This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

Civil Litigation,
Intellectual Property,
Entertainment & Sports,
9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals

Mar. 26, 2018

En banc review of 'Blurred Lines' case is warranted

In a split decision, the 9th Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part the judgment after a jury trial that Pharrell Williams and Robin Thicke’s song “Blurred Lines” infringed Marvin Gaye’s composition of the song “Got to Give It Up.”

Elliot N. Brown

Phillips ADR Enterprises

complex litigation and intellectual property

Email: ebrown@phillipsadr.com

Harvard Univ Law School

Elliot Brown is a partner in the Los Angeles office of Irell & Manella LLP where he specializes in complex litigation and a broad spectrum of intellectual property matters.

See more...

Moon Hee Lee

Associate
Durie Tangri LLP

Phone: (213) 443-3000

Email: moonheelee@quinnemanuel.com

Northwestern Univ SOL; Chicago IL

Moon focuses on intellectual property and entertainment litigation.

See more...

En banc review of 'Blurred Lines' case is warranted
Robin Thicke in Boston in 2013 (New York Times News Service)

In a split decision, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last week affirmed in part and reversed in part the judgment after a jury trial that Pharrell Williams and Robin Thicke's song "Blurred Lines" infringed Marvin Gaye's composition of the song "Got to Give It Up." Williams v. Gaye, 2018 DJDAR 2555 (March 21, 2018). On narrow procedural grounds that dictated a highly deferential standard of review, the panel affirmed the judgment of in...

To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)

Already a subscriber?

Enewsletter Sign-up