Ed Sheeran found not liable in “Thinking Out Loud” trial
Ed Sheeran won a case against "Let's Get It On" co-writer Ed Townsend's heirs regarding similarities with his song "Thinking Out Loud"
Aux News Ed Sheeran
The Ed Sheeran “Thinking Out Loud” trial has come to a conclusion. Sheeran was taken to court by the heirs of Ed Townsend, Marvin Gaye’s co-writer on “Let’s Get It On,” over similarities between that song and “Thinking Out Loud.” The jury in this trial agreed, finding him not liable, per The Independent.
“It looks like I’m not going to have to retire from my day job after all,” Sheeran said outside the courtroom, per The BBC. “But at the same time I am absolutely frustrated that baseless claims like this are allowed to go to court at all. If the jury had decided this matter the other way we might as well say goodbye to the creative freedom of songwriters.”
Sheeran previously stated that if he lost the suit, he would quit music for good. “If that happens, I’m done, I’m stopping,” he testified earlier this week. “I find it really insulting to devote my whole life to being a performer and a songwriter and have someone diminish it.” To add insult to injury, he missed his own grandmother’s funeral to be present at a trial over a claim he clearly thought was bogus. His argument against the suit was that much of pop music shares similar chord progressions.
Though Sheeran has prevailed in this case, the amount of similar song-based copyright cases seems to be increasing. This isn’t even Sheeran’s first rodeo—after winning a victory in a copyright claim over “Shape Of You,” the singer tweeted, “Whilst we’re obviously happy with the result, I feel like claims like this are way too common now and have become a culture where a claim is made with the idea that a settlement will be cheaper than taking it to court, even if there is no basis for the claim. It’s really damaging to the songwriting industry.”
73 Comments
What did “Shape of You” allegedly rip off?I’m not particularly an Ed Sheeran fan, but I’m glad he won. I couldn’t hear any similarities. Then again, I thought the Gaye estate’s claims against “Blurred Lines” to be pretty shaky, too.
The “Oh I” in the chorus and the “Oh Why” in this.
Not just that. He admitted to ripping off the melody from TLC’s “No Scrubs.”
No, he recognized the similarity and consulted with TLC before finalizing the song. The trial helped reveal how much Sheeran tries to avoid these problems.
“Recognized the similarity” = “realized he was ripping them off”
Every piece of music you’ve heard is lodged somewhere in your subconscious, so I could see a writer penning something they thought was original and realize only later that it bore a similarity to someone else’s work, for good reason. It’s what they do then that matters.But there’s also the fact that with millions of published songs, there are going to be legitimate coincidental similarities.
Yes, that’s what I think is happening, but it seems to be going on with him an awful lot, so I’m not sure it’s all just coincidental.
“Ripping off” implies intent. You can’t realize you accidentally intended to do something. You also can’t rip something off if you’re asking for and receiving permission. Those are mutually exclusive.
That’s fair enough and I was actually specifically trying not to imply intent. That’s why I suggested he look at his writing process to see why he keeps ending up with stuff that’s so derivative of other writers, because I don’t think he’s doing it on purpose necessarily, but I also think it’s something to think about if there’s nothing new or inventive in your music.As for asking for and receiving permission, the above comment said he didn’t get the permission until after he realized he was already writing the same melody, so the point still stands that the sounds in his head are derivative.
It is interesting that it happens so much with him. I’m watching videos on AI art this afternoon. That bleeds over into this topic.
You think Sheeran’s a robot?
Only a madman would build a robot and make it ginger.
So either Cobra Commander or Jon Hamm is responsible for this?
That’s all I’m saying! lol He seems to get it a lot…
There are a limited number of chord progressions. This didn’t used to be a thing 40 years ago.
That’s what people keep telling me, and while I’m sure it’s true, it’s just noteworthy, I think, that this keeps happening to him in particular.
Just wait till you hear about Folsom Prison Blues…
OOooohhh yeah, now I think I remember this the first time in made news.It’s a lot closer than “Thinking Out Lod” is to “Let’s Get it On,” at any rate.
I’m no musician, but I don’t detect any similarities – at all. Thanks for the example.
Yea I actively despise Sheeran’s music, and his general vibe, but I was rooting for him on this one. Looking forward to not having to root for him anymore.
