Jurors Prohibited From Dancing To Ed Sheeran's Funky Music (Or Is It Marvin Gaye's)

When it comes to music, the line between homage and copyright infringement can be blurred. Just ask Pharrell and Robin Thicke -- they lost a suit alleging that their hit single "Blurred Lines" infringed on Marvin Gaye's "Got To Give It Up."

And when you've got a catalogue as powerful as Gaye's, it's expected for similar suits to pop up periodically. For example, did you ever hear a similarity between Marvin Gaye's "Let's Get It On" and Ed Sheeran's "Thinking Out Loud"?

Well, his co-writer's estate did.

Earlier this week, the judge had to prohibit the jurors from "giving it up" as they listened to the evidence:

With Ed Sheeran on the witness stand in Manhattan federal court on Tuesday during a copyright trial, jurors were warned to keep their composure while watching a video of the British pop star performing a medley of his hit song "Thinking Out Loud" and the classic Marvin Gaye tune "Let's Get it On."

"We don't allow dancing," U.S. District Judge Louis Stanton instructed the seven-member jury.

Lawyers for heirs of songwriter Ed Townsend, Gaye's co-writer on the 1973 hit, showed the video to bolster their allegation that Sheeran, his label Warner Music Group and music publisher Sony Music Publishing owe them a share of the profits for allegedly copying the song.

Ben Crump, a lawyer for the heirs, said in his opening statement that the performance amounted to a "confession" by Sheeran.

I think the judge made the right call. It's one thing to see an episode of The Boondocks. To live in one? I wouldn't want that either. Imagine if this was your court room:

Back to the substantive aspect of the case, a verdict against Sheeran could have wide reaching consequences for the music industry:

Under questioning from Keisha Rice, another lawyer for the plaintiffs, Sheeran said many pop songs use the same three or four chords, and that he performs "mash-ups" of many songs at his concerts.

"You could go from 'Let it Be' to 'No Woman, No Cry' and switch back," Sheeran testified, referring to the Beatles and Bob Marley classics. "If I had done what you're accusing me of doing, I'd be a quite an idiot to stand on a stage in front of 20,000 people and do that."

...

In her opening statement, Sheeran's lawyer Ilene Farkas, said the two songs are distinct and told jurors that the plaintiffs should not be allowed to "monopolize" a chord progression used in countless songs.

Sheeran at one point grew frustrated when Rice cut off his response about the medley.

"I feel like you don't want me to answer because you know that what I'm going to say is actually going to make quite a lot of sense," he said.

The sense he'd make aside, let's not lose the trees for the forest here. Even if it is the case that a ruling against Sheeran could have massive consequences for the music industry, the specific question of if he merely used a chord progression or actually infringed on Gaye's copyright needs to be answered. And that nuanced issue may be difficult to determine -- the two songs go very well together:

And while the jurors can't dance to their favorite Ed Sheeran tunes, nothing prevents us from doing so. Including any of the remixes:

P.S.: Is there a case that Ben Crump isn't on? I feel like I've seen his name pop up at least 57 times since January. If you've also wondered why his name pops up so often, you can probably find an answer in the documentary Civil hosted by Netflix. It really is a small world.

No Dancing, Judge Tells Jury At Ed Sheeran Copyright Trial [Reuters]

Chris Williams became a social media manager and assistant editor for Above the Law in June 2021. Prior to joining the staff, he moonlighted as a minor Memelord(TM) in the Facebook group Law School Memes for Edgy T14s. He endured Missouri long enough to graduate from Washington University in St. Louis School of Law. He is a former boatbuilder who cannot swim, a published author on critical race theory, philosophy, and humor, and has a love for cycling that occasionally annoys his peers. You can reach him by email at cwilliams@abovethelaw.com and by tweet at @WritesForRent.