See, despite the fact that he owns 20% of the song’s copyright—one of the key sticking points in the lawsuit, since it theoretically proves that he’s at least 20% responsible for its creation—Thicke now says he didn’t have anything to do with it. In standard music industry practice, he just told people he did because he was embarrassed about having to reach outside of himself to become truly successful.

“The public would only know it if I somehow said it was my idea,” he said. “So the only way to make the song my idea was to say, ‘Hey I wanted to do something like this and Pharrell made it.’ But the truth was Pharrell made it without me… I was lucky to be in the room.”

And what was the ultimate goal? Moving units, naturally.

“I thought it would help sell records,” he said. “When I give interviews, I tell whatever I want to say to help sell records.”

Collaborators and friends, Thicke and Williams

Thicke alleges that he made up the part about the song being inspired by Gaye, and that a conversation between him and Pharrell about “Got to Give It Up” never even happened. Like, Marvin Gaye was nowhere on their radar.

“I didn’t even use the Marvin Gaye thing until everyone started saying to me, ‘Hey, it’s reminiscent of a Marvin Gaye song’,” he said. “There was no other way to get credit for this biggest song of the year unless it was my idea.”

In his deposition, Pharrell echoes this and says Thicke got credit on the song because they needed to keep up appearances. The pale crooner was the face of the song, so he needed to be perceived as such. The pair are also friends, and respectfully, Pharrell would never do anything to make him look bad.

“This is what happens every day in our industry,” he explained. “People are made to look like they have much more authorship in the situation than they actually do.”

Another reason why Thicke says he couldn’t have much to do with “Blurred Lines” is because he says he was too drunk and high to know what the hell was going on. It’s a strange legal strategy, but a strategy nonetheless.

“I was high on Vicodin and alcohol when I showed up at the studio,” he explained. “I was high and drunk every time I did an interview last year. So there are some quotes I don’t remember saying, but I do generally remember trying to sell the public on the fact that ‘Blurred Lines’ was my idea in some way.”

Thicke’s character questions aside—in the deposition, he flat-out admits that he’s not an honest person—the issue at hand is whether or not “Blurred Lines” cribbed from “Got to Give It Up.” And what you see instead, colored between the lines, is how marketing messages and the narratives that artists tend to create around their music can really come back to haunt them.

Last year, in article for Noisey, I contended, in a very declarative way, that “Blurred Lines” was popular because it was “originally a Marvin Gaye song.” Later, via CNN, I would find out that my words were actually used in the lawsuit. But I was only being halfway serious.

If you really listen to the two songs—and I mean really really listen—there is an obvious similarity between them. To say “Blurred Lines” was inspired by Marvin Gaye, that doesn’t feel like a stretch; it might even make a good talking point in interviews. Because back then, before his wife left him, what else was there to really talk to Robin Thicke about? The guy had no story. He was as vanilla as it gets.

But that doesn’t make the songs the same. You don’t need to be a musicologist to tell that they’re not in the same key, the lyrics aren’t the same, the syncopation of the bass—which seems to be what the Gaye’s lawyers are harping on—isn’t the same either.

They are just not the same song. Period.

Marvin Gaye continues to inspire

Could “Blurred Lines” have been influenced, at least subconsciously, by “Got to Give It Up?” Sure. Could it have been a concerted effort on the part of Pharrell to make something that sounded like “Got to Give It Up?” Sure. But it’s not a replica. It’s got a familiar groove, a similar vibe. But how many disco songs in Gaye’s day had that same groove? Thousands.

How many songs on the radio right this very second sound like other songs? Watch Axis of Awesome’s “Four Chords.” Then come back here.

Now, it does seem unreasonable that Robin Thicke and Pharrell never had a single conversation about Marvin Gaye prior to making “Blurred Lines,” but it is plausible that Thicke had absolutely nothing to do with creating it. That can be his escape clause here, his way of absolving himself. Another strategy presumably cooked up by his lawyer.

Because in this day and age, producers and songwriters make thousands of songs, store them on hard drives and demo them with dozens of singers before they wind up belonging to a specific artist. It’s the same ol’ tried-and-true tin pan alley method of making records. The best songs go to the artists who can afford them, the artists who have a platform.

And just like you might not have known that a bunch of white Jewish people were writing songs for Black doo-wop artists in the 50s, you might not know that some of the biggest hits of today do not originate with the artists who sing them.

So while the case may make it to trial, what it really shows is that artists need to be way more transparent—or, alternatively, even less forthcoming—about how they’re making records. They also need to be far more careful about their sales pitch, the story they’re using to sell the public. Because the Gaye family—all respect due to them and Marvin’s legacy—really had nothing to go on until Thicke started shooting off at the mouth, promoting his song and himself, hungry for credit, hungry for something he probably didn’t deserve.

Robin Thicke shouldn’t have been so full of it.