I’m not an Ed Sheeran fan, and definetely not a Robin Thicke fan, but at least this jury got it right. I adore Marvin Gaye’s, and his collaborator’s, music but his family/estate has turned into a vampire of trying to make money off him. The Blurred Lines verdict was horribly, horribly wrong and the only circuit dissenting judge on the failed appeal noted, correctly, that the songs “differed in melody, harmony and rhythm” and wrote that the verdict “strikes a devastating blow to future musicians and composers everywhere.”Luckily, the precedent from that case didn’t continue in this case. Simple and common chord progressions shouldn’t be anywhere near a copyright violation.
There is no need to worry about copyright infringement going forward. In a year or so, the major labels and publishing houses will have their acres of AI server hives cranking out generic, gelatinous crap, untouched by human hands and impervious to litigation. And also, putting Ed Sheeran out of a job.
While I agree with the decision, I guess we have to continue to endure Bilbo…I mean Ed’s career in music.
Correct. You’re still not allowed to make up your own fucking mind about who you’ll listen to and who you won’t listen to. Same as before.
He looks like a Muppet that Sesame Street would use to introduce children to the mentally disabled.
That is as accurate as it is mean.
You’re terrible, Muriel.
Dude looks like he should be presenting a program on historic bollards on BBC2.
40 years is too long for copyright anyway.
I don’t mind copyright lasting about a lifetime’s worth. 75 years or so. People should be able to profit off their creations for the duration of their life, and it’s not a bad thing for their offspring to benefit either. It’s the 75 years after death thing that gets really squirrelly.
But people can still profit from their creations after copyright expires, they just have to get creative about it. (41st year anniversary edition, now with a making of and footnotes!) All copyright does is make the rights exclusive for the duration.And this isn’t even going down the rabbit hole that is corporate held copyright and work for hire…or if nepobabies deserve to profit off the work of their gamete donors.
If there’s no copyright, that 41st edition gets put out by 100 different companies, and the creator gets nothing from at least 99 of them- nor do they get any say or control over how it looks, is presented- or maybe most importantly to a creator: whether or not it’s edited.Corporate copyrights are indeed a stickier issue, but even then, I think they have a time and place, as does work-for-hire. Someone who writes a single Iron Man movie shouldn’t get ongoing say in the character or storylines, and a creator should be able to farm out parts of the work when an idea gets too big. As for “nepobabies”, that doesn’t even apply here. We’re not talking about someone getting a job because of their parents’ influence, we’re talking about property rights being passed on. If I write a book that sells millions of copies a year, but I get hit by a bus right after it gets published, there’s no logical reason that control and profit shouldn’t be maintained by my family, for at least a little while. One lifetime (ie 75 years or so) seems about fair to me, no matter how many generations of a family it passes through in that time.
Dammit.
Blink-182’s lawyers have filed a suit against this comment
I promise to stop writing songs when I lose this suit.
Thank god. I hope the other, similar cases go the way of the artists as well, so we can undo the damage of that fucking “Blurred Lines” case a decade ago.
The Blurred Lines decision to be STILL feels like an absolute travesty. I’ll never understand the legal logic in that one.
I think the legal logic was mainly that people didn’t like Robin Thicke. Sheeran is more likeable.
That’s a theory I can get behind.
didn’t they have a recording of Pharrell saying “let’s make a song like ___”?
this is a good thing.
“I feel like claims like this are way too common now”For everyone or just you? I feel like if you’ve been hit by three of these already, even if you didn’t technically plagiarize consider why your writing style is so derivative that it keeps looking like plagiarism.
Sigh…Sheep, you know how I feel about you, I know how you feel about me, so I’m just going to leave you with this so you can answer your own question once you watch it.
“Sheep, you know how I feel about you”I do, so I don’t know why you feel the need to bring it up all the time like a fucking 5 year old. You hate me, so feel free to just scroll past when you see my name and we don’t have to go through this every couple of weeks.
I don’t hate you, I just wish you’d quit it with your blazing hot knee-jerk reactions that you usually double-down on, objectively I might add, when people point out you’re wrong.Like this comment you wrote: “Recognized the similarity” = “realized he was ripping them off” – ElectricSheepI mean… come on.so feel free to just scroll past when you see my name and we don’t have to go through this every couple of weeks.Oh, don’t worry, most of the time I do just this. I don’t think you realize how often you comment and engage in the threads I’m in.
Then no, I don’t know how you feel about me, and I truly don’t care, so you can feel free to stop bringing it up all the time. Grow up. No, I don’t realize how often I’m in the threads you’re in because I don’t pay attention to you as much as you pay attention to me. And this was not a thread you were in. This is a thread I started. Edit: And of course you edited your comment after I finished responding, which is just…so absolutely fucking lame.
