There has been yet another twist in the tale of Blurred Lines and the legal action bought against it.

Back in March, Marvin Gaye’s family who started legal action against the song’s writers and performers won their case when a court concluded that Blurred Lines copied Gaye’s Got to Give it Up. Now, lawyers representing Pharrell Williams and Robin Thicke are pushing for a new trial, citing “errors in jury instructions, improper testimony from a musicologist and insufficient evidence to support the initial ruling.”

Pharrell and Thicke both expressed deep sadness over the original decision to rule in the Gaye’s favour. Not only this, but the decision had many deeper implications for the future of music. A major part of the Blurred Lines camp’s defence was that the song was influenced by the style of Gaye’s music rather than outright copying it. This is true of a lot of modern music and the fact that the court ruled against Pharrell and Thicke means that the door is left wide open for similar and maybe unfounded cases.

One of the major complaints that Pharrell and Thicke had over the original ruling was that the pair were ordered to pay $7.3 million to the Gaye family. Their lawyer described this as "grossly excessive and not supported by any admissible evidence". He went on to say "the elements of [Got To Give It Up'] claimed to have been copied amount to less than 5% of the [Blurred Lines] composition. Gaye's family are entitled to no more than 5 percent of non-publishing profits, which would amount to $680,000.”

When faced with these facts, it’s difficult not to think that the ruling was skewed slightly against Pharrell and Thicke and they are well within their rights to try and contest the decision. As well as defending the rights of the individuals, there is also the larger issue of defending all artists in the future. Most music is heavily influenced by past work so it’s only a matter of time before similar cases threaten the future of the industry.