Should classical musicians worry about the 'Blurred Lines' verdict?

On the face of it, it might seem that classical musicians have little reason to concern themselves with the ongoing legal battle between the heirs of Marvin Gaye and the co-writers of "Blurred Lines," the massive 2013 hit that became infamous for its controversial lyrics and its video that had performers Robin Thicke, Pharrell Williams, and T.I. dancing with near-naked women (and a sheep). According to at least one experienced critic, though, classical musicians may have even more at stake in the case than pop musicians do.

Thicke and Williams are currently in the process of appealing a Los Angeles jury's decision to award $7.4 million to the Gaye estate: the jury agreed with the Gaye family that "Blurred Lines" illegally plagiarized Gaye's 1977 hit "Got to Give it Up." The case has been the subject of intense debate among music insiders due to its potentially precedent-setting focus on the songs' feel and rhythm: the Gaye family's argument isn't that co-writers Thicke and Williams stole Gaye's "top-line melody," but rather that they essentially copped Gaye's groove. Previously, similarities of that nature have not been held to constitute theft — merely homage.

As Los Angeles Times music critic Mark Swed notes, for composers to borrow the rhythm and feel of existing music isn't just a practice with a long history in popular music, it's "the very basis of Western music."

Beginning with Gregorian plainchant, Swed runs through composers' long and extensive history of borrowing from existing compositions. "When Bach made concertos out of pieces by Vivaldi," writes Swed, "he bettered Vivaldi, and the pieces became Bach. You would be hard put to find a great composer who didn't use what came before, and the more progressive the composer, the bigger the bandit."

Swed's most recent example is the film composer John Williams, whose Star Wars score unambiguously borrows from Korngold, Holst, Stravinsky, and others. If those composers had Gaye-like rights to sue for the "feel" of a piece, Williams might have been blocked from creating what's widely regarded as one of the best and most influential movie scores of all time.

Still, it might seem easy to wave off the implications of the "Blurred Lines" suit for contemporary composers: Vivaldi's music is in the public domain, so what's the issue?

Well, consider the classical music that debuted in 1977 — the year "Got to Give It Up" came out. 1977 saw premieres by John Adams, Laurie Anderson, George Crumb, Peter Maxwell Davies, Morton Feldman, Arvo Part, Karlheinz Stockhausen, Michael Tippett, and more. Imagine a world in which living composers like Adams, Philip Glass, and Steve Reich could sue those who write music that shares the feel and texture of the minimalist techniques they developed in the 1970s. Taking it a step further, what if those composers had been taken to court by the likes of Terry Riley and Ravi Shankar?

It remains to be seen whether the "Blurred Lines" verdict will be overturned. Many believe it will, and argue that the case should never have been allowed to go before a jury — where it became a referendum on the general character of the unlikable Thicke rather than a case decided purely on its legal merits. If the verdict stands, however, it could potentially change the way music is made — whether you're banging a cowbell or lifting a baton.

Gallery

Fullscreen SlidePrevious Slide

1 of 1

Next Slide