Ed Sheeran Copyright Trial

[Anonymous]

If you were on the jury, how would you vote? I watched this video to get a good understanding of the similarities.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0kt1DXu7dlo

[Anonymous]

He’s not guilty.

[Anonymous]

The songs are sufficiently different as to make this a frivolous lawsuit.

[Anonymous]

Not guilty. They don’t sound alike to me at all.

[Anonymous]

No, the melody is different. This would be an unfair standard to hold song writers to.

[Anonymous]

just the video is not the entirety of the evidence. the chord progression is a standard one, printed in guitar lesson books as demonstrated during the trial

the case is a farce

[Anonymous]

Does not sound alike to me at all.

[Anonymous]

This OP. So I was reading more about the case, and apparently this was played at the trial, and it’s such a fun video

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5pidokakU4I&pp=ygUXZm91ciBjaG9yZCBwcm9ncmVzc2lvbiA%3D

I’m not sure how I would vote given that the groove and tempo are also similar.

[Anonymous]

He’s guilty but gorgeous

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This OP. So I was reading more about the case, and apparently this was played at the trial, and it’s such a fun video

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5pidokakU4I&pp=ygUXZm91ciBjaG9yZCBwcm9ncmVzc2lvbiA%3D

I’m not sure how I would vote given that the groove and tempo are also similar.

You don't understand the basic premise of a music copyright case. It's based on mis-use of melody and/ or lyrics, tempo and "groove" however you define that.

It can also be using a larger sample than officially agreed and various other things, but in this Ed Sheeran case it's based on his choice of chord progression, which is a standard musical formation, not owned or copyrighted by anyone.

[Anonymous]

^^"NOT tempo / groove" I meant to write

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He’s guilty but gorgeous

Uhhhhh no.

[Anonymous]

The background music in both songs sound the same to me.

[Anonymous]

This is a much closer case than the one Gaye’s family one against Blurred Lines. I think both cases are without merit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The background music in both songs sound the same to me.

Because it's a frequently used chord progression, PP. This absolutely cannot be used to demonstrate theft. The plaintiff should be made to pay all of Sheeran's incurred fees so they don't try that too often. They're not acting in good faith here.