“Happy” Tears



“Happy” Tears

Oprah makes everyone cry … even Pharell; check to see the Oprah Prime interview on what made Pharell weep.

– by Joseph Dieuvil



Thicke v. Gaye

Thicke v. Gaye

The family of Marvin Gaye is suing Robin Thicke for Copyright infringement, claiming that Thicke stole two songs from the late Marvin Gaye.

The family claims, “that Thicke not only stole Gaye’s “Got to Give It Up” for his mega-hit “Blurred Lines,” but also lifted Gaye’s “After the Dance” for his track “Love After War.'”

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. district court in California, follows Thicke’s own preemptive lawsuit in August that sought to protect him from the Gaye family’s allegations that “Blurred Lines” uses the same “feel” and “sound” as Gaye’s “Got to Give It Up.”

The latest suit contends that Thicke is guilty of a “blatant copying of a constellation of distinctive and significant compositional elements of Marvin Gaye’s classic No. 1 song, ‘Got to Give It Up.’”

The Gayes cite interviews given by Thicke to GQ and Billboard as evidence that he deliberately boosted Gaye’s sound for “Blurred Lines.”

What are your thoughts?


Life Rights; Burn Notice

The idea of ‘life rights’ always seems to play a part in television and Film adaptations.

But what about when someone claims that an adaptation is surprisingly similar to their own life, and a network or studio hasn’t obtained that persons permission, whether they knew of that third part or not.

This hypothetical is the basis for a recent lawsuit filed agains the network and producers of the hit TV show ‘Burn Notoce’.

While life rights are typically secured as source material and cooperation from an individual, there is no legal basis for someone to claim the exclusive rights to their life story. Why you may ask do producers, networks and studios insist on these rights? Insurance is the best answer.

For more details on the ‘Burn Notice’ case, see the article Here