Marvin Gaye song to be used in ‘Blurred
Lines’ copyright trial
Judge
John Kronstadt said he made a mistake when he ruled Monday
that Gaye’s song ‘Got To Give It
Up’ would be completely inadmissible at
trial. On Wednesday, he said excerpts can be played for jurors
if they’re ‘tailored to the allegedly protected content
asserted by’ Gaye’s heirs, who are in a copyright dispute with
Thicke and Williams.
The judge handling the "Blurred Lines" copyright dispute
between Marvin Gaye's kids and Robin Thicke and Pharrell
Williams has changed his tune.
In a surprise reversal filed Wednesday, U.S. District Judge
John Kronstadt said he made a mistake when he said Monday that
the recording of Gaye's legendary song "Got To Give It Up" would
be completely
inadmissible at trial.
"This order represents a change from this earlier view
based on the court's further (self-imposed) consideration of the
proof required," he wrote in his new ruling.
Judge Kronstadt said that "upon reflecting further," he
decided to modify his position and consider playing excerpts of
Gaye's 1977 hit recording for jurors if they're "tailored to the
allegedly protected content asserted by" Gaye's heirs.
"To avoid prejudice to (Thicke and Williams), these
recordings would need to be edited to remove all unprotected
elements such as percussion and backup vocals," Kronstadt wrote.
"Any potential prejudice to (Thicke and Williams) caused
the by the airing of Gaye's voice, which is not protected, is
something that could perhaps be addressed by a limiting
instruction," he said.
Kronstadt said that if either side wants to play an edited
sound recording at the upcoming trial scheduled to begin Feb.
10, they must submit the snippet to the court by Feb. 2 for
consideration.
It was Monday that Kronstadt first told both parties that
the original Motown recording of "Got To Give It Up" would be
off limits in the multimillion dollar copyright infringement
dispute.
Gaye's children, including son Marvin Gaye III, were upset
by the initial ruling, arguing through their lawyer that Gaye's
protected sheet music was best embodied by his sound recording.
The heirs
remain adamant that Thicke and Williams illegally copied
protected elements of "Got To Give It Up" when they wrote their
wildly popular 2013 Grammy-nominated single "Blurred Lines."
Frederick M.
Brown/Getty ImagesThe hit song 'Blurred Lines' by
Pharrell Williams and Robin Thicke has led to a multimillion
dollar copyright infringement dispute.
After the judge's initial decision Monday, lawyers on both
sides said it appeared the judge only would allow hired
musicologists to come into court and play Gaye's song on a
keyboard.
A lawyer for Williams and Thicke said that was the right
decision because Motown owns the iconic voice recording and is
not a party to the lawsuit.
"I love Marvin Gaye.
My clients love Marvin Gaye. But this is not about his
voice, his character, his charisma.
The question is whether 'Blurred Lines' is a copy of what he
wrote in the sheet music. And it's not," lawyer Howard E. King,
who represents Thicke and Williams, told The News Tuesday.
"We've said for two years that there are not two
consecutive notes of the same duration duplicated in either
song. The notes, chords and key are different," King said.
"There's no disputing the songs are in the same genre.
Everyone recognizes it's in the same genre, but it ends there.
Marvin Gaye doesn't own the genre," he said.
A lawyer for Gaye's children pointed out that Thicke and
Williams initiated the court battle when they filed their
preemptive claim in August 2013 asking for protection.
"Pharrell Williams and Robin Thicke started this lawsuit
against the Gaye family, but then filed motions asking the court
to prohibit the playing of Marvin Gaye's song, which prevents
the jury from comparing the songs," lawyer Richard Busch said.
"We know of no similar case where this has occurred, and do
not believe that a truly fair trial can take place if the jury
cannot hear and compare both songs," he said.
One Typo Brought Down
A 124-Year-Old Company
It took a century to build and a
moment to destroy.
A family business that had been around for more than a
century was run out of business after a United Kingdom
government register made a typo in 2009 that listed the
company as having gone bust.
The former co-owner of the company sued the government
and recently won, The Telegraph reports.
It took four years for the case to be decided.
Engineering firm Taylor & Sons Ltd was mistakenly
listed on a UK government company register as being in
liquidation when it was really another company — Taylor
& Son Ltd (without the second “s”) — that had gone
under. Once this information got out to creditors,
suppliers started terminating orders, according to The
Telegraph.
The mistake was caught within a few days, but by then,
the damage was already done.
Managing director and co-owner
Philip Davison-Sebry said he was on vacation
in the Maldives when this all happened, and it was “like
Armageddon” with clients calling him and asking what
was going on.
