Pharrell Williams Et Al v Bri (3)

Paul H. Duvall (SBN 73699) E-Mail: [email protected] KING & BALLOW 6540 Lusk Blvd., Suite 250 San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 597-6000 Fax: (858) 597-6008 Attorneys for Defendants and Counter-Claimants Frankie Christian Gaye and Nona Marvisa Gaye

Richard S. Busch (TN BPR 014594) (pro hac vice) E-Mail: [email protected] KING & BALLOW 315 Union Street, Suite 1100 Nashville, TN 37201 (615) 259-3456 Fax: (615) 726-5417 Attorneys for Defendants and Counter-Claimants Frankie Christian Gaye and Nona Marvisa Gaye

Mark L. Block (SBN 115457) E-Mail: [email protected] WARGO & FRENCH LLP 1888 Century Park East; Suite 1520 Los Angeles, CA 90067 (310) 853-6355 Fax: (310) 853-6333 Attorneys for Defendants and Counter-Claimants Frankie Christian Gaye and Nona Marvisa Gaye

Paul N. Philips (SBN 18792) E-Mail: [email protected] The Law Offices of Paul N. Philips 9255 West Sunset Boulevard West Hollywood, CA 90069 (323)813-1126 Fax: (323) 854-6902 Attorney for Defendant and Counter-Claimant Marvin Gaye III

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION

PHARRELL WILLIAMS, an individual; ROBIN THICKE, an individual; and CLIFFORD HARRIS, JR., an individual,

Plaintiffs,

vs. BRIDGEPORT MUSIC, INC., a Michigan corporation; FRANKIE CHRISTIAN GAYE, an individual; MARVIN GAYE III, an individual; NONA MARVISA GAYE, an individual; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive,

Defendants. _______________________________ AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS

Case No. CV13-06004-JAK (AGRx) Hon. John A. Kronstadt DECLARATION OF RICHARD S. BUSCH IN SUPPORT OF COUNTER-CLAIMANTS OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS AND COUNTER-DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT Date: October 20, 2014 Time: 8:30 a.m. Ctrm: 750 Action Commenced: August 15, 2013 Trial Date: February 10, 2015

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Case 2:13-cv-06004-JAK-AGR Document 122 Filed 09/15/14 Page 1 of 125 Page ID #:2570

1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

DECLARATION OF RICHARD S. BUSCH

I, Richard S. Busch, declare and state:

1. I am a partner in the law firm of King & Ballow and lead counsel for

Counter-Claimants Nona Marvisa Gaye and Frankie Christian Gaye in the above

captioned matter. My application to appear and participate in this action pro hac vice

has been approved by the Court. The information contained in this Declaration is based

upon my personal knowledge. If called as a witness in this action, I could and would

testify competently to the contents of this declaration.

2. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a true and correct copy of Counter-

Defendant Robin Thickes Supplemental Responses to Defendants and Counter-

Claimants Frankie Christian Gaye and Nona Marvisa Gayes First Set of Interrogatories.

3. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1A is a true and correct copy of Counter-

Defendant Robin Thickes Amended Supplemental Responses to Interrogatory Nos. 16

& 21 of Defendants and Counter-Claimants Frankie Christian Gaye and Nona Marvisa

Gayes First Set of Interrogatories.

4. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a true and correct copy of the July 9, 2013

Billboard.com article, Robin Thicke on Wifes Impact on Blurred Lines and the May

7, 2013 G.Q. article, Robin Thicke on That Banned Video, in which he admits that when

creating Blurred Lines, he wanted to do something like Marvin Gayes Got to Give it

Up.

5. Attached hereto as Exhibit 3 is a true and correct copy of a CD containing:

a. Track 1: Robin Thickes interview with Hot 97, on or about June 11, 2013

b. Track 2: Robin Thickes interview with VH1, on or about May 6, 2013

c. Track 3: Robin Thickes interview with Twitter Take Over On or about

July 20, 2014

d. Track 4: Robin Thickes interview with Inside Track on Fuse TV, on or

about July 29, 2013


2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

e. Track 5: Robin Thickes interview with Oprah, on or about October 13,

2013

f. Track 6: Robin Thickes interview with TMZ, on or about September 26,

2013

g. Track 7: Pharrell Williams Admits Blurred Lines Was Inspired By

Marvin Gayes Got to Give it Up, on or about October 31, 2013.

6. Attached hereto as Exhibit 4 is a true and correct copy of the March 4,

2014 XXL article Pharrell Has Found His Happy Place in the Mainstream, by Dan

Rys, in which he admits that he was trying to pretend that he was Marvin Gaye when

creating Blurred Lines.

