sxww 2017 - blurred lines music industry damages calculations … · 2019-02-12 · blurred lines |...
TRANSCRIPT
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 1
BLURRED LINES MUSIC INDUSTRY DAMAGE CALCULATIONS
Prager Metis CPAs, LLC
BRUCE KOLBRENNER
Meloni & McCaffrey
Nevium Intellectual Property Solutions
DOUG BANIA
ROBERT S. MELONI
MARCH 15, 2017 @ 5PM
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 2
THE BASICSElements Needed to Prevail on Copyright Claim
Must prove ownership and copying
OWNERSHIP + COPYING
Either direct copying or access and
substantial similarity
COPYING
Only matters for statutory damages,
and whether infringer's
costs/expenses can be deducted from infringer’s profits in
determining profits to award
INNOCENT OR WILLFUL INFRINGEMENT
Can be copyright owner's actual
damages and/or Infringer’s profits
DAMAGES
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 3
DEFENSES
05INDEPENDENT CREATION
04DE MINIMIS
02FAIR USE
01SCÈNES À FAIRE
03STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS
3 YEARS LOOK BACK
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 4
HANDLING PRE-LITIGATION CLAIMS
COPYRIGHT OWNER ASSERTS CLAIMS; CEASE & DESIST LETTERS
HOW TO HANDLE RESPONSE TO CLAIM/C&D LETTERS
PRE-LITIGATION SETTLEMENTS DESIGNED TO AVOID LITIGATION: PROS AND CONS
CONTRACTUAL INDEMNITIES: ARTIST/LABEL, SONGWRITER/PUBLISHER & PRODUCER/ARTIST
TYPICAL PARAMETERS OF PRE-LITIGATION SETTLEMENTS
COMPARE RESULTS IN PRE-LITIGATION VS. LITIGATION
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 5
EXPERTS USED IN A COPYRIGHT CASE
Provide opinions as to damages (copyright owner’s lost profits,
infringer’s profits,
deductible expenses)
DAMAGES - ACCOUNTANTS & ECONOMISTS
Offer opinions solely to assist
the fact finder
STANDARD
Plaintiff’s musicologist underscores the similarities between the works, while the defendant’s musicologist
underscores the differences
MUSICOLOGISTS
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 6
HISTORY OF MUSIC COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT CASES
OUR HISTORY
LAST 50 YEARS
Growing number of music copyright infringement claims
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 7
2000 - 2016
BETWEEN 1950 - 2000
Courts issued over 50% of opinions published between 1950 and 2000
Courts issued more than 2X the number of opinions in this area than they did between 1900 and 1950
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 8
15
10
78
15
31
3534
1940-1949 1950-1959 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-1999 2000--2009 2010-2013 8
MUSIC COPYRIGHT CASES FILED 1940 - 2013Source: Music Copyright Infringement Resource (USC Gould School of Law)
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 9
MUSIC COPYRIGHT DISPUTES ARE COMMON, BUT OFTEN DON’T GO TO TRIAL
Settlements – typically a “get lost” payment to the plaintiff – keeps disputes
off court dockets, but may promote attenuated claims by plaintiffs seeking similar
payoffs based on convenience and economic
expediency.
02SETTLEMENTS
Judicial opinions represent only a small portion of
music copyright infringement claims; most
are settled long before trial.*
01JUDICIAL OPINIONS
Predilection towards settlement, however, ultimately reflects its
wariness of unpredictable results of litigation
(particularly jury trials) and expense of litigation.
03PREDILECTION TOWARDS SETTLEMENT
Source | I Hear America Suing: Music Copyright Infringement in the Era of Electronic Sound, (USC Gould School of Law, Legal Studies Research Papers Series No. 14-6, March 2014)
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 10
O V E R 8 0 % O V E R W H E L M I N G
V E R Y F E W O N L Y 1 6 . 1 8 %of cases in which there was an explicit winning party, defendant won a little more than half THE TIME (54.10%) and the plaintiff a little less (45.90%)*
terminated by trial (2.87%) or by dispositive motion or other dismissal (16.98%)
majority of cases (85.41%) the case was dismissed with neither party winning an adversarial judgment over the other
of copyright infringement cases terminated voluntarily through settlement
WHO WON? WHO SETTLED?
