## Is