Many famous cases have come up regarding one artist claiming another artist copied their song. It seems very difficult to prove. The latest, that I'm sure you've read about, is Ed Sheeran involving his song:
And a lawsuit brought against him by the estate of Marvin Gaye, involving this song:
I can see similarities in both, but also find them sufficiently different to find the Gaye case without merit (at least in this case). I always find this interesting from a legal standpoint...how much similarity/difference in chord structure, lyrics, musical style is required to be guilty/not guilty? WIth lyrics it seems a bit more cut-n-dry, but with chord progressions, especially widely-used ones (e.g., I IV V; II V VII, etc.) it seems hard to pin down true originality, from similar but still original-ish derivatives, from conscious copying.
What say you?
And a lawsuit brought against him by the estate of Marvin Gaye, involving this song:
I can see similarities in both, but also find them sufficiently different to find the Gaye case without merit (at least in this case). I always find this interesting from a legal standpoint...how much similarity/difference in chord structure, lyrics, musical style is required to be guilty/not guilty? WIth lyrics it seems a bit more cut-n-dry, but with chord progressions, especially widely-used ones (e.g., I IV V; II V VII, etc.) it seems hard to pin down true originality, from similar but still original-ish derivatives, from conscious copying.
What say you?