RZA Weighs in on ‘Blurred Lines’ Verdict

Beat making has become a tricky game with artists and producers seemingly getting sued left and right by people who claim their original composition was swiped without permission. The recent case of the Marvin Gaye family versus Pharrell and Robin Thicke is a shining example. Currently in Austin, Texas for the famed SXSW Festival, frequent sampler RZA weighed in on the recent case saying the artist of a sampled work should be able to get 50 percent of the songs profit, at maximum.

“Art is something that’s made to inspire the future. If you utilize somebody’s artistic expression blatantly, to [the point] where it’s an identifiable thing, then there should be some sort of compensation to the person who inspires you,” said RZA.

Barring an successful appeal, Pharrell and Robin Thicke will have to come up off $7.3 million after losing a suit brought up my Gaye's estate claiming “Blurred Lines” ripped off Gaye’s 1977 song “Got To Give It Up.” The Wu-Tang clansman agreed that Pharrell's track does sound very similar Gaye's original. But says as a whole, the industry maximum for using a sample should have a cap. “Even though I use his portion as an instrument—because the sampler is an instrument—he should not be able to come in and take 100 percent of my song. The most he should get is 50 percent. There should be a cut off. Fifty percent is the most.”

Bobby Digital recalled one of his own issues where the artist he sampled got 90 percent of his new track's publishing. That was way too much in his opinion. “That means they ignored all the programming, drumming, keyboard playing I played on top of it, they ignored every lyric, every hook, everything that we built to make it a song," he said. "And we wound up selling more copies than the sample version—but yet they took 90 percent of the song.”

Pharrell recently spoke on his situation, saying the "Blurred Lines" verdict handicaps creators.

Filed Under: RZA

Categories: News