7. Attached hereto as Exhibit 5 is a true and correct copy of the October 31,

2013 HipHollywood.com article Pharrell Williams Admits Blurred Lines Was Inspired

By Marvin Gayes Got to Give it Up, by Ashley Williams, in which he admits that he

was inspired by Marvin Gaye and he tried to take the feeling that Got to Give it Up

gave him, when creating Blurred Lines.

8. Attached hereto as Exhibit 6 is a true and correct copy of excerpts of April

23, 2014 Deposition of Robin Thicke.

9. Attached hereto as Exhibit 7 is a true and correct copy of excerpts of April

21, 2014 Deposition of Pharrell Williams.

10. Attached hereto as Exhibit 8 is a true and correct copy Declaration of

Sandy Wilbur in Bourne Co v. Twentieth Century Fox.

11. Attached hereto as Exhibit 9 is a true and correct copy of excerpts of

August 27, 2014 Deposition of Sandy Wilbur.

12. Attached hereto as Exhibit 10 is a true and correct copy of a profile of

Robin Thicke posted on Allmusic.com, discussing Robin Thickes perpetual Marvin

[Gaye] fixation.


3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

13. Attached hereto as Exhibit 11 is a true and correct copy of the August 8,

2013 New York Times.com article Why Blurred Lines Wont Go Away by Rob

Hoerburger.

14. Attached hereto as Exhibit 12 is a true and correct copy of the August 23,

2013 Rolling Stone article Robin Thicke, You're No Marvin Gaye, by David Ritz.

15. Attached hereto as Exhibit 13 is a true and correct copy of the July 30,

2013 Vice article Why Don't We Have a Song of the Summer Yet?, by Paul Cantor.

16. Attached hereto as Exhibit 14 is a true and correct copy of excerpts of

Trial Testimony of Sandy Wilbur in Guzman v. Hacienda Records, United States

District Court, Southern District of Texas, Case No. 6:12-cv-00042, Dkt. No 148.

17. Attached hereto as Exhibit 15 is a true and correct copy of Sandy Wilburs

2012 Musicology Services Brochure for Music Suppliers and Advertisers.

18. Attached hereto as Exhibit 16 is a true and correct copy of a DVD

containing:

a. Track 1: Thicke Deposition Video from 68:20-71:7

b. Track 2: Thicke Deposition Video from 31:15-19

c. Track 3: Thicke Deposition Video from 103:15-24

d. Track 4: Thicke Deposition Video from 105:17-19

e. Track 5: Thicke Deposition Video from 115:2-10

f. Track 6: Thicke Deposition Video from 116:1-18

g. Track 7: Thicke Deposition Video from 31:12-14

h. Track 8: Thicke Deposition Video from 27:16-28:4

i. Track 9: Thicke Deposition Video from 88:10-12

j. Track 10: Thicke Deposition Video from 154:11-16

k. Track 11: Williams Deposition Video from 66:24-68:15

l. Track 12: Williams Deposition Video from 90:14-17

m. Track 13: Williams Deposition Video from 104:18-110:22

n. Track 14: Williams Deposition Video from 60:6-12


4

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1746, I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing

is true and correct. Executed this 7th day of September 2014.

/s/Richard S. Busch

Richard S. Busch


Exhibit 1


61 KING, HOLMES, PATERNO & BERLINER, LLPHOWARDE. KING, ESQ., STATEBARNo. 77012

2 STEPHEND. ROTHSCHILD,ESQ., STATEBARNo. [email protected]

3 SETHMILLER,EsQ., STATEBARNo. [email protected]

4 1900 AVENUEOFTHESTARS,25TH FLOORLos ANGELES,CALIFORNIA90067-4506

5 TELEPHONE:(310) 282-8989FACSIMILE: (310) 282-8903

Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Counter-7 Defendants PHARRELL WILLIAMS,

ROBIN THICKE and CLIFFORD8 HARRIS, JR. and Counter-Defendants

MORE WATER FROM NAZARETH9 PUBLISHING, INC., PAULA MAXINE

PATTON individually and dlbla10 HADDINGTON MUSIC, STAR TRAK

ENTERTAINMENT, GEFFEN11 RECORDS, INTERS COPE RECORDS,

UMG RECORDINGS, INC., and12 UNIVERSAL MUSIC DISTRIBUTION

13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION

15 PHARRELL WILLIAMS, anindividual; ROBIN THICKE, an

16 individual~ and CLIFFORD HARRIS,JR., an individual,

17

18

19

Plaintiffs,

vs.

