Listen to Naughty Juice on Spotify or check out their YouTube channel: @naughtyjuice7676.
Thank you to J. Kenji López-Alt who drew to my attention the similarity in between "Considering Loud" and "Crazy Love".
And, an additional unique thanks goes to Douglas Lind, Vidad Flowers, Ivan Pang, Waylon Fairbanks, Jon Dye, Austin Russell, Christopher Ryan, Toot & Paul Peijzel, the channel's Patreon saints!.
ASSISTANCE ME ON PATREON:.
Ed Sheeran didn't copy Marvin Gaye… he copied a different soul song
Click Here To Learn Piano or Keyboard
Listen to Naughty Juice on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/artist/6n7nkpNHM2PV8CWTyr6280?si=CZNC_1uARliR5XofSXZ9pQ 🎸😊
that wii ed sheeran mashup is way better than it needs to be
Your sense of humor surely is evolving, Mr. Bennett…
Yes, nearly good enough to merit the second “u”!
Ha
That Golfing Out Loud mashup “mistake” had me laughing out loud. I know you’re not necessarily known for comedy in your content, but… yeah, you could be. More of this!
😂
I’m familiar with the Marvin Gaye tune and it never came to my mind while hearing Ed Sheeran’s song.
@Stamatis Kon I heard it years ago, long before some YouTuber had to “point it out” to me.
I wouldn’t listen to Ed Sheeran by choice anyhow if that’s what you mean. So much more worthwhile music to listen to.
All this does is demonstrate how vapid and unimaginative modern music really is.
@Matt Rogers The point of this video, which I assume you stumbled upon in your search for a comment section to make you feel superior, is that these things happen. Unless you believe that Marvin Gaye was an unimaginative songwriter that copied Van Morrison! If so, I bow to your greatness!
@Stamatis Kon All I said was I realized this was a rip-off long before Marvin’s family filed a lawsuit and that your assumption that no one paid any attention before that is erroneous.
You know what they say about people that ASSume, right?
As a bass player,
I can tell you, music is essentially the same group of “stuff” from genre to genre.. the similar changes over and over that are pleasing to that genre with melody and rhythm. If you try something too different, many times won’t work. If you serve the song, you get accused of copying other bass parts or sounding like someone else. Thankfully tones are much more complex than their fundamental frequencies. This whole witch hunt thing in the music biz is ridiculous, thanks to the digital age. Too many greedy or egotistical a*** trying to make the cash grab, that sometimes aren’t even the artists themselves. It’s pathetic. Then you have the dysfunctional fanboys and girls trying to justify the actions for their preferred artist. There are no musical geniuses, just hard working musicians that some get lucky and some don’t. Corporations are feeding off of people like an oppressive govt.
@Matt Rogers Look, you’re replying to a thread in which the creator of the video states that he didn’t find any similarities between the two songs so it’s safe to assume that you’re not here because you value his opinion. Especially since you are so dismissive of the people that didn’t observe the “rip-off” in 30 seconds like you did!
As for the “rip-off”, there is not a single respectable person associated with music that supports this. Everyone say that although they see some similarities the songs are not the same because the have different melodies and structure. But I now have to respect your imposed authority because I don’t have the courage to debate something like that on the internet…
Those Marvin Gaye lawyers could find plagiarism in the singing of birds if they had money
At that point the birds could sue us since it’s part of their biology
Yet another example of why copyright laws are a complete joke.
They got this one right. The Led Zeppelin one was a joke.
Van Morrison is so good. Lately I just toss his entire collection on shuffle and it can go for hours without a bad song playing
I feel like Ed Sheeran hit it on the head. You can interchange almost everything in Pop nowadays and it’s literally impossible to avoid sounding like anything whether it’s lyrics, tempo, vibe, chord progressions, etc. You can find similarities in almost every song and as David pointed out before. The Gaye Estate is a bit TOO hungrily hunting for things.
That interchangeability is definitely a “nowadays” problem. In what was arguably the golden age of pop (80’s) no two songs on the radio sounded the same. At that time originality was the criteria A&R departments used for selecting artists and material.
@Brian Bray 80s the golden age of Pop?
It’s not actually the Gaye estate that’s suing… it’s the Townsend estate.
@Brian Bray lmao nostalgia brain speaking loudly here. this is absolutely not true.
@Brian Bray Disagree. Almost all Stock Aitken Waterman songs sound alike.
Vibe and style is partly why “Uptown Funk” wound up having a mile long list of “writers”, since everyone involved with the “Minneapolis sound” that inspired Mark Ronson and Bruno Mars said “that’s my riffs!
The question I ask is “would this approach to copyright law have theoretically allowed somebody to copyright the 12-bar blues?” For this case I think the answer is yes.
Yeah the 12 bar blues always crosses my mind when it comes to copyright. It seems that ‘standards’ for music chord progressions aren’t allowed to exist anymore
Ed Sheeran writes formulaic songs based on very generic chord changes. Any one of his songs can be compared to several others that came before.
Ultimately if ed Sheeran’s song wasn’t popular this wouldn’t see the inside of a courtroom.
The problem is that it isn’t the songwriters themselves, who hear a song in a similar “style” and immediately scream for their lawyers, but rather corporations or their estate, people who don’t understand the musical process. I find it hard to believe that if Marvin Gaye was still with us, he’d be pursuing these actions.
100% agreement!
It’s interesting that rhythm isn’t held to the same standard as melody in copyright cases. Why can’t someone sue for using the Bo Diddley beat? The beat has his NAME on it for god’s sake! :^)
They could. However, Bo Diddley did not really invent it, or at least modified only slightly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo_Diddley_beat
The miusic industry needs some type of software like “Shazam”, that reports how similar one piece of music is to another and what parts are covered by copyright and what parts are not.
Apparently the issue with the Robin Thicke v Marvin Gaye lawsuit also had to do with the legal team messing up and forgetting to do a specific legal move (Rule 50) in the early stages, which meant that they couldn’t file a legal procedure later to have the verdict overturned.
(Thank you Legal Eagle)
the problem with music copyright laws is that the people who make up the laws have no idea how music works
I do think it’s important for artists to make a good faith effort not to have their songs sound too much like other poplar songs. I think Ed Sheeran’s problem is that he’s TOO known for being inspired by other artists.
Something that might untangle this mess is a generalized “style copyright” that distributes money evenly among all the artists who are considered pioneers of the style. So if someone wanted to do a soul song, they could give co-writing credit to “Soul Writers” and the money would be split evenly among Ray Charles, Sam Cooke, Smokey Robinson, Marvin Gaye, and all the other soul songwriter pioneers or their estates. Not as fair to those whose songs can be identified as being directly copied, but a lot less complicated and hopefully less discouraging to those who want to write new music.