Source | Copyright’s Topography: An Empirical Study of Copyright Litigation, Christopher A. Cotropia & James Gibson, Texas L. Rev. [Vol. 92:1981]
VOLUNTARY DISMISAL 34.46% 80.15%
SETTLEMENT 29.50%
AGREED JUDGMENT 16.19%
TRIAL 2.87%
DISPOSITIVE MOTION OR OTHER DISMISSAL
16.98%
80%
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 11
HANDLING PRE-LITIGATION CLAIMS
PLAINTIFF'S ACTUAL DAMAGES (E.G., LOST LICENSE REVENUES)
PLAINTIFF REQUIRED TO PRESENT PROOF ONLY OF THE INFRINGER’S GROSS REVENUE, AND DEFENDANT REQUIRED TO PROVE HIS OR HER DEDUCTIBLE EXPENSES AND THE ELEMENT OF PROFIT ATTRIBUTABLE TO FACTORS OTHER THAN THE COPYRIGHTED WORK
DEFENDANT’S PROFITS NOT ATTRIBUTABLE TO ACTUAL DAMAGES (E.G., REVENUES FROM SALE OF RECORDS, CONCERT AND MERCHANDISE PROFITS, TV OR MOVIE SYNCHRONIZATION FEES)
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 12
RHYTHMIC FEELComparison: Got To Give It Up vs. Blurred Lines
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 13
RHYTHMIC FEELCOMPARE: “Juggernaut” from The Wild Party vs. Action Bronson’s “Moonstruck”
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 14
Got To Give It UpWords and Music by Marvin Gaye
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 15
Got To Give It UpWords and Music by Marvin Gaye
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 16
Got To Give It UpWords and Music by Marvin Gaye
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 17
COMPETING DAMAGES THEORIES IN BLURRED LINES
Williams/Thicke responded that Blurred Lines was not nearly that profitable, arguing that the track's success wasn't due entirely to the music --noting that the racy video and social media promotions should also be considered.
WILLIAMS / THICKE
Both sides in Blurred Lines
case gave estimation
of potential damages.
BOTH SIDES
The Gaye family claimed Thick and Williams' profits from the
track totaled roughly $40 million and that according to general
practices for licensing, they are due about half of that.
THE GAYE FAMILY
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 18
Nancy Stern, testified that appropriate license for the portions of Got to Give It Up copied by Blurred Lines would have been 50% percent of publishing revenue if the license had been obtained before the release of Blurred Lines, and 75% to 100% percent if it were obtained afterwards.
GAYE'S DAMAGES EXPERT REASONABLE MARKET VALUE
a hypothetical license may be determined by reference to similar licenses that have been granted in the past or evidence of benchmark licenses in the industry approximating the hypothetical license
in question.
Gaye sought actual damages under a “hypothetical
license theory.”
GAYE
Based on a hypothetical-license theory - amount a willing buyer would have been reasonably required to pay a willing seller at the time of the infringement for the actual use made by the infringer of the plaintiff's work.
MARKET VALUE OF THE INJURY
ACTUAL DAMAGE THEORY ASSERTED IN BLURRED LINESHypothetical License Theory
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 19
DETERMINING FACTORS ATTRIBUTABLE TO SUCCESS OF BLURRED LINES (THE COMPOSITION)
Apportionment: The portion of product-level incrementalProfits due specifically to the contribution of an identifiedIP asset
As it relates to the Blurred Lines case: The portion of profitsdue specifically to use of the Got to Give it Up Composition Copyright
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 2020
EVERY SONG HAS TWO COPYRIGHTS
Song(100%)
Sound Recording Copyright
(50%)
Lyrics(25%)
Other Elements
= = =
Composition Copyright
(50%)Music Elements
(25%)Claimed IP
• The Gaye family only had legal rights to a portion of the profit the composition copyright generated
• Based on typical industry custom and practice, Thicke/Williams argued the Gaye family is only entitled to 25% of profit generated if infringement is determined
• Based on the 25%, there are other factors that contributed to the success of Blurred Lines
• Difficulties when the infringing work inextricably intermingles non-infringing material with the plaintiff’s protectable material.
