Was this Song Stolen?

Take a listen to this song by Geggy Tah, starting at 0:47...

Now check out this song, produced by Pharrel, starting at 1:05...

Thomas Jordan of Geggy Tah has sued Pharrell Williams for plagiarism.

What do you think? Does he have a case? What would you do if you were in this situation?

Post your thoughts below...

Comments

[Dana from Serious Vanity Music]

Sounds like a derivative work to me. It amazes me, with how much easier licensing has gotten over the last decade (plus how much more expected and accepted this stuff is), people, especially on major label releases, don't close these loopholes. Take. Care. of. Business!

[John Thomas]

Given that the Geggy Tah was a song I heard on the radio when it first came out (99x in Atlanta wore it out), I think they could have a viable case here. The melody is the same; the lyrics are similar enough to make it seem likely (in my mind) that this is a winnable case for Geggy Tah.

Having said that, I didn't like the original song or the "re-make," but, hey, Pharrell Williams knows how to sell cd's, so what do I know?

[exaltron]

Definitely a flagrant ripoff. What kind of four-foot bong haze do you have to be in to either a) think it makes more sense to hope you don't get sued then to just pony up the cash in the first place or b) assuming these guys thought they came up with an original melody that was uncannily familiar, decide not to to a simple check to figure out if by chance this jumped out of their subconscious? What's really frustrating is when you consider that Pharrell was once a struggling producer (slash "composer"?). How would he have felt if someone who already had more money than he could ever spend ripping him off?

[kelly Pettit]

The chorus is a rip off for sure in my opinion.

[Gary Sklenar]

Let's look at the check list:
* Sufficient materiality to constitute a "work" (check)
* Works similar enough to constitute infringement (check)
* Access to material/distribution (check)
* Producer responsible for content of recording, indemnifying record label from potential infringement litigation (check)
* Not intentionally infringing is not a defense (check)

You lose, you will pay. The only thing left for the courts is to determine damages. Maybe these are popular songs, but I've never heard them and don't like them. If there's any justice in the world, the judge will find the infringement willful and press for criminal charges. Just kidding, but I hate this kind of thing. Same goes for "Song of the Year" winners Coldplay...

[David Hooper]

Am pretty sure it was getting rotation here in Nashville also. It was apparently "unreleased" though. Weird.

[Geert Fieuw/Beyond The Labyrinth]

Definitely a rip off. No doubt about it. Typically in the "we call it recycling" mentality.....

[Ambyr Amoureuse]

Hmmm, well its obvious he did a very similar vocal hook to the other tune - but I really dont think its as bad as people are making out - writers do this all the time. You can't copyright the chord sequence so write that off and the chorus hook is similar..

Its not as bad as when Timbaland directly sampled the swedish guys computer music for Nelly Furtado and claimed he thought it would be "royalty free" now that was BAD.

[Ian]

I personally think its silly.... While the feeling may be inspired by that the instrumentation is very different as well as the lyrics.... I mean Avril didn't get sued over hey hey you you I dont like your girlfriend.... even though she ripped those exact lyrics off an older song .... hey hey you you i dont like your boyfriend..... so I think its silly.

[RooRoo]

It's the EXACT same melodic phrase. I don't see how this can be defended.

Anyhoo...even if the courts do not judge in Geggy Tah's favor, I'm sure they will get plenty of publicity out of this, which might make more of a difference in their career, than a few $$$ in damages.

[Chet]

This is OBVIOUSLY an interpolation of the Geggy Tah tune. What's not mentioned here is that the Clipse tune was NEVER COMMERCIALLY RELEASED. It was leaked on the Internet in 2007. Last I checked, recording a cover song in your home studio is not illegal. Is Thomas Jordan going to start suing kids covering his songs in garages and basements? Pharrell should send him the 8.5 cents to cover the Statutory rate.

[Hector Armando Herrera]

maybe its not intentional from pharrell but yes theyre the same notes . i think geggy tah must be pleased with this oportunity and they wont let it go. wether theres a case or not jaja.

www.myspace.com/thestarproject

[Rencontres]

Obviously the song is stole, Thomas would win the case against Pharrell Williams, would receive huge amount of money.
The justice would be served.
Hm in my opinion music plagiarism has been decreased in comparison with 90s..

[Beat Attitude]

Geggy Tah should be honoured to know that when both they and Pharell Williams made a song with that melody and hook, they made a much better record. Who the hell are Geggy Tah anyway? Up until this, I had no idea. Now I think they're cool. 1-0 to Geggy Tah. I already know who Pharrell Williams is.

They should milk it everywhere they possibly can. People love a bit of dramatic conflict, and being asked their opinion.

Thanks for asking, BTW :)

[Cortez Liggins]

If this was done without permission or any type of arrangement, then it is definetly stolen. With all the money they make, they really need to get their legal crap in order.

[Stephen C. Shapiro]

I remember hearing the Geggy Tah song on some national commercial spot a while back. Maybe Pharrel just subconsciously ripped it off.

Has anyone else here done that? "Come up" with a good idea only to remember moments later it's a good idea because it was done before? I know I have.