[ad_1]
Robin Thicke is in hot water again for his 2013 hit “Blurred Lines”.
Model Emily Ratajkowski, who appeared in the music video for the song Thicke directed with Pharrell Williams, accuses Thicke of groping her on the set. Ratajkowski revealed the allegations in his upcoming book, “My Body,” claiming that Thicke was drunk when he groped her breasts from behind between takes.
“Suddenly out of nowhere I felt the coolness and weirdness of the hands of a stranger cupping my topless breasts from behind. I instinctively pulled away looking at Robin Thicke,” she wrote, according to an extract published in Sunday Times.
Thicke did not immediately respond to Fox News’ request for comment.
EMILY RATAJKOWSKI TELLS AMY SCHUMER ‘THIS IS 40’ IS NOT ‘AGING WELL’
Emily Ratajkowski accused Robin Thicke of groping her.
(AP file)
The model’s allegations, while alarming, are not the first headache that “Blurred Lines” has caused Thicke since he became a No. 1 hit on the Billboard Hot 100 chart for 13 weeks and died. sold six million copies. It’s unclear how much the hit single did to Thicke, but we certainly have a good idea of what it cost him. While the song had its pop music moment, one has to wonder if “Blurred Lines” was worth it after copyright infringement lawsuit cost Thicke and Williams millions of dollars and royalties. .
The situation stems from claims made by the family of famous 1970s singer Marvin Gaye, who claimed that “Blurred Lines” sounded and sounded a bit too much like Gaye’s 1977 song “Got To Give It Up”.
In response, Thicke, Pharrell Williams and TI, who also appeared on the track, filed a lawsuit in California federal court the same year, “Blurred Lines” was released against Gaye and Bridgeport Music’s family seeking protection. preventive copyright for the song. The Hollywood Reporter noted at the time that Thicke, Williams, and TI thought they had an affair, saying the song’s makeup was completely different.
They alleged that Gaye’s family simply felt that the two songs “sounded” or “sounded” the same.
“Blurred Lines” was written by Robin Thicke, Pharrell Williams and TI, all of whom have been linked to the song’s controversy. Marvin Gaye then received writing credit.
(Getty Images)
“The Gaye defendants claim ownership of an entire genre, as opposed to a specific work,” the lawsuit said.
EMILY RATAJKOWSKI FACES A CRAZY RETURN FOR THE WAY SHE HOLDING A BABY IN VIRAL PHOTO
For a year and a half, the music world has paid close attention to the case, wondering what the ramifications would be if the “sound” and “feel” provided a sufficient legal basis for claiming a violation of the right to author. In 2015, The New York Times reported that a federal jury in Los Angeles sided with Gaye’s family, forcing Williams and Pharrell to pay one of the highest copyright awards in music history.
The duo appealed the ruling, starting three more years of legal battles that culminated in the 9th U.S. Court of Appeals ruling in favor of the Gaye family by a 2-1 vote, according to Reuters.
CLICK HERE TO SUBSCRIBE TO OUR ENTERTAINMENT NEWSLETTER
The total the two artists had to pay the Gaye family fell from around $ 7 million to around $ 5 million. However, Judge John Kronstadt ordered that future royalties from “Blurred Lines” also go to Gaye. Family.
Robin Thicke was ordered to pay a large sum of money to the family of Marvin Gaye in a trial for “fuzzy lines”.
(Kevin Mazur / Getty Images for iHeartMedia)
According to Billboard, Thicke, Williams and Williams’ More Water From Nazareth Publishing Inc. were ordered to pay $ 2,848,847 in damages. Thicke was ordered to pay an additional $ 1,768,192 and Williams and his publishing house were ordered to pay an additional $ 357,631. TI was off the hook after it was determined that his brief appearance on the track would not reach the level of plagiarism.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Besides costing Thicke and Williams a pretty dime, the court rulings have raised awareness across the industry. As Forbes notes, artists now have to be very careful with creating songs or rhythms. The Gaye case set a precedent whereby songs simply inspired by another artist can open an artist to possible plagiarism lawsuit.
[ad_2]
Source link