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 21
Factors Contributing to the Success of Blurred Lines1 The Musical Elements
2 Celebrity And Star Power
3 Awareness Related To The Videos
4 Marketing Activities Undertaken By UMG
5 Social Media Activities
A written composition sitting on your desk will not generate revenue on its own
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 2222
THE SUCCESS OF BLURRED LINES WAS DEFINED BY THE SOUNDSCAN DATA
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000So
undS
can/
Wee
k
Single Blurred Lines Album
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 2323
THE VOLUME OF MARKETING EVENTS AND SOUNDSCAN DATA
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000
Num
ber o
f Mar
ketin
g Ev
ents
Dur
ing
the
Wee
k
Soun
dSca
n/W
eek
SoundScan
Events
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 2424
MARKETING EVENTS AND SOUNDSCAN DATASo
undS
can/
Wee
k
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 2525
LIST OF MARKETING EVENTS
Event Description Date Event Description DateA VideoSneakPeak 3/19/2013 P BETAwardsPerformance 6/30/2013
B YoutubeUnratedVideoRelease 3/26/2014 Q InterviewswithVH1,FUSE&MusicChoice 7/18/2013
C UnratedVideopulledfromYouTube 3/29/2013 R TwitterChat,#ASKTHICKEDebacle 7/23/2013
D BeatsCommercialAired 4/28/2013 S InterviewswithRyanSecreast,VanityFair,HowardSternandSIRIUSbetween7/24/13and 7/29/2013
E VideoaddedtoFusePop&VHI 4/29/2013 T AlbumReleasedinUS 7/30/2013
F NYCPromo:Power105,GQ,VH1,HOT97 5/1/2013 U TheTodayShow ,BETY106,PARK,America'sGotTalent Performances 7/30/2013
G TheVoice PerformancewithThicks,PharrellandT.I. 5/14/2013 V TheView andJimmyFallon Performances 8/2/2013
H InterviewswithKissFM&Power106 5/15/2013 W ThickeAppearsonTheColbertShow 8/6/2013
I EllenPerformance 5/16/2013 X TheMTVVideoMusicAwardsPerformancewithMileyCyrus 8/25/2013
J LeGrandPerformance&InterviewswithMadmoizelleandPauletteMag 5/18/2013 Y OprahShow Appearance 10/14/2013
K InterviewswithMetro,Booska,PurechartsandSkyrock 5/20/2013 Z 12LiveShowsinMajorMarketsbetween12/2/2013and 12/29/2013
L GrahamNorton Performance 6/6/2013 AA RyanSecreastRockin' Airs 12/31/2013
M NYCPromo:Z100,WTKU,Hot97,CBSOnline,WNOWandWBLS 6/10/2013 AB PerformanceattheGrammy's 1/26/2014
N JimmyKimmelPerformance 6/13/2013 AC ESPNSuperbowlPartyPerformance 1/31/2014
O InterviewwithCentric 6/27/2013
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 2626
GROSS MARKETING EVENTS AND SOUNDSCAN DATA
$0
$100,000
$200,000
$300,000
$400,000
$500,000
$600,000
$700,000
$800,000
$900,000
$1,000,000
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
1,600,000
1,800,000
2,000,000
Mar
ketin
g Sp
end
Soun
dSca
n/M
onth
MARKETING EXPENSE
SOUNDSCAN
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 27
FIRST RADIO SPIN HISTORY AND SOUNDSCAN DATA
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000
RAD
IO S
TATI
ON
S
SOU
ND
SCA
N/W
EEK
SOUNDSCAN
RADIO STATIONS
Number of radio stations in which “Blurred Lines” was first played.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000
MA
RKET
SIZ
E IN
MIL
LIO
NS
SOU
ND
SCA
N/W
EEK
SOUNDSCAN
MARKET SIZE
Combined size of audience in which “Blurred Lines” was first played on the radio.
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 2828
ROBIN THICKE’S YOUTUBE CHANNEL DATA
86%
14%
MARCH 2013
MaleFemale
88%
12%
“BLURRED LINES” VIDEO
MaleFemale
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
1,600,000
1,800,000
Feb-13 Mar-13 Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 Oct-13 Nov-13 Dec-13
VIEWS
54%
46%
ALL OTHER MONTHS
MaleFemale
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 2929
NUMBER OF ITUNES VIDEO REVIEWS AND SOUNDSCAN DATA
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000
ITU
NES
VID
EO R
EVIE
WS
SOU
ND
SCA
N/W
EEK SOUNDSCAN
REVIEWS
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 30
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
10,000
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
1,600,000
1,800,000
2,000,000
RETW
EETS
SOU
ND
SCA
N/M
ON
TH
T.I.PHARRELLTHICKESOUNDSCAN
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
10,000
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
1,600,000
1,800,000
2,000,000
FAV
ORI
TES
SOU
ND
SCA
N/M
ON
TH
T.I.PHARRELLTHICKESOUNDSCAN
TWITTER ACTIVITY AND SOUNDSCAN DATA
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 310
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
