Robin Thicke’s ‘Blurred Lines’ case hears new arguments

A judge Monday took under submission a motion for a new trial for Pharrell Williams and Robin Thicke, who are seeking to reverse a jury’s copyright infringement finding and $7.4 million damages award involving a 1970s Marvin Gaye hit used in the creation of the song “Blurred Lines.”

U.S. District Judge John A. Kronstadt did not indicate when he would issue a ruling.

Attorneys for Williams and Thicke contend that a second trial is warranted because the jury’s finding of copyright infringement, and the damages and profits awarded, are unsupported by evidence and contrary to law. The pop stars further allege that evidentiary and legal errors in jury instructions by the judge were “prejudicial and prevented counter-defendants from receiving a fair trial.”

The “unfounded, illogical” verdict, delivered by a “confused and misled” jury, found liability against Thicke and Williams but exonerated the record company parties that distributed “Blurred Lines” and a co-writer and co-performer on the song, Clifford “T.I.” Harris Jr., according to the new trial motion. Following the March 10 verdict, which awarded the Gaye heirs $7.4 million, the family’s attorneys filed papers seeking to halt future sales of “Blurred Lines” until a royalties agreement could be reached giving the late singer a co-writing credit.

The family is also seeking to “correct” the verdict to include rapper Harris, as well as labels Universal Music, Interscope Records and Star Trak Entertainment.

Kronstadt limited the jury to considering only the registered sheet music for “Got to Give it Up,” rather than the 1977 sound recording.

Attorneys for Williams and Thicke contend that hours of testimony by musicologist Judith Finell, centering on her opinion as to the similarity of the two songs’ sound recordings, should not have been allowed.