>>our decision hinges on settled procedural
>>principles and the limited nature of our appellate review,
>>dictated by the particular posture of this case and
>>controlling copyright law. Far from heralding the end of
>>musical creativity as we know it, our decision, even
>construed
>>broadly, reads more accurately as a cautionary tale for
>future
>>trial counsel wishing to maximize their odds of success.”
>>
>
>The majority is making it sound like the defendants (Thicke,
>Pharrell) botched their defense moreso than the Gayes winning
>the case in principle. And they assert that the exact thing
>we're all lamenting is not true. Can anyone who knows this
>better explain it?

There are limits on what can be reviewed on appeal. They don't re-litigate the entire case. They're saying that their decision is based on reviewing a small slice of the original case, not the entire thing. It almost sounds like they're saying, "This isn't our fault. We did what we could with what we were given."

And you seem to be correct about the defense. The appeals court seems to be saying that this is a warning to future attorneys trying similar cases on how to improve their chances of winning.





>
>______________________________
>http://i.imgur.com/v2ye7l2.jpg