BRIDGEPORT MUSIC, INC., a20 Michigan cOl]Joration; FRANKIE

CHRISTIAN GAYE, an individual;21 MARVIN GAYE III, an individual;

NONA MARVISA GAYE, an22 individual; and DOES 1 through 10,

inclusive,2324

25 AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS.

Defendants.

26 III27 III28 I I I

4112.060/746228.1

CASE NO. CV13-06004-JAK (AGRx)

PLAINTIFF AND COUNTER-DEFENDANT ROBIN THICKE'SSUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES TODEFENDANTS AND COUNTERCLAIMANTS FRANKIECHRISTIAN GAYE AND NONAMARVISA GAYE'S FIRST SET OFINTERROGATORIES


18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28KING, HOLMES,PATERNO &

BERLINER, LLP

Defendants and Counter-Claimants Frankie

Christian Gaye and Nona Marvisa Gaye

Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant Robin Thicke

One

1 PROPOUNDING PARTY:

2

3 RESPONDING PARTY:

4 SET NO.:

5 Pursuant to Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff and

6 Counter-Defendant Robin Thicke ("Responding party") hereby provides these

7 supplemental responses to Defendants and Counter-Claimants Frankie Christian

8 Gaye and Nona Marvisa Gaye's ("propounding parties") first set of interrogatories.

9 GENERAL OBJECTIONS AND PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

10 Responding party generally objects to the interrogatories to the extent they

11 and the instructions and definitions therein purport to impose obligations beyond

12 those provided in applicable law and are vague, ambiguous and unintelligible.

13 Responding party has not completed discovery or his investigation and analysis of

14 the facts, issues and evidence in the instant action. Accordingly, Responding party

15 reserves his right to produce and/or offer information andlor documents responsive

16 to the requests that Responding party has not yet identified or of which Responding

17 party is not presently aware.

In particular, propounding parties, after obtaining multiple extensions to

respond to discovery, using the extra time to propound hundreds of repetitive

requests for production and interrogatories, and then serving seriously inadequate

discovery responses, refused to grant a two week extension to respond to the instant

interrogatories. Propounding parties had no legitimate reason to refuse to provide

the reciprocal professional courtesy in the form of the requested extension and the

refusal violated Rule (B)(2) of the above-entitled Court's Civility and

Professionalism Guidelines. Responding party intends to provide all responsive

information to the subject interrogatories to which propounding parties are entitled

and are gathering same.

III

4112.060/746228.1 2


1 SUPPLEMENTAL

2 RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES

3 INTERROGATORY NO.1:

4 Identify by name, title, and address each and every person which you have

5 reason to believe you may call as a witness at the trial of this matter or who may

6 have personal knowledge of facts regarding the claims and defenses at issue in this

7 action. Provide a short statement, in narrative form, with respect to each witness or

8 person identified above describing the nature and substance of the proposed

9 testimony of each witness or knowledge of each person, including which

10 allegations in Counter-Defendants' Answer or defenses the testimony or knowledge

11 would address.

4112.0601746228.1 3

12 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO.1:

13 Responding party objects to the subject interrogatory on the grounds that it is

14 too general to meet the requirements ofPed.R.Civ.P. 26(b), seeks attorney work

15 product and/or attorney-client communications, is overbroad and unduly

16 burdensome, is vague, ambiguous and unintelligible, is not relevant to any claim or

17 defense at issue herein, seeks information that is subject to the rights of privacy of

18 responding party and third parties, and that it is compound and, therefore, causes the

19 total number of interrogatories in this set to exceed the allotted maximum.

20 SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO.1:


22 too general to meet the requirements ofPed.R.Civ.P. 26(b), seeks attorney work

23 product and/or attorney-client communications, is overbroad and unduly

24 burdensome, is vague, ambiguous and unintelligible, is not relevant to any claim or

25 defense at issue herein, seeks information that is subject to the rights of privacy of

26 Responding party and third parties, and that it is compound and, therefore, causes

27 the total number of interrogatories in this set to exceed the allotted maximum.

28 / / /KING, HOLMES,PATERNO &

BERLlNER,LLP



State the factual and/or legal basis for Counter-Defendants' Affirmative

Defenses identified in Counter-Defendants' Answer.

4112.0601746228.1 4

1 Subject to and without waiver of the foregoing objections, Responding party

2 responds as follows: Please see Plaintiffs and Counter-Defendants' Initial

3 Disclosures, incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in full. Responding

4 party's investigation and discovery into these matters is ongoing.

