négative dans Petrella v. [read post]
9 Jun 2016, 2:11 am
If this claim goes to trial, it could be the 2016 edition of the infamous “Blurred Lines” dispute which resulted in Pharrell Williams and Robin Thicke being ordered to pay Marvin Gaye’s family $7.4 million USD for infringing copyright in his 1977 hit ‘Got to give it up. [read post]
31 May 2016, 6:22 am
, v. [read post]
19 Jan 2016, 8:00 am
“Blurred Lines” Can Make Things Expensive As you might recall, Pharrell Williams and Robin Thicke sued the Gaye estate, seeking declaratory judgment that they did not copy Marvin Gaye’s song “Got to Give it Up” with their 2013 “Blurred Lines” single. [read post]
8 Jan 2016, 12:41 pm
Shelly Sterling, the NBA, V. [read post]
28 Dec 2015, 2:51 am
Civ. 1ère, No. 13-23566.March was all about the 'Blurred Lines' in copyright and a US Jury's decision to award $7.3 million to the Estate of Marvin Gaye on the basis that Pharrell Williams and Robin Thicke’s soul-inspired pop song "Blurred Lines" too closely mirrored Gaye’s 1977 single "Got to Give It Up". [read post]
23 Oct 2015, 7:00 am
”[10] The District Court found in favor of Gaye’s descendants, finding Thicke and Williams liable for over $7 million of damages. [read post]
5 Jun 2015, 3:15 am
More here.and more here.Universal has submitted papers to the US Courts arguing that despite Pharrell Williams and Robin Thicke being found liable by a jury for plagiarising Marvin Gaye's "Got to Give It Up" - rapper TI (real name Clifford Harris) and their Interscope label cannot be held liable in the "Blurred Lines" litigation - because the said jury didn't find against them: "The court may not enter an order declaring that… [read post]
2 May 2015, 1:47 am
The Appeals Court decision in Blurred Lines is keenly awaited by many.More on Billboard here , Williams v Bridgeport Music, Inc, No. 13-06004 (C.D. [read post]
20 Apr 2015, 9:45 am
En Pharrell Williams et al v. [read post]
18 Apr 2015, 9:48 am
Panel V. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 5:07 am
Pharrell Williams’ and Robin Thicke’s 2013 hit Blurred Lines was in fact only 50% their hit, according to a jury verdict in mid-March that found in favor of Marvin Gaye’s children. [read post]
27 Mar 2015, 4:43 pm
Thicke Just days before SXSW, a court awarded $7.3 million to the family of Marvin Gaye as the result of the contentious and highly publicized Gaye v. [read post]
22 Mar 2015, 4:30 am
SOCAN http://t.co/tnEDw6Kh0z -> Costs issues in copyright summary judgement motion Actuate v. [read post]
22 Mar 2015, 4:30 am
SOCAN http://t.co/tnEDw6Kh0z -> Costs issues in copyright summary judgement motion Actuate v. [read post]
18 Mar 2015, 4:01 am
”And with Marvin Gaye's children now musing what other songs may have been 'copied' from their father's work (the last I heard, it was Pharrell Williams in the firing line again for his smash hit 'Happy', which Nona Gaye says is a copy of Hayes 1966 song 'Ain’t That Peculiar') an appeal in the Blurred Lines case has been formally announced. [read post]
16 Mar 2015, 5:00 am
Fast-forward to a relatively huge copyright jury verdict in the Williams v. [read post]
12 Mar 2015, 9:56 am
Instead, the question presented was the extent to which Thicke-Williams might have improperly taken elements from Gaye’s “musical composition. [read post]
12 Mar 2015, 5:46 am
I went back 99 years to Haas v. [read post]