100,000
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
1,600,000
1,800,000
2,000,000
LIKE
S O
N P
OST
S M
ENTI
ON
ING
BLU
RRED
LIN
ES
SOU
ND
SCA
N/M
ON
TH
LIKES
SOUNDSCAN
Posts mentioning “Blurred Lines”
NUMBER OF LIKES ON ROBIN THICKE’S FACEBOOK POST AND SOUNDSCAN DATA
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 32
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
1,600,000
1,800,000
2,000,000
MED
IA M
ENTI
ON
S
SOU
ND
SCA
N/M
ON
TH
MEDIA MENTIONS
SOUNDSCAN
The Voice Performance
NUMBER OF MEDIA MENTIONS AND SOUNDSCAN DATA
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 33
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
1,600,000
1,800,000
2,000,000
SMA
RTU
RL C
LICK
S
SOU
ND
SCA
N/M
ON
TH
SMARTURL TOTAL CLICKS
SOUNDSCAN
SMARTURL CLICKS AND SOUNDSCAN DATA
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 3434
APPORTIONMENT
Song(100%)
Sound Recording Copyright
(50%)
Lyrics(25%)
Other Elements
= = =
Composition Copyright
(50%)Music Elements
(25%)Claimed IP
• Damages will always be a decision for judge and jury
• The Apportionment Expert serves to educate and teach how IP contributes to financial performance
• Apportionment is the process of identifying the portion of product level incremental profits due specifically to use of an IP asset
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 35
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 36
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 37
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 38
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 39
STIPULATED FACTS (PROFITS) IN BLURRED LINES CASE TOTAL PROFITS – ARTIST, PRODUCER, LABEL
COMBINED FOUND LIABLE PUBLISHING NET (WRITER SPLITS) ARTIST PRODUCER
Thicke 5,658,214 YES 1,404,569 (23%) 4,253,645
Williams 5,153,457 YES 4,293,124 (64%) 860,333
Harris (TI) 704,774 NO 679,362 (13%) 25,412
TOTAL $11,516,445 $6,377,055 (100%) $4,279,057 $860,333
Interscope 1,343,674 NO
UMGD 217,150 NO
Star Trak 3,598,412 NO
TOTAL $16,675,681
TOTAL PROFITS - PUBLISHING
Thicke 1,404,569
Williams 4,293,124
Harris (TI) 679,362
TOTAL $6,377,055
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 40
During deliberations, the jury posed a Written question to the Court that read -“Juror Question: Can you clarify or explain the intentions of what this sentence means? ‘You may not include in an award of profits any amount that you took into account in determining actual damages.’”
Counsel agreed to the following written response to be presented by the Court -“The parties agreed that approximately $8 million was received by the writers of Blurred Lines in publishing revenue. In calculating actual damages, it is the $8 million you should take into consideration. If you decide to consider awarding profits, you should not take into consideration the same $8 million.”
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 41
POST-TRIAL MOTION
Counsel for Thicke Parties argued this instruction was a “mistake,” and that “[t]he Court’s reference to “approximately $8 million” was “grossly inaccurate,” because “the stipulated amount of publishing revenue was $6,377,055 for all three writers.
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 42
DISPUTED FACTS IN BLURRED LINES CASE
Gaye parties maintained
should be included
THICKE TOUR INCOME (BLURRED LINES)
Gaye parties maintained
should not be deducted
OVERHEAD (BLURRED LINES)
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 43
VERDICT
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 44
VERDICT
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 45
VERDICT
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 46
VERDICT
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 47
DAMAGES AWARDED IN BLURRED LINES CASE: ACTUAL DAMAGES
PARTIES HAD STIPULATED GROSS PUBLISHING REVENUES FOR BLURRED LINES TOTALED $6,377,055 (DID NOT INCLUDE COMMISSIONS TO MANAGERS/ACCOUNTANTS/LAWYERS).
THICKE/WILLIAMS ARGUED THAT THE AWARDOF PROFITS AS TO BOTH THICKE AND WILLIAMS SHOULD BE REMITTED TO “NO MORE THAN 5% OF THE ACTUAL NON-PUBLISHING PROFITS” OF THICKE AND WILLIAMS STIPULATED TO AT TRIAL. THIS POSITION PREMISED ON TESTIMONY OF SANDY WILBUR THAT “THE HANDFUL OF ELEMENTS IN GOT TO GIVE IT UP CLAIMED TO BE COPIED IN BLURRED, EVEN IF CREDITED, AMOUNT TO NO MORE THAN 5% OF BLURRED.”
JURY AWARD OF $4 MILLION CONSISTENTWITH THEORY JURY APPLIED 50% LICENSING FEE ABOUT WHICH STERN TESTIFIED.