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


BERlINER,LLP

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO.2:

Responding party objects to the subject interrogatory on the grounds that it is

too general to meet the requirements ofPed.R.Civ.P. 26(b), seeks attorney work

product and/or attorney-client communications, is overbroad and unduly

burdensome, is vague, ambiguous and unintelligible, is not relevant to any claim or

defense at issue herein, seeks information that is subject to the rights of privacy of

responding party and third parties, and that it is compound and, therefore, causes the

total number of interrogatories in this set to exceed the allotted maximum.

SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO.2:


too general to meet the requirements ofPed.R.Civ.P. 26(b), seeks attorney work

product and/or attorney-client communications, is overbroad and unduly

burdensome, is vague, ambiguous and unintelligible, is not relevant to any claim or

defense at issue herein, seeks information that is subject to the rights of privacy of

Responding party and third parties, and that it is compound and, therefore, causes

the total number of interrogatories in this set to exceed the allotted maximum.

Subject to and without waiver of the foregoing objections, Responding party

responds as follows: The compositions and sound recordings "Blurred Lines" and

"Love After War" were independently created and do not copy, interpolate, or

infringe "Got to Give It Up" or "After the Dance." There is no similarity between

those Marvin Gaye compositions, respectively, and "Blurred Lines" and "Love


1 After War." On information and belief, the Gayes do not own and/or did not

2 register a copyright in those portions of the Marvin Gaye songs that the Gayes allege

3 were copied, including without limitation because those portions are not sufficiently

4 original, are generic, and/or are not encompassed within the copyright deposit,

5 and/or because the Gayes otherwise lack standing to assert their claims. On

6 information and belief, the Gayes were advised by their publisher, EMI, that their

7 claims had no merit, and they have proceeded in bad faith and without justification

8 in asserting their claims. The foregoing is not intended to and shall not be deemed

9 to alter the Gayes' burden of proof on any issue on which they bear such burden

10 under applicable law. Responding party's investigation and discovery into these

11 matters is ongoing.

4112.0601746228.1 5


13 Name all persons who contributed to the songwriting, composing, arranging,

14 recording, mixing, remixing, creation, development, and/or revision of the sound

15 recording or musical composition "Blurred Lines" and describe their involvement.



18 too general to meet the requirements ofFed.R.Civ.P. 26(b), seeks information that is

19 not relevant to any claim or defense herein, is overbroad and unduly burdensome, is

20 vague, ambiguous and unintelligible, seeks information that is subject to the rights

21 of privacy of responding party and third parties, and that it is compound and,

22 therefore, causes the total number of interrogatories in this set to exceed the allotted

23 maximum.





28 vague, ambiguous and unintelligible, seeks information that is subject to the rightsKING, HOLMES,PATERNO &

BERLINER, LLP


1 of privacy of Responding party and third parties, and that it is compound and,


3 maximum.

4112.0601746228.1 6


5 responds as follows:

6 Written By Robin Thicke, Pharrell Williams, Clifford Harris, Jr.

7 Vocals By Robin Thicke, Pharrell Williams, Clifford Harris, Jr.

8 Produced By Pharrell Williams.

9 Instruments By Pharrell Williams.

10 Recorded By Andrew Colman.

11 Assisted By Todd Hurt.

12 Digital Editing and Arrangement By Andrew Coleman.

13 Mixed By Tony Maserati.

14 Mix Assisted By Justin Hergett and James Krausse.

15 Mastered By Chris Gehringer.

16 The persons listed above may be contacted c/o counsel for Plaintiffs.

17 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33(d), please see also the

18 documents produced by Plaintiffs and Counter-Defendants in response to

19 Defendants/Counter-Claimants' requests for production of documents.


21 Name all persons who contributed to the songwriting, composing, recording,

22 mixing, remixing, creation, development, and/or revision of the sound recording or

23 musical composition "Love After War" and describe their involvement.



26 too general to meet the requirements of Fed.R. Civ.P. 26(b), seeks information that is


28 vague, ambiguous and unintelligible, seeks information that is subject to the rightsKING, HOLMES,PATERNO &

BERLlNER,LLP


1 musical composition "Blurred Lines," and provide their current physical (and if

2 different, mailing) address and telephone number.








10 maximum.

4112.0601746228.1 8



13 too general to meet the requirements of Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b), seeks information that is





18 maximum.


