登录以后才能看到帖子详情哦！
您需要 登录 才可以下载或查看，没有账号？立即注册
×
Why the “Blurred Lines” Copyright Verdict Should Be Thrown Out 《模糊界线》版权案裁决缘何应被否决
Alegal contest over alleged copyright infringement in Robin Thicke’s “Blurred Lines” became a referendumon the singer’s character. Robin Thicke的《模糊界线》版权侵犯案由一场法律争辩演变成了对歌手人格的公决。
CREDITPHOTOGRAPH BYCHARLES SYKES / INVISION / AP
There was far more Schadenfreude than sorrow when,on Tuesday, Robin Thicke and his colleagues were defeated in a legal contestover copyright by the Marvin Gaye estate. Thecharge: that Thicke’s 2013 hit “Blurred Lines” lifted from a 1977 singleby Gaye. 3月10日，Robin Thicke和他的团队在与Marvin Gaye方的版权纠纷案中败诉时，幸灾乐祸者远多于为之而伤感的人。此案的控诉是：Thicke2013年的大热单曲《模糊界线》剽窃了 Gaye1977年的单曲。
Gayeis widely revered, while Thicke, throughout the trial, came across as enormouslyunappealing. He now says that he did not actually write “Blurred Lines,” hismost famous song—which would mean that he lied about this to OprahWinfrey, a cardinal sin in contemporary America. Gaye是一位广受崇敬的歌手，而Thicke在此案的审理中显得非常不讨人喜欢。如今他说，这首他的代表作《模糊界限》其实并不是他本人创作的，也就是说，他在Oprah Winfrey的节目上说谎了，这可是当代美国的头等大罪。
Manyfind the song’s lyrics and its music video morally objectionable, and it doesnot help that Mr. Thicke, with his aviators and swaggering demeanor, seems tobe borrowing from another act: the old “Saturday Night Live” skit “The RoxburyGuys.” 很多人都发现这首歌的歌词和MV会在道德层面上引发争论，Thicke先生的飞行员式墨镜和拽拽的架势似乎借鉴于另外一个节目：此前《周六夜现场》的滑稽短剧《狂舞者》。可这对本案审理并无帮助。
The idea that Thicke—or, more precisely, Pharrell Williams, hiscollaborator, who actually wrote the song—stole “Blurred Lines” from Gaye completes the “Jackass” narrative nicely. Nonetheless,a serious error has been made: the judge overseeing the case should never havelet the case go before a jury. The ruling against Thicke was a mistake, and itshould, and likely will, be reversed on appeal. Thicke，或者更确切地说，他的合作者 Pharrell Williams，也是真正写这首歌的人，他写《模糊界线》时对Gaye的抄袭很好地完善了《蠢蛋搞怪秀》的故事。然而，其中有一个很严重的错误：审查此案的法官绝不应该在陪审团审查之前结案。驳回Thicke是一个错误的决定，这应该也有可能在上诉中被推翻。
Thereis no question that Pharrell was inspired by Gaye and borrowed from him; he hasfreely admitted as much. But, by that standard, every composer would be alawbreaker. The question is not whether Pharrell borrowed from Gaye but whetherGaye owned the thing that was borrowed. And this is where the case falls apart. 毫无疑问，Pharrell的灵感来自于Gaye，并且从他那里有所借鉴，这一点他已经直率地承认了。但如果照这个标准，每个作曲家都可能成为违反法律的人。问题并不在于Pharrell是否借鉴了Gaye的作品，而是在于Gaye是否对被借鉴的作品内容拥有所有权。这也是众人对此案意见不一的地方。
For it wasnot any actual sequence of notes that Pharrell borrowed, but rather the generalstyle of Gaye’s songs. Thatis why “Blurred Lines” sounds very much like a Marvin Gaye song. But to saythat something “sounds like” something else does not amount to copyrightinfringement. Pharrell所创作的歌曲中没有任何音符序列是抄袭的，仅仅是整首歌曲听起来像 Gaye的风格。这就是为什么《模糊界线》听起来非常像Marvin Gaye的那首歌的原因。但是，说某首歌听起来像另一首歌并不能和侵犯版权划等号。
Thisis not like the rapper Vanilla Ice using the opening riff from “Under Pressure,”by Queen and David Bowie, in his hit “Ice Ice Baby,” adding just a single note.That 1990 case involved the kind of literal copying that the law clearlyprohibits. 这并不像说唱家Vanilla Ice在他的大热单曲《冰 冰 宝贝》中使用Queen与David Bowie合唱的《承受压力》的前奏——他只是在原曲中添加了一个音符。这件1990年的案子涉及到了法律明确禁止的“字面抄袭”。
Incontrast, as Pharrell’s counsel pointed out, “Blurred Lines” actually has morenotes in common with the 1966 Lee Dorsey song “Working in the Coal Mine” thanwith Gaye’s “Got to Give It Up,” which Pharrell is accused of copying. 相反， 正像Pharrell的法律顾问所指出的那样，比起被指控抄袭Gaye的《不得不放弃》，《模糊界线》实际上与Lee Dorsey在1966年发型的歌曲《煤矿中工作》在音符上有更高的相似度"
确实有一些人，可能在听过这两首歌的混搭之后，仍然坚持两者很相像，并且会批评这首歌曲本身。
