Ed Sheeran was found not liable Thursday in Manhattan federal court on a copyright claim alleging that he copied key elements from the Marvin Gaye ’70s hit “Let’s Get It On” for his own “Thinking Out Loud.”
The verdict that cleared him of copyright infringement came after just a few hours of deliberation Thursday, wrapping up a trial that lasted just under two weeks.
Standing outside the courtroom, Sheeran read a statement for reporters that made it clear how frustrated he felt at being accused of plagiarism and having the case reach trial.
“I am obviously very happy with the outcome of the case, and it looks like I’m not going to have to retire from my day job after all,” Sheeran said, referring to a possibly hyperbolic statement he’d made on the stand earlier this week that he would feel compelled to quit music if the verdict went against him. “But at the same time, I am absolutely frustrated that baseless claims like this are allowed to go to court at all… If the jury had decided this matter the other way, we might as well say goodbye to the creative freedom of songwriters.”
He added, “I am just a guy with a guitar who loves writing music for people to enjoy. I am not and will never allow myself to be a piggy bank for anyone to shake.”
Saying that he had been forced to miss his grandmother’s funeral due to the case, Sheeran told reporters, “Having to be in New York for this trial has meant that I have missed being with my family at my grandmother’s funeral in Ireland. I won’t get that time back.” The funeral was held Wednesday.
In closing, Sheeran told the assembled reporters, “We need songwriters and the wider musical community to come together to bring back common sense. These claims must be stopped so that the creative process can carry on, and we can all go back to making music. At the same time we absolutely need trusted individuals, real experts, who help support the process and protect copyright.” (Scroll down to see Sheeran’s full statement.)
The Associated Press reported from inside the courtroom that after the verdict was read, Sheeran mouthed the words “thank you” to the jury and then spent about 10 minutes talking with the plaintiffs, including Kathryn Townsend Griffin, the daughter of “Let’s Get It On” co-writer Ed Townsend, as they “hugged and smiled with each other.” CNN further reported that, according to witnesses, Sheeran had invited Townsend Griffin to an upcoming concert.
“These trials take a significant toll on everybody involved, including Kathryn Townsend Griffin,” Sheeran said in his statement.
The jury had officially begun deliberations after closing arguments Wednesday evening, although, since it was after 5 p.m., the judge held them just long enough for a get-acquainted session before sending them home for the night.
U.S. District Court Judge Louis Stanton had sent the Manhattan jury into deliberations with a pointed admonition: “Independent creation is a complete defense, no matter how similar that song is.”
Stanton’s instructions left a high bar in the jury’s minds for just how much evidence the plaintiffs’ attorneys needed to have established to prove that Sheeran and his co-writer actually copiedGaye’s “Let’s Get It On” when they wrote the 2014 pop hit “Thinking Out Loud.” The case was filed by heirs of Ed Townsend, Gaye’s co-writer on the 1973 song.
Stanton told jurors that the lawyers for the heirs of Gaye’s co-writer, Ed Townsend, needed to “prove by a preponderance of the evidence… that Sheeran actually copied and wrongfully copied ‘Let’s Get It On’” — as opposed to the coincidental, negligible similarities argued by Sheeran’s attorneys.
In closing arguments, Sheeran attorney Ilene Farkas referred back to the other side’s contention that the singer’s concert mashup of the two songs constituted “a smoking gun” and “a confession.” Said Farkas, “He did a mashup one night. That’s a plaintiff’s confession, their smoking gun?… Simply put: the plaintiff’s ‘smoking gun’ was shooting blanks.”
Sheeran and his co-writer on “Thinking Out Loud,” Amy Wadge (who was not named as a defendant in the suit), both testified during the trial that they had written the song quickly in a spontaneous afternoon session without any discussion of “Let’s Get It On,” prompted by thinking about older relatives and the topic of having love last into old age. Similarities in lyrics or melody were not alleged by the plaintiffs.
Before the case was left with the jury, Sheeran attorney Ilene Farkastold the jurorsin a closing argument that similarities in chords or rhythm — versus melody and lyrics — were “the letters of the alphabet of music… These are basic musical building blocks that songwriters now and forever must be free to use, or all of us who love music will be poorer for it,” Farkas said.