20 responds as follows: Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33( d), please see

21 the documents produced by Plaintiffs and Counter-Defendants in response to



24 Name each copyright owner, publisher, sub-publisher, licensor, licensee,

25 licensing agent, collection agent and/or administrator of the sound recording or

26 musical composition "Love After War," and provide their current physical (and if

27 different, mailing) address and telephone number.


BERLlNER,LLP



4112.0601746228.1 9







8 maximum.








16 maximum.


18 responds as follows: Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33(d), please see




22 Identify each separate version of "Blurred Lines" and "Love After War" in

23 existence, including commercially released and unreleased versions, and the

24 location (e.g. physical or digital location andlor mailing address) where such

25 version is currently stored andlor located; and for each commercially exploited

26 version include a catalogue number and any other unique identification (e.g. ISBN

27 code).

28 IIIKING, HOLMES,PATERNO &

BERLINER, LLP



4112.060/746228.1 10







8 maximum.








16 rnaxrmum.






22 Identity each and every recorded statement, or statement that has been

23 reported in any format, in which you made reference to Marvin Gaye, and/or his

24 impact on you, and/or your desire to create a song that sounded like "Got To Give

25 it Up."



28 too general to meet the requirements ofFed.R.Civ.P. 26(b), seeks information that isKING, HOLMES,PATERNO &

BERLINER, LLP


1 not relevant to any claim or defense herein, is overbroad and unduly burdensome,

2 and is vague, ambiguous and unintelligible.


4112.0601746228.1 11




7 and is vague, ambiguous and unintelligible.



10 the copies of interviews produced by Plaintiffs and Counter-Defendants in response

11 to Defendants/Counter-Claimants' requests for production of documents.


13 Identify each and every source of revenue by payor, and the amounts

14 received by you or to be received by you, related to the musical compositions

15 andlor sound recordings "Blurred Lines" and "Love After War."





20 vague, ambiguous and unintelligible, and that it is compound and, therefore, causes









BERLlNER,LLP






5 INTERROGATORY NO. 10:

6 Are there any musical similarities between the musical composition and/or

7 sound recording "Blurred Lines" and the musical composition and/or sound

8 recording "Got To Give it Up?" If so, please identify them.

9 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 10:

4112.060/746228.1 12


11 too general to meet the requirements of Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b), seeks information that is




15 SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 10:







22 responds as follows: No.


24 Are there any musical similarities between the musical composition and/or

25 sound recording "Love After War" and the musical composition and/or sound 8

26 recording "After The Dance?" If so, please identify them.

27 /11


BERLlNER,LLP

















16 Was the musical composition andlor sound recording "Got To Give it Up"

17 used as inspiration in any way in the creation of the musical composition andlor

18 sound recording "Blurred Lines?" If so, how?





23 and is vague, ambiguous and unintelligible, seeks information that is subject to the

24 rights of privacy of responding parties and third parties, and that it is compound and,


26 maximum.27 III28 III

KING, HOLMES,PATERNO &

BERLlNER,LLP

4112.0601746228.1 13


12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


BERLINER, LLP



3 too general to meet the requirements ofPed.R.Civ.P. 26(b), seeks information that is


5 and is vague, ambiguous and unintelligible, seeks information that is subject to the

6 rights of privacy of responding parties and third parties, and that it is compound and,


8 maximum.




Was the musical composition and/or sound recording "After The Dance"

used as inspiration in any way in the creation of the musical composition and/or

sound recording "Love After War?" If so, how?

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 13:


too general to meet the requirements ofPed.R.Civ.P. 26(b), seeks information that is

not relevant to any claim or defense herein, is overbroad and unduly burdensome, is

vague, ambiguous and unintelligible, and that it is compound and, therefore, causes


SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 13:


too general to meet the requirements ofPed.R.Civ.P. 26(b), seeks information that is


vague, ambiguous and unintelligible, and that it is compound and, therefore, causes


Subject to and without waiver of the foregoing objections, Responding party

responds as follows: No.

4112,0601746228,1 14



2 Did you, Williams or anyone else involved in the process of the creation of

3 the musical composition and/or sound recording "Blurred Lines" listen to "Got To

4 Give it Up" within 30 days prior to creating, while creating, or within 60 days after

5 completing "Blurred Lines?" If so, why and for what purpose?


4112.0601746228.1 15



9 not relevant to any claim or defense herein, seeks information subject to the attorney

10 client privilege and/or which constitutes attorney work product, is overbroad and

11 unduly burdensome, is vague, ambiguous and unintelligible, and is compound and,


13 maximum.








21 maximum.


