Investment Bankers, Bowie Bonds, Paternity Challenges and Alleged Adoption Concealment – when it comes to a copyright lawsuit for "Thinking Out Loud", allegedly a rip-off of Marvin Gayes classic "Let's Get It On", there's fireworks.
Ed Sheeran is one of the most successful singer-songwriters working in the pop music industry today. He was also repeatedly sued for copyright infringement. He had to hand over part ownership to "Photograph" last year to settle a legal dispute. He is also facing litigation over a song written for Tim McGraw and Faith Hill. But in terms of sheer absurdity, that's nothing compared to Sheeran's "Thinking Out Loud," which is supposedly a rip-off of the Marvin Gaye classic, "Let's Get It On."
"Let's Get It On," released in 1
We start with the last one since a new litigation The report filed on Thursday is getting attention without the really interesting context.
Already in May, an organization called Structured Asset Sales wrote a letter to the New York judge seeking permission to become a co-plaintiff in the case of "Thinking Out Loud."
Represented by the attorney Hillel Parness, who once headed Warner Music, founded Structured Asset Sales by investment banker David Pullman in the late 1990s by securitizing future intellectual property royalties and then sell those asset-backed securities to other investors, David Bowie was only one of many musicians who decided to sell future proceeds in exchange for money in advance, and other evidenced works include songs by James Brown and The Isley Brothers.
Structured Asset Sales appears to have a deal with one of Ed Townsend Jr.'s children. Clef Michael Townsend, closed and claims to own a piece of "Let's Get It On." As a part owner of Urh Right-wing of the song or as the beneficiary of the song's proceeds, Pullman's company claims a stake in the lawsuit.
Nevertheless, US District Judge Richard Sullivan rejected the application for intervention on June 11 because he said it was "clearly outdated". In his decision, Sullivan pointed out that the case of "Thinking Out Loud" was a "widely publicized action" with much press attention, but that Structured Asset Sales had waited two years for the discovery to close ,
Pullman's company is now appealing to the 2nd Circuit, but in the meantime, Structured Asset Sales has today filed a new lawsuit that basically repeats the claim that "Thinking Out Loud" is a copyright infringement of "Let's Get." It's On. "
The alleged infringement will, of course, in the first case (or technically in the second case, since Townsend's heirs had to sue twice, after initially failing to supply papers to defendants) be tested in the summary judgment.
Usually what is most At this stage, it is important that the musicologists consider similarities between the respective songs and statements of those involved in the genesis of the music. And while this case has many of them – plaintiffs point out that Sheeran "Let's Get It On" argue with "Thinking Out Loud" in performances, nodding to the correspondence between Sheeran and his manager about the similarities and struggling defendants on non-protectable elements such as common song structures and percussive rhythms – Richter Sullivan will have to think more about this time.
One of Townsend's children and co-plaintiff in this lawsuit is Kathy Griffin (not the comedian). Sheeran's camp challenges her position because she says she was "adopted by others at birth, and under the California Probation Law, she has no right to follow Mr. Townsend's interest in the song."
A letter to the judge On Wednesday, the lawyer of Pryor Cashman Donald Zakarin, who represents the defendants and outlines the pending judgments, goes further to explain the challenge.
"Kathryn's lack of adoption position was first confirmed on April 24, 2017," Zakarin writes. "Based on hearsay, Kathryn testified that: (a) While she believes that Townsend is her biological father, no DNA or paternity tests were conducted (and the claimants refused and refused to produce Kathryn's birth certificate), (b) Townsend became Kathryn allegedly fathered an unknown woman of the Catholic faith who refused to raise her; (c) the doctor who had delivered Kathryn cared for Kathryn in the early months of her life (which sounds unlikely at best) until Shirley and Earnest Griffin Kathryn and moved with her to Mississippi, where she raised her until she reached legal age, and (d) Kathryn was about 26 years old when she learned she was adopted and that Townsend was supposed to be her biological father. "[19659003Theplaintiff'sattorneyarguesthatGriffinwasnamedalegalheiradecadeagobyaprobatecourtandinterestedinTownsend'smusiccatalogTheplaintiffsaddthatSony/ATV-oneoftheco-defendants-hasuntilnowpaidGriffinroyaltiesfor"Let'sGetItOn"
Zakarin answers that defendants have investigated California probate lawsuits and concluded that heirs withheld information a decade ago, "corrupting" the resolve.
"In particular, Plaintiff Helen McDonald, who originally served as" Personal Representative "of Townsend's estate, concealed Kathryn's adoption from the court," he writes. "In fact, she represented in court that Kathryn had not been adopted."
Zakarin adds that Jobete Music – not Sony – manages the rights to "Let's Get It On" and has paid royalties based on information from McDonald and Griffin and represented as accurate.
In sum, the argument over whether Marvin Gaye's most iconic songs got hurt and has become something out of the ordinary. An investment banker with perceived economic ownership comes up with his own claims, while the supposed "Let's On" inheritance is questioned by one of the songwriter's biological children – all from a celebration of lovemaking.