Music is an integral part of modern society. Melodies, tunes, and rhythms bind people in a way that no other form of artwork can. Music also offers the musicians and composers an opportunity to express themselves through their work. Every musician gets his or her own opportunity to share his or her thoughts and feelings. And every listener of music can form their own thoughts and opinions about the songs they listen to. That is because no two songs are alike; or are they? Music has been around for centuries and yet there is still a continuous production of new, novel music, but with all of this music that has and is being produced how can we truly be sure that all music is uniquely original. Such is the case in regards to modern musician Robin
…show more content…
Bridgeport Music, is now predominant in music culture. The court case, which stars Robin Thicke, Pharrell Williams, TI, and Star Tracks as the counter-defendants and Marvin Gaye’s family and EMI as the counter-claiment, gives the verdict on whether the song Thicke song “Blurred Lines” violates the copyright of Gaye’s song “Got to Give it Up”. Originally, when Gaye’s family began comparing the two songs, Robin Thicke sued the family for slander. However, it wasn’t long until the Gaye family served a counter-suit which claimed that “Blurred Lines” closely imitated “Got to Give it Up” in an undeniable way It is during this counter-claim that the issue of whether Thicke was intentionally copying Gaye’s music or if he was simply expressing his creative rights comes about. For, while there are similarities between the songs, each song still has their own unique voice about …show more content…
Bridgeport Music. Robert’s piece is more satirical and light-hearted, but the ideas that Frye speaks of still ring throughout the piece. The opinion piece—like Frye’s article—attacks the idea of patents and copyrights. Robert’s even goes so far as to say that the Williams v. Bridgeport Music verdict is, “a blow to creative expression.” Robert’s—like Frye—believes that all artists copy a certain form or style. In order to copy this style they must pull from other artists to develop their own form. And, just as Frye believes, Roberts believes that copyrights take away from a musicians ability to express themselves and their own creativity. Because, all music employs the styles and signatures of different
Bridgeport Music, is now predominant in music culture. The court case, which stars Robin Thicke, Pharrell Williams, TI, and Star Tracks as the counter-defendants and Marvin Gaye’s family and EMI as the counter-claiment, gives the verdict on whether the song Thicke song “Blurred Lines” violates the copyright of Gaye’s song “Got to Give it Up”. Originally, when Gaye’s family began comparing the two songs, Robin Thicke sued the family for slander. However, it wasn’t long until the Gaye family served a counter-suit which claimed that “Blurred Lines” closely imitated “Got to Give it Up” in an undeniable way It is during this counter-claim that the issue of whether Thicke was intentionally copying Gaye’s music or if he was simply expressing his creative rights comes about. For, while there are similarities between the songs, each song still has their own unique voice about …show more content…
Bridgeport Music. Robert’s piece is more satirical and light-hearted, but the ideas that Frye speaks of still ring throughout the piece. The opinion piece—like Frye’s article—attacks the idea of patents and copyrights. Robert’s even goes so far as to say that the Williams v. Bridgeport Music verdict is, “a blow to creative expression.” Robert’s—like Frye—believes that all artists copy a certain form or style. In order to copy this style they must pull from other artists to develop their own form. And, just as Frye believes, Roberts believes that copyrights take away from a musicians ability to express themselves and their own creativity. Because, all music employs the styles and signatures of different