23 responds as follows: Robin Thicke did not listen to "Got to Give It Up" within the

24 time frame stated in the Interrogatory. No one listened to "Got to Give It Up" in the

25 studio when "Blurred Lines" was created. Responding party otherwise lacks

26 information and belief sufficient to answer this Interrogatory as to anyone else.

27 / / /


BERLINER, LLP


20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


BERLlNER,LLP


2 Did you or anyone else involved in the process of the creation of the musical

3 composition and/or sound recording "Love After War" listen to "After The Dance"

4 while creating "Love After War?" If so, why and for what purpose?"





9 vague, ambiguous and unintelligible, and is compound and, therefore, causes the











Please describe step by step how "Blurred Lines" was created, including any

and all conversations you had with Williams or anyone else involved in the

creation or recording of "Blurred Lines" about what you were attempting to

achieve with the song (i.e., whether you were trying to evoke Marvin Gaye at all or

create something that sounded like "Got To Give it Up").



too general to meet the requirements of Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b), seeks information that is


4112.0601746228.1 16


4112.0601746228.1 17










10 responds as follows: The track was created from scratch in about an hour and a half.

11 Robin Thicke told Pharrell Williams that Thicke would love to create a song that

12 evoked the musical era of "Got to Give It Up." Williams created the instrumental

13 track and the first verse, and then Thicke and Williams created the rest of the verses,

14 improvising four lines at a time. Clifford Harris later added a vocal track.


16 Please describe step by step how "Love After War" was created, including

17 any and all conversations you had with anyone else involved in the creation of

18 "Love After War" about what you were attempting to achieve with the song (i.e.,

19 whether you were trying to evoke Marvin Gaye at all or create something that

20 sounded like "After The Dance").







27 / / /


BERLINER, LLP


15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


BERLINER, LLP








8 responds as follows: Robin Thicke wrote the song on his piano in five minutes after

9 having had a fight with Paula Patton, and then he recorded it the next day in his

10 home studio. Approximately one year later, Thicke and Patton rewrote the lyrics.


12 Identify all sources of inspiration andlor collaboration for the creation of the

13 title "Blurred Lines," including any known derivation thereof or intended meaning

14 or metaphor associated therewith.



too general to meet the requirements ofFed.R.Civ.P. 26(b), seeks information that is


vague, ambiguous and unintelligible, and is compound and, therefore, causes the


SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 18:


too general to meet the requirements ofFed.R.Civ.P. 26(b), seeks information that is


vague, ambiguous and unintelligible, and is compound and, therefore, causes the


III

III

4112.0601746228.1 18


4112.0601746228.1 19


2 responds as follows: The title refers to the subject matter of the song, which is

3 about a good girl who has nasty thoughts.


5 Identify all analog and digital transcriptions, comparisons and analyses of

6 "Blurred Lines" and "Got to Give it Up" created at your request or with your

7 knowledge prior to the initial U.S. commercial release of the single, or prior to the

8 initial U.S. commercial release of the album thereof, including any discussions with

9 anyone about the similarities.








17 maximum,








25 maximum.


27 responds as follows: None.


BERLlNER,LLP



Pharrell and I were in the studio and I told him that one of my favorite

songs of all time was Marvin Gaye's 'Got to give it Up.' I was like,

'Damn, we should make something like that, something with that

groove.' Then he started playing a little something and we literally

wrote the song in about half an hour and recorded it;

23 admitted:

24

25

26

27


BERLINER, LLP

4112.0601746228.1 20

2 Identify all analog and digital transcriptions, comparisons and analyses of

3 "Love After War" and "After The Dance" created at your request or with your

4 knowledge prior to the commercial release thereof, including any discussions with

5 anyone about the similarities.














19 responds as follows: None.


21 If your answer to any of interrogatory Nos. 10, 12 or 14 is no, please explain

22 each answer in light of your May 7, 2013 interview with GQ, in which you





12 vague, ambiguous and unintelligible, that it is not full and complete in and of itself,

13 and that it is compound and, therefore, causes the total number of interrogatories in

14 this set to exceed the allotted maximum.





19 vague, ambiguous and unintelligible, that it is not full and complete in and of itself,

20 and that it is compound and, therefore, causes the total number of interrogatories in

2

3

4

5

6

7

Pharrell and I were in the studio making a couple records, and then on

the third day I told him I wanted to do something kinda like Marvin

Gaye's 'Got to Give it Up,' that kind of feel 'cause it's one of my

favorite songs of all time. So he started messing around with some

drums and then he started going 'Hey, hey, hey .. ' and about an hour

and a half later we had the whole record finished.