But,even accepting that some of Gaye’s style elements—such as the male falsetto andthe use of cowbell—may, in combination, be distinctive enough to warrant legalprotection, there remains a technical problem that will likely get this verdictthrown out. 但是，即使认同Gaye的某些风格元素（男性假声和铃铛的使用）的组合独具特色到足以受法律的保护，技术上的问题仍然有可能让此案的判决撤诉。
TheGaye estate’s copyright covers only the notes of his song (the composition),and not the way it was played (the sound recording). These copyrights areseparate. Gaye reportedly submitted sheet music for “Got to Give It Up” to theU.S. Copyright Office in 1977, thus registering his copyright of thecomposition. But he appears notto have complied with the formalities necessary toobtain copyright of the recording. Gaye方的版权仅仅是他歌曲的乐谱（纯曲子），而不是歌曲的演绎（制作后的成品）。这两种版权是分开的。据报道，Gaye在1977年向美国版权局提交了《不得不放弃》的乐谱，以此登记他对词曲的版权。但是他并没有按照相应手续获取制作版权。
With a broader copyright, Gaye's estate would havea stronger claim to owning some of his particularly distinctive style choices.But, given that the copyright covers only the notes and Pharrell didnot borrow any note sequences, the judge was legally obliged to throw out thecase. 因为拥有更广的版权，Gaye的背景地位将能让他底气十足地对某些具有个人独特风格的元素宣誓主权。但是，因为版权只包括音符而Pharrell并没有借用任何的音符段落，法官依法必须否决这个起诉。
His failure to do so has led not only to anexcessive fine (more than $7.3 million) but also to the possibility of afederal ban on the playing of "Blurred Lines"-a potentiality thatmakes the stakes of this case clear. Copyright must not interfere with theFirst Amendment's guarantee of free speech, which this judgment comes close todoing: the borrowing of styles is too important an expressive freedom to besubject to federally enforced censorship. 然而法官最终并没有做到这一点。这不仅导致了过高的罚款（超过730万美元）而且使得《模糊界限》可能被联邦禁止播放——这将有可能使此案的利益关系变得清晰。当然，版权法绝对不能与美国第一修正案确保的言论自由发生冲突。法官却几乎违反了自由言论这一条：借用风格是表述自由的很重要的一种方式，并不受收到联邦强化的审查制度的制约。
Consider the sheer number of creators who would beaffected if such rulings were levied more widely. Everyone knows that theRolling Stones borrowed their style from Chuck Berry and other rhythm-and-bluesartists. Rush's first album sounds a lot like Led Zeppelin-who copied RobertJohnson, among others. Nor is this true only in musical composition.GeorgesBraque and Pablo Picasso borrowed ideas from Paul Cézanne to developCubism, for instance, a style that was, in turn, copied by numerous others.There are hundreds of other examples. To suggest that this verdict willencourage better songwriting is to misunderstand the history of the arts. Thefreedom of artists and other creators to borrow from each other is connectedwith the principle that ideas cannot be copyrighted, a notion that is essentialto free speech and artistic expression. 如果这样的规定被更为广泛的启用，受到影响的作者——即使仅仅考虑数量——是相当可观的。每个人都知道滚石从ChuckBerry和其他R&B艺术家找到了他们的风格。尤其是Rush的第一张专辑听起来很像Led Zeppelin-而这个乐队模仿了Robert Johnson。这种情况不仅仅体现在音乐作曲上。例如，乔治·布拉克和巴勃罗·毕加索借用了保罗·塞尚的想法发展出了立体主义绘画——一种之后又被许多其他人模仿的风格。这样的例子不计其数。认为”这个判决将会鼓励出更好的作曲”的想法是对整个艺术史的误解。艺术家和其他创作者互相学习的自由与”创意不可版权化原则”密不可分， 这是一个对言论自由和艺术表达都很重要的概念。
The Gaye estate's victory was an accomplished pieceof lawyering, for which its counsel deserves credit. The estate's lawyers,taking advantage of the fact that Gaye is considerably more popular andrespected than Thicke, made a dispute between two groups of wealthy people seemlike a battle between good and evil. Rather than focussing on what Gaye'sestate actually owned, the trial became a referendum on Thicke's character. Asfor that, the verdict was already clear. Gaye保护其财产案件的胜诉是律师的成就，它的法律顾问为此值得赞誉。财产案的律师利用了Gaye比Thicke更受到欢迎和尊敬这一事实，制造出两组有钱人之间看似正义与邪恶的战斗一般的争辩。审判变成了对Thicke人格的公投，而不是专注于Gaye实际上的产权范围。介于这点，判决已经很清楚了。
翻译：Wendy & Sherry 校对：山 & gabriellaz 终校：小郭 翻译仅供学习交流，严禁用于商业用途 PDF文档下载;
| 
发表于 2015-9-2 17:39:37