ACTUAL DAMAGES (LOST LICENSING INCOME - PUBLISHING): JURY AWARDED: $4,000,000 AS AGAINST THICKE/WILLIAMS ONLY
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 48
REMITTER (ACTUAL DAMAGES)
“REMITTER”: A REMEDY DESIGNED TO CURE AN AWARD OF DAMAGES THAT IS GROSSLY EXCESSIVE, OR COMPLETELY OUT OF LINE WITH THE DAMAGES PROVENIN THE CASE, WITHOUT THE NECESSITY OF A NEW TRIAL OR AN APPEAL.
REMITTED AMOUNT OF $3,188,527 = 50% OF $6,377,055 (TOTAL PUBLISHING PROFITS FOR THICKE & WILLIAMS NET OF COMMISSIONS TO LAWYERS/ACCOUNTANTS/MANAGERS).
COURT DETERMINED THAT $4 MILLION AWARD “NOT REASONABLY SUPPORTED BY THE EVIDENCE.”
HOWEVER, JURY AWARD FOR ACTUAL DAMAGES (PUBLISHING) WAS LATER REMITTED (LOWERED) BY COURT TO $3,188,527
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 49
PUBLISHING DAMAGESJURY VERDICT v. REMITTER
JURY AWARD REMITTTER INCREASE (DECREASE) DAMAGES
Robin Thicke 2,000,000 702, 284 (1,298,716)
Pharell Williams 2,000,000 2,146,562 146,562
Cliff Harris (TI) - 339,681 339,681
3,188,527
NET PUBLISHING AS PER STIPULATION
PERCENT APPLIED REMITTER AMOUNT
Robin Thicke 1,404,569 50% 702,284
Pharell Williams 4,293,124 50% 2,146,562
Cliff Harris (TI) 679,362 50% 339,681
TOTAL STIPULATED 6,377,055 3,188,527
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 50
DAMAGES AWARDED IN BLURRED LINES CASE: LOST PROFITS
Jury found that Williams received profits of $1,610,455.31, and that Thicke had received profits of $1,768,191.88, which were not taken into account in calculating actual damages. HOW?
HOW JUDGE DETERMINED REMITTER AMOUNTS:Award against Thicke: $1,768,191 = 41.5689% of $4,253,645 Thicke artist royalties.(stipulated)Award against Williams: $1,610,455 = 187% of $860,333 Williams’ producer royalties.(stipulated)$1,768,191.88 ÷ 4,253,645 = 41.5689%
CALCULATIONS OF PROFIT DAMAGES
Williams’ profits-to-damages ratio of 187% was 4.7 times GREATER than the 41.5689% ratio used to calculate damages re Thicke profits.
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 51
REMITTER (WILLIAMS’ PROFITS)
Court applied 41.5689%: what jury applied to
award of Thicke profits - to the
$860,333 in producer royalties paid to Williams
41.5689% of $860,333 = $357,630.96
Award of Pharrell Williams’ profits remitted from $1,610,455.31 to $357,630.96
Total reduction: $1,252,824.44
040201 03
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 52
REMITTER (THICKE’S PROFITS)
No change to Damage Profits for Thicke.
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 53
REMITTER (HARRIS’ PROFITS)
No change to Damage Profits for Harris.
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 54
ATTORNEYS FEES & EXPERTS (GAYE ONLY)
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 55
FINAL APPORTIONMENT CONCLUSIONS
Did the claimed Got to Give it Up musical elements have a minimal contribution to the success of the Blurred Lines?
Did the videos, marketing and social media related to Blurred Lines each make substantial contributions to the success of Blurred Lines, as measured using data from SoundScan?
If the Defendants establish liability, would the Defendants only be entitled to a fraction of any economic benefits derived from the success of Blurred Lines?
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 56
Will definition of music copyright infringement in the US need to be revisited?
The “similarity” between the two songs came from the “rhythmic feel” rather than the lyrics, melody or chord progressions, an issue which also caused evidentiary problems in the trial.
If the Defendants establish liability, would the Defendants only be entitled to a fraction of any economic benefits derived from the success of Blurred Lines?
Many of those in the music industry concerned that this verdict, if upheld on appeal, will prevent artists from creating any music which may evoke past genres.
Jury verdict has no precedential value.
OTHER RAMIFICATIONS OF BLURRED LINES VERDICT
Blurred Lines | Music Industry Damage Calculations 57
CONTACT US
BRUCE KOLBRENNER DOUG BANIAROBERT S. MELONI
Prager Metis CPAs, LLC
pragermetis.com
310 820 1201
Nevium Intellectual Property Solutions
nevium.com
858 255 4361
Meloni & McCaffrey
robertmeloni.com
212 520 6090