The company fell apart within two months.
The High Court in Britain ruled in managing director
and co-owner Philip Davison-Sebry’s favor and he’ll
likely receive millions. The final payout has yet to be
determined.
The market continues its correction. Price is staying below the
bottom band. The MACD has fallen below the zero signal line which
mean the market is now in a bearish cycle. The Stochastic has
fallen into the oversold area. Though the ADX is low but it has
begun to rise, so I would still be watching the Stochastic over
the MACD. The DMI stays negative with the D- above the 30's and
rising. This confirms the sellers are getting very strong. The D+
has fallen below the 20's, this is also confirming the buyers are
really running.
I continue to place my stop at bottom band. But if price can go
back up for 2 days, then I will adjust my stop to prior day high.
The weekly chart confirmed the previous week's sell signal as
price went lower than 2222. The MACD remains positive but it has
begun to turn downward. The Stochastic stays negative and falling.
I take note that the Stochastic has completed a bearish divergence
formation with lower peaks. If price closes below the bottom band
of 2144 in the coming week, then we may see a new cycle of serious
selling emerging. The DMI has just turned negative with the ADX
goes flat.
The monthly chart is in a listless mode as price went back closing
below the bottom band. The MACD is negative but the Stochastic
went positive. So this pair of contradicting indicators is
confirming a listless mode.
I have been harboring some bullish thoughts on this market as the
longer term was forming some subtle signal. But obviously this is
not to be the case now, but it is extremely important that traders
must obey all the signals that their trading systems flashes.
Though my supposedly bullish scenario did not materialize, but I
was still able to make some decent profit from that previous long
trade , just as the current short trade is as rewarding.
FKLI - Rebound Fizzled Out
Fast - 2/2/2015
Last week I wrote of the low ADX which require me to pay attention
to the Stochastic over the other indicators. The Stochastic went
into the overbought zone last week, so I begin to tighten my stop
to prior day low minus 1 point. So by last Monday or latest by
Wednesday, I closed off my long positions. As at now I am waiting
for the next sell signal as the Stochastic has already begun to
cross down and it may cross down below its 80's signal line by the
coming week.
The MACD remains positive and above its zero signal line. The DMI
continues to stay positive but the D- has been falling. This means
the buyers are leaving. The D- is now above 20's but it has
stopped rising. This would warrant some attention to the selling
forces. The ADX has been flat at 20's for the past 3 days, this
means there is no trend in the market yet. But overall, I would
pay more attention to the sell side of the story over the buy
signal.
The previous week bullish development at the weekly chart failed
to develop further as price was unable to close above the previous
week's closing and middle band. The indicators continue to stay
bullish as both the Stochastic and MACD stay positive and rising.
But as the MACD is still relatively "far" from its zero signal
line, so I would not get too excited about it. The slower reacting
DMI stays negative with the D- falling. This means the sellers are
getting weak. But the D+ is flat which mean the buyers are also
not brave. On top of this, the ADX is falling, so I would say
there is no trend in this market yet.
The monthly chart's MACD is negative and falling, but it is still
above the zero signal line. The Stochastic is negative and falling
and it is now below its 80's signal line. But we are not getting a
confirmation from price as it manages to close back above the
previous month's low. In order to secure a confirmation I would
need to see price goes below 1693 in the coming month.
The game plan is still to concentrate on the sell side over the
buy side. A correction in the US Dollar and crude oil may bring
back some bullish sentiments, but get fooled by it as to think we
are out of fire pit.
An ex-business owner who turned private trader applying technical analysis to trade major FX pairs and indies, commodities and KL futures. He used to write a weekly column in a Chinese daily on local futures markets. A self confessed stern supporter of the Far Right and nothing apologetically about it.
Tun Marvin is not an investment advisory service, nor a registered investment advisor or broker-dealer and does not purport to tell or suggest which securities you should buy or sell for themselves. I may hold positions in the financial instruments discussed here. You understand and acknowledge that there is a very high degree of risk involved in trading all financial instruments. I assume no responsibility or liability for your trading and investment results. Factual statements on this blog site are made as of the date stated and are subject to change without notice.
It should not be assumed that the methods, techniques, or indicators presented in these postings will be profitable or that they will not result in losses. Past results of any trading systems published are not indicative of future returns by that systems, and are not indicative of future returns which be realized by you. In addition, the indicators, strategies, columns, articles and all other features of discussions are provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment advice. All set-ups are not solicitations of any order to buy or sell.