Edit: And of course you edited your comment after I finished responding, which is just…so absolutely fucking lame.Lol. That edit was made before you posted your comment and all I did was add to my comment. Not one part of it was deleted. We’ve gone down this road before… you should know better. Refresh your browser more often. Besides, what difference does it make if I wrote my edit in a second comment? You saw it, you had an opportunity to say something, but you didn’t, instead choosing to complain about it.
Yeah okay dude.
Uh huh, so you’ve now had two comment opportunities to respond to the edit you freaked out over…
Okay.
Okay.
Lol, this video is great. We’re dealing with an angry badger is sheep’s clothing. They come at me repeatedly; I ask them to stop. Now they’re telling everyone to “scroll past my comments,” leave them alone. Hypocrite. Bully.
I realize in this moment I’m being antagonistic, but I’m beyond sick and tired of it. The false-victimhood, the mean/hateful comments, the objective stubbornness… did she even bother reading the relatively hateful comments that she wrote about Ed Sheeran? I hate using “likes” or “stars” as a metric, but… does she ever stop and wonder why all the people responding to her comments get dozens of stars while hers don’t?
It’s all about the outrage here now and I see a lot of commenters rewarded for it. She’s often rewarded for it. I’m also tired of the baiting, the insults, the false equivalencies, the general mean spiritedness that’s overtaken this place. But the bloggers encourage it too. I wish I could find a decent site with a comment section that doesn’t rely on sh*t throwing.
Oh boy, you really have to see how depressingly hypocritical she’s acting on the thread about Jonathan Majors.https://www.avclub.com/1850425062I mean, hilariously, she claims she won’t judge him based on reports yet here she is judging Sheeran like he’s the fucking devil, despite him winning his case.
It actually gets to the point where I feel bad when a commenter consistently loses control of themselves for the sake of a “win.” But I won’t be happy to be attacked again either. Too bad we don’t have modertors any longer. They aren’t always impartial, but I think they used to try.
I’m just tired of it.
Yeah, just ignore her from now on, maybe. Narcissists get furious when you refuse to play. She’ll probably try taunting you. That just means you’re important to her. She’ll have to find new supply.
You’re right.
Derivative? If derivative was a copyright violation then music couldn’t exist. You should really look at Gaye’s estate who keeps trying to sue high profile people for basic chord progressions. The Blurred Lines lines case was a travesty and luckily that precedent has been ignored going forward.
Well I didn’t say derivative was a copyright violation…
So you mean every song written is not actually a Marvin Gaye song?
Sheeran previously stated that if he lost the suit, he would quit music for good. “If that happens, I’m done, I’m stopping,” he testified earlier this week….if ever there were a case which called for $1 in nominal damages, it was this one. Equitable principles alone would justify an award, if it meant sparing the world from the music of Ed Sheeran. (Disclaimer: Not your lawyer.)
It’s the ghost of Marvin Gaye that should sue the plaintiff, for any suggestion that Ed Sheeran’s music sounds anywhere near as good as Marvin Gaye’s. Sheesh.
Ed Sheeran found not likeable
Comparing “Thinking out Loud” to “Let’s Get It On” is a tendon-aching stretch. Good that he prevailed, but threatening to quit otherwise is man-baby behavior or he was trying to give his fans some separation anxiety.
Someone online made a good case that it was actually ripping off “Crazy Love” by Van Morrison. Still, not close enough. Also…”Cool About It” by boygenius interpolates “The Boxer” by Paul Simon…lots of bands quote to some degree.Not a fan of his music, but sucks that he wrote the song about his grandparents and then the trial made him miss his grandma’s funeral.
A lot of Ed Sheeran hate in the comments. I’m not the biggest fan, but I’m sorry, “Bad Habits” is a banger.
Oh, you’re defending him? Here, let me ruin your fucking day:SHE PLAYED THE FIDDLE IN A IRISH BAND SHE FELL IN LOVE WITH AN ENGLISHMAN
I hate Sheeran’s music, and thus somewhat hate Sheeran himself for creating it, but it sucks that he missed his grandma’s funeral for this. That’s rough.
I love that the internet completely pans musicians that don’t play instruments or write their own music or live unrelatrable lifestyles. But then Ed Sheeran, who writes most of his music, plays multiple instruments, lives out of the limelight, etc. comes along and people openly hope he loses a lawsuit so he quits music because they don’t like his musical style or they think he’s funny looking. Just shows how absolutely petty people are.