Or even genres, themselves?

I'm genuinely curious, no snark implied.

It would seem the creation of sub-genres would follow the exact path that Pharrell/Thicke took.

And, no, I'm not saying "Got To Give It Up" or "Blurred Lines" will spawn an R&B sub-genre, but the underlying premise is the same.

Artist A creates a song. Artist B (C, D, etc.) chooses to create or reproduce elements of Artist A's song's production style – not wholly lift chords or melodies or instrumental arrangement – to evoke a similar rhythm arrangement or syncopation or musical intent or "mood" or "feel" or "groove."

For example, there'd never be funk without other subsequent R&B artists consistently aping (proto-?)funk concepts (e.g., emphasis on rhythmic arrangement over vocals; particular emphasis on bass, rhythm guitar, and drums). Funk, as we now know it, would have died if the concepts weren't freely allowed to be perpetually recreated by multiple artists to recreate the feel or mood or sound.

In a similar fashion, there'd never be disco, bebop, G-funk, etc. if certain elements of those musics aren't freely allowed to be shared, copied, aped, etc. to evoke a similar musical intent.

And to be clear, I'm against any artist outright using another's music, in whole or in part, melodically or instrumentally, without attributing credit. But that's not what Pharrell or Robin did.