Keisha Rice, another attorney for the plaintiffs, argued in return that the case hinged on “the way in which these common elements were uniquely combined.”
Sheeran had claimed in testimony earlier this week that he would quit the industry if found guilty. “If that happens, I’m done, I’m stopping,” he said. “I find it really insulting to devote my whole life to being a performer and a songwriter and have someone diminish it.”
Final testimony on Wednesday had found a musicologist called by the defense playing orchestral recordings of the 1960s pop hit “Georgy Girl” for the courtroom to demonstrate that it was one of many songs pre-dating “Let’s Get It On” that used the same chords and rhythm found in the Gaye and Sheeran hits. In cross-examination, an attorney for the Townsend heirs countered that the chords must be rare indeed if a song that supposedly obscure was being cited to defend their common usage. Sheeran’s attorney begged to differ about the obscurity of “Georgy Girl” or other songs mentioned but added that, regardless, “What matters is that ‘LGO’ (‘Let’s Get It On’) did not do it first.”
The verdict will put some wind into Sheeran’s sails as, coincidentally, this week marks the release of both his new album and a Disney+ documentary series.
The music industry at large is expected to welcome the jury’s verdict, with many feeling that a previous case that went the other way — a lawsuit contending that Robin Thicke’s hit “Blurred Lines” had infringed on the copyright for Marvin Gaye’s “Got to Give It Up” — would have a chilling effect on songwriters exercising their creativity, especially if further such lawsuits went against songwriters. Although both cases involved Gaye songs, the lawyers and plaintiffs were not the same in the two cases.
Sheeran’s full post-verdict statement:
Good afternoon,
I am obviously very happy with the outcome of the case, and it looks like I’m not going to have to retire from my day job after all – but, at the same time, I am unbelievably frustrated that baseless claims like this are allowed to go to court at all.
We have spent the last eight years talking about two songs with dramatically different lyrics, melodies and four chords which are also different and used by songwriters every day, all over the world.
These chords are common building blocks which were used to create music long before “Let’s Get It On” was written and will be used to make music long after we are all gone. They are a songwriter’s ‘alphabet’, our tool kit and should be there for us all to use. No-one owns them or the way they are played, in the same way, nobody owns the color blue.
Unfortunately, unfounded claims like this one are being fueled by individuals who are offered as experts in musical analysis. In this instance, the other side’s musicologist left out words and notes, presented simple (and different) pitches as melody, creating misleading comparisons and disinformation to find supposed similarities where none exist. They tried to manipulate my and Amy’s song to try to convince the jury that they had a genuine claim, and I am very grateful that the jury saw through those attempts. This seems so dangerous to me, both for potential claimants who may be convinced to bring a bogus claim, as well as those songwriters facing them. It is simply wrong. By stopping this practice, we can also properly support genuine music copyright claims so that legitimate claims are rightly heard and resolved.
If the Jury had decided this matter the other way, we might as well say goodbye to the creative freedom of songwriters.We need to be able to write our original music and engage in independent creation without worrying at every step of the way that such creativity will be wrongly called into question. Like artists everywhere, Amy and I work hard to independently create songs which are often based around real-life, personal experiences.It is devastating to be accused of stealing other people’s songs when we have put so much work into our livelihoods.
I am just a guy with a guitar who loves writing music for people to enjoy. I am not and will never allow myself to be a piggybank for anyone to shake. Having to be in New York for this trial has meant that I have missed being with my family at my grandmother’s funeral in Ireland. I won’t get that time back.
These trials take a significant toll on everybody involved, including Kathryn Townsend Griffin.
I want to thank the jury for making a decision that will help to protect the creative process of songwriters here in the United States and around the world.
I also want to thank my team who has supported me throughout this difficult process and to all the songwriters, musicians and fans who reached out with messages of support over the last few weeks.
Finally, I want to thank Amy Wadge. Neither of us ever expected that 9 years on from our wonderful writing session that we would be here having to defend our integrity. Amy, I feel so lucky to have you in my life.
We need songwriters and the wider musical community to come together to bring back common sense. These claims need to be stopped so that the creative process can carry on, and we can all just go back to making music. At the same time, we absolutely need trusted individuals, real experts who help support the process of protecting copyright. Thank you.
