HB 24-11: Inspiration Is Not Theft Act of 2020 (Passed)

[thumb21]

A BILL

protecting the right to produce music that is inspired by other works

Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives, in Congress assembled:

SECTION 1. TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the "Inspiration Is Not Theft Act of 2020".

SECTION 2. FINDINGS.

A. In 2013, defendants Mr. Pharrell Williams, Mr. Robin Thicke, and Mr. Clifford Harris, Jr., were served with a lawsuit from plaintiffs representing the estate of Marvin Gaye, Jr. (Mr. Frankie Christian Gaye, Mr. Marvin Gaye III, and Ms. Nona Marvisa Gaye, respectively).  

B. The defendants, which may be referred to as the "Thicke Group", are songwriters and musicians by trade.

C. The matter at issue in this case involves copyright infringement; specifically, does the musical composition "Blurred Lines" (as written by Williams, Thicke, and Harris) copy the essential elements in the Gaye composition "Got To Give It Up" (as written by Mr. Marvin Gaye, Jr.) (thus entitling the plaintiffs to financial relief)?

D. Although the two songs share a similar style, the underlying melodies and harmonies are not sufficiently similar to one another.  

E. A district court entered judgment for the plaintiffs; on appeal, this was affirmed by the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.  

F. As decided by the Ninth Circuit, the ruling in this case effectively declares that works imitating, but not specifically copying, other works may be regarded as copyright infringements.  

G. This decision has had, and will continue to have, a "chilling effect" on the capability of songwriters to produce works evoking other eras or styles.  

H. As a matter of routine, many musical acts and works imitate the style of other musical acts and works.  

SECTION 3. PROTECTION OF CERTAIN RIGHTS.

A. It shall not be a violation of copyright law to:

1. Imitate, or borrow from, the style of another artist or composition.  

2. Produce a work parodying another's compositions or style.  

3. Employ, or assist in employing, any person who created, or assisted in the creation of, another act or work.  

SECTION 4. ACT NOT TO BE MISCONSTRUED.

This Act shall not be so construed as to prohibit certain individuals or groups the right to seek credit, and/or financial compensation for, the direct copying of specific works (in the music industry, this act is known as "sampling")

SECTION 5. WHEN EFFECTIVE.

This Act will become effective when signed by the president.

Sponsor: Citizen (FairBol)
House Designation: HB 24-11

72 hours to debate.

[thumb21]

I'd have to do a little bit more research on copyright law before I can fully comment on it but it seems like a good idea to me. I'm not sure how exactly we'd be defining words like imitation legally.

[RC (a la Frémont)]

The premise of this bill is a good idea to help stop copyright abuse. While copyright isn't necessarily a bad idea, it's flawed to leave it so open to interpretation that something remotely similar could get taken down from looking or sounding similar. I'll support this bill, but I await the findings of the Speaker.

[thumb21]

After some thought, this is probably fine as written.

Does anyone else have any thoughts?

[Fmr. Representative Encke]

Yeah, I'm fine with this.

Motion for a final vote (unless anyone else has anything to add)

[thumb21]

Final Vote

72 hours

[thumb21]

Aye

[Fmr. Representative Encke]

Aye

[Elcaspar]

Aye

[cinyc]

Nay.

[PPT Spiral]

Nay

[OSR stands with Israel]

Abstain

[thumb21]

Passed

3-2-1-3

[thumb21]

A BILL

protecting the right to produce music that is inspired by other works

Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives, in Congress assembled:

SECTION 1. TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the "Inspiration Is Not Theft Act of 2020".

SECTION 2. FINDINGS.

A. In 2013, defendants Mr. Pharrell Williams, Mr. Robin Thicke, and Mr. Clifford Harris, Jr., were served with a lawsuit from plaintiffs representing the estate of Marvin Gaye, Jr. (Mr. Frankie Christian Gaye, Mr. Marvin Gaye III, and Ms. Nona Marvisa Gaye, respectively).  

B. The defendants, which may be referred to as the "Thicke Group", are songwriters and musicians by trade.

C. The matter at issue in this case involves copyright infringement; specifically, does the musical composition "Blurred Lines" (as written by Williams, Thicke, and Harris) copy the essential elements in the Gaye composition "Got To Give It Up" (as written by Mr. Marvin Gaye, Jr.) (thus entitling the plaintiffs to financial relief)?

D. Although the two songs share a similar style, the underlying melodies and harmonies are not sufficiently similar to one another.  

E. A district court entered judgment for the plaintiffs; on appeal, this was affirmed by the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.  

F. As decided by the Ninth Circuit, the ruling in this case effectively declares that works imitating, but not specifically copying, other works may be regarded as copyright infringements.  

G. This decision has had, and will continue to have, a "chilling effect" on the capability of songwriters to produce works evoking other eras or styles.  

H. As a matter of routine, many musical acts and works imitate the style of other musical acts and works.  

SECTION 3. PROTECTION OF CERTAIN RIGHTS.

A. It shall not be a violation of copyright law to:

1. Imitate, or borrow from, the style of another artist or composition.  

2. Produce a work parodying another's compositions or style.  

3. Employ, or assist in employing, any person who created, or assisted in the creation of, another act or work.  

SECTION 4. ACT NOT TO BE MISCONSTRUED.

This Act shall not be so construed as to prohibit certain individuals or groups the right to seek credit, and/or financial compensation for, the direct copying of specific works (in the music industry, this act is known as "sampling")

SECTION 5. WHEN EFFECTIVE.

This Act will become effective when signed by the president.

House of Representatives
Passed the House of Representatives 3-2-1-3