It will be an interesting one
I still believe only "melody and lyric" can be protected
The key part is this bit:
The judge also pointed in particular to the “substantial similarity” of the two songs’ “signature phrases, hooks, basslines, keyboard chords, harmonic structures and vocal melodies”. - I actually think this might be a "mis-quote" of what the musicologist said (see below)
Most of these refer to melodies - the keyboard chords and "harmonic structures" are just being used to support the case that they had been using the track as reference (which Thicke seems to confirm and deny in various statements / interviews - Thicke by name....thick by nature)
Eg if they claim they hadn't heard the original track an pd came up with the same melodies by accident - however, this would be difficult to argue with the other "non-protected" similarities
The "musicologist" working for the Gaye family is arguing:
[There are at] least eight substantially similar compositional features" with Gaye's original. The similarities are said to encompass the signature phrase, vocal hook, backup vocal hook, their variations, and the keyboard and bass lines -- "far surpassing the similarities that might result from attempts to evoke an 'era' of music or a shared genre"
Notice the difference "keyboard and bass lines" = melodies
I am sure there will be a settlement before this goes to court