will.i.am sues Pharell

will.i.am sues Pharell

MusicJune 27, 2013

According to the BBC outlet Newsbeat, the hyper-hypocritical and often agitating lead of the Black Eyed Peas, will.i.am, is suing fellow artist Pharrell Williams over the use of two commonly used words in the English language. “I” and “Am” are at the heart of the dispute and subsequent lawsuit filed by will.i.am against the “Get Lucky” collaborator in what he claims to be a copyright violation.

“i am OTHER” is a youtube channel that was created by Williams that sought to help struggling artists develop a new way of channeling their inner individuality. Lawyers for will.i.am claim that the title is just too similar to his iPhone app that goes by the name of “i.am+.”

On the artist dedicated YouTube channel, “i am Other” explains, “We are proud to be different and believe that individuality is the new wealth. This shared philosophy flows through each pillar within the company: music, film, television, apparel, tech and multimedia.”

The lawsuit is not only a cowardly slap in the face to Williams, but is in stark contrast to an admitted mis-handling of sampling (read: stealing) done by will.i.am in the past. In April of 2013 he admitted to not having clearance from artists in his using a sampling of the song “Rebound” by Arty and Mat Zo. Not surprisingly, the track also featured Chris Brown, another gem of upstanding law abiding citizenry.

The plagiaristic pattern doesn’t stop at Arty and Mat Zo, either. Other artists, including Tulisa, have made similar claims that will.i.am is abusing the power of sampling and is just downright stealing their creations.

The pot is most certainly calling the kettle black…eyed peas.

As for Pharrell Williams, he’s disappointed that it came to this, but was able to make a little light of the situation. In response he’s been quoted as saying, “I AM someone who likes to talk things out and, in fact, I attempted to do just that on many occasions. I AM surprised in how this is being handled and I AM confident that Will's trademark claims will ultimately be found to be as meritless and ridiculous as I do.”