A minority owner of a Marvin Gaye song has tried incessantly to sue Sheeran over the alleged similarities between Sheeran’s hit and “Let’s Get It On”
Despite a plea from one of the people accusing Ed Sheeran of copying Marvin Gaye‘s “Let’s Get It On,” the Supreme Court will not be taking on a copyright case around Sheeran’s hit, “Thinking Out Loud.” On Monday, the high court refused to take on the lawsuit claiming that Sheeran infringed on the copyright of Gaye’s song.
“No reasonable jury could find that the two songs, taken as a whole, are substantially similar in light of their dissimilar melodies and lyrics,” Judge Michael Park wrote for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, per USA Today.
Back in November, the same court found that Sheeran did not infringe on Gaye’s copyright citing that the songs share only the “fundamental musical building blocks.” The original case — filed by Structured Asset Sales, a company that owns a small stake in Gaye’s song — argued that Sheeran copied a chord progression and rhythm from “Let’s Get It On.”
“We are gratified that the Second Circuit agreed with Judge Stanton that Ed Sheeran and Amy Wadge did not infringe ‘Let’s Get It On’ in creating ‘Thinking Out Loud,’” Sheeran’s attorney Donald Zakarian told Rolling Stone in November. “This ruling is consistent with the jury’s rejection of any claim of infringement in the Griffin case, finding that Ed and Amy independently created ‘Thinking Out Loud.’”
While Monday’s denial ends this lawsuit against Sheeran, a separate SAS case may go forward in federal court. The second suit attempts to sue Sheeran over a detailed recorded version of the Gaye song, which had been paused in the court system. “The U.S. Supreme Court was aware of this and understands that the case will go forward and may very well be back at the U.S. Supreme Court at a later date,” David Pullman, who heads SAS, told Billboard.
Separately, Zakarian shared his agreement with the court’s Monday decision and slammed SAS’ attempt at a second suit. “If [Pullman] truly believed that the second case he filed was so compelling — which it is not — he would not have spent the last two years pursuing his failed first case,” Zakarian said.
