reminded me of: > The complaint argued that "the basis of the Gaye defendants' claims is that "Blurred Lines" and "Got To Give It Up" "feel" or "sound" the sam

reminded me of: > The complaint argued that "the basis of the Gaye defendants' claims is that "Blurred Lines" and "Got To Give It Up" "feel" or "sound" the same. Being reminiscent of a "sound" is not copyright infringement. The intent in producing "Blurred Lines" was to evoke an era. In reality, the Gaye defendants are claiming ownership of an entire genre, as opposed to a specific work" they lost (eventually) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharrell_Williams_v._Bridgeport_Music https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharrell_Williams_v._Bridgepor... wider point -- whether or not a copy is a copy and whether it is is infringing on copyright or not ultimately has to be decided by a court case when it's not an obvious and clear cut violation. especially in the USA with the utterly mental fair use law.