1 andlor your July 9,2013 interview with Billboard, in which you admitted:


21 this set to exceed the allotted maximum.

22 III23 III24 III25 III26 III27 III28 III


BERLINER, LLP

4112.0601746228.1 21



2 responds as follows: Thicke wanted to create a song that evoked the musical era of

3 "Got to Give It Up." But Williams created the instrumental track and vocal melody

4 (except for the second verse melody) from his own inspiration and ideas.

56 DATED: March 28,201478910111213141516171819202122232425262728


BERLINER, LLP

4112.0601746228.1

KING, HOLMES, PATERNO &BERLINER, LLP

By: --+----"'----------"------SETH MILLER

HOWARD E. KINGAttorneys for Plaintiffs and Counter-DefendantsPHARRELL WILLIAMS, ROBIN THICKEand CLIFFORD HARRIS, JR. and Counter-Defendants MORE WATER FROMNAZARETH PUBLISHING, INC., PAULAMAXINE PATTON individually and d/b/aHADDINGTONMUSIC, STAR TRAKENTERTAINMENT, GEFFEN RECORDS,INTERS COPE RECORDS, UMGRECORDINGS, INC., and UNIVERSALMUSIC DISTRIBUTION

22


VERIFICA nON

I have read the foregoing PLAINTIFF AND COUNTER-DEFENDANT ROBINrBICKE'S SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES TO DEFENDANTS AND COUNTER;LAIMANTS FR.ANKIE CHRISTIAN GAVE AND NONA MARVISA GAVE'S FIRST;ET OF INTERROGATORIES and know its contents.

I am a party to this action. The matters stated in the foregoing document are true of myIWU knowledge. information or belief.

ExecutedonMarch212014.at~, N(.AN ~k- C.r~i

5Attorneys forDefendants/CounterclaimantsNONA MARVISA GAYE ANDFRANKIE CHRISTIAN GAYE

1 PROOF OF SERVICE

2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

3 At the time of service, I was over 18 years of age and not a party to thisaction. I am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California, My

4 business address is 1900 Avenue of the Stars, Twenty-Fifth Floor, Los Angeles, CA90067-4506.

On March 28, 2014, I served true copies of the following document( s)6 described as PLAINTIFF AND COUNTER-DEFENDANT ROBIN TH!CKE'S

SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES TO DEFENDANTS AND COUNTER7 CLAIMANTS FRANKIE CHRISTIAN GAYE AND NONA MARVISA

GAYE'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES on the interested parties in this8 action as follows:

9 Richard S. Busch, Esq.KING & BALLOW

10 315 Union Street, Suite 1100Nashville, TN 37201

11 (615) 259-3456 - Telephone(615) 726-5417 - Facsimile

1213

BY FEDEX: I enclosed said document(s) in an envelope or package14 provided by FedEx and addressed to the persons at the addresses listed in the

Service List. I placed the envelope or package for collection and overnight delivery15 at an office or a regularly utilized drop box ofFedEx or delivered such document(s)

to a courier or driver authorized by FedEx to receive documents.16

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of17 America that the foregoing is true and correct and that I am employed in the office

of a member of the bar of this Court at whose direction the service was made.18

19202122

2324

252627

28

Executed on March 28, 2014, at Los Angeles, California.

4112.0601746228.1


12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728


BERLINER, LLP

PROOF OF SERVICE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

At the time of service, Iwas over 18 years of age and not a party to thisaction. I am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. Mybusiness address is 1900 Avenue of the Stars, Twenty-Fifth Floor, Los Angeles, CA90067-4506.

On March 28, 2014, I served true copies of the following document/ s)described as PLAINTIFF AND COUNTER-DEFENDANT ROBIN TIt(CKE'SSUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES TO DEFENDANTS AND COUNTERCLAIMANTS FRANKIE CHRISTIAN GAYE AND NONA MARVISAGAYE'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES on the interested parties in thisaction as follows:

SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST

BY MAIL: Ienclosed the document(s) in a sealed envelope or packageaddressed to the persons at the addresses listed in the Service List and placed theenvelope for collection and mailing, following our ordinary business practices. Iamreadily familiar with King, Holmes, Paterno & Berliner, LLP's practice forcollecting and processing correspondence for mailing. On the same day that thecorrespondence is placed for collection and mailing, It is deposited in the ordinarycourse of business with the United States Postal Service, in a sealed envelope withpostage fully prepaid.

Ideclare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States ofAmerica that the foregoing is true and correct and that Iam employed in the officeof a member of the bar of this Court at whose direction the service was made.

Executed on March 28,2014, at Los Angeles, California.

4112.0601746228.1


12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728


BERLlNER,LLP

Attorneys forDefendants/CounterclaimantsNONA MARVISA GAYE ANDFRANKIE CHRISTIAN GAYE

SERVICE LISTWilliams, Pharrell, et al. v. Bridgeport Music, Inc., et al,

2: 13-cv-06004-JAK (AGRx)

Paul H. Duvall, E~q.KING & BALLOW6540 Lusk Blvd., Suite 250San Diego, CA 92121(858) 597-6000 - Telephone(858) 597-6008 - Facsimile

Mark L. Block, Es9.:WARGO & FRENCH LLP1888 Century Park East, Suite 1520Los Angeles, CA 90067(310) 853-6355 - Telephone(310) 853-6333 - Facsimile

Paul N. Philips, Esq.The Law Offices of Paul N. Philips,APLC9255 Sunset Blvd #920Los Angeles, CA 90069(323) 813-1126 - Office(310) 854-6902 - Facsimile

4112.0601746228.1

Attorneys forDefendants/CounterclaimantsNONA MARVISA GAYE ANDFRANKIE CHRISTIAN GAYE

Attol1lej1sfor DefendantMARVIN GAYE III


Exhibit 1A


Exhibit 2


Exhibit 3


Paul H. Duvall (SBN 73699) E-Mail: [email protected] KING & BALLOW 6540 Lusk Blvd., Suite 250 San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 597-6000 Fax: (858) 597-6008 Attorneys for Defendants and Counter-Claimants Frankie Christian Gaye and Nona Marvisa Gaye

Richard S. Busch (TN BPR 014594) (pro hac vice) E-Mail: [email protected] KING & BALLOW 315 Union Street, Suite 1100 Nashville, TN 37201 (615) 259-3456 Fax: (615) 726-5417 Attorneys for Defendants and Counter-Claimants Frankie Christian Gaye and Nona Marvisa Gaye

Mark L. Block (SBN 115457) E-Mail: [email protected] WARGO & FRENCH LLP 1888 Century Park East; Suite 1520 Los Angeles, CA 90067 (310) 853-6355 Fax: (310) 853-6333 Attorneys for Defendants and Counter-Claimants Frankie Christian Gaye and Nona Marvisa Gaye

Paul N. Philips (SBN 18792) E-Mail: [email protected] The Law Offices of Paul N. Philips 9255 West Sunset Boulevard West Hollywood, CA 90069 (323)813-1126 Fax: (323) 854-6902 Attorney for Defendant and Counter-Claimant Marvin Gaye III

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION

PHARRELL WILLIAMS, an individual; ROBIN THICKE, an individual; and CLIFFORD HARRIS, JR., an individual,

Plaintiffs,

vs. BRIDGEPORT MUSIC, INC., a Michigan corporation; FRANKIE CHRISTIAN GAYE, an individual; MARVIN GAYE III, an individual; NONA MARVISA GAYE, an individual; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive,

Defendants. _______________________________ AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS

Case No. CV13-06004-JAK (AGRx) Hon. John A. Kronstadt CONCURRENTLY LODGED AS A

NONPAPER EXHIBIT

EXHIBIT 3 TO THE DECLARATION

OF RICHARD S. BUSCH IN

SUPPORT OF COUNTER-

CLAIMANTS OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS AND COUNTER-

DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE

ALTERNATIVE, PARTIAL

SUMMARY JUDGMENT Date: October 20, 2014 Time: 8:30 a.m. Ctrm: 750 Action Commenced: August 15, 2013 Trial Date: February 10, 2015

EXHIBIT 3 TO RICHARD S. BUSCH DECLARATION

CONCURRENTLY LODGED AS A NONPAPER EXHIBIT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28


Exhibit 4


Exhibit 5


Exhibit 6


Exhibit 7


General Information

Court United States District Court for the Central District of California;United States District Court for the Central District of California

Nature of Suit Property Rights - Copyrights[820]

Docket Number 2:13-cv-06004

Pharrell Williams et al v. Bridgeport Music Inc et al, Docket No. 2:13-cv-06004 (C.D. Cal. Aug 15, 2013), Court Docket

2014 The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Service // PAGE 126

Pharrell Williams Et Al v Bri (3)

Documents

Transcript of Pharrell Williams Et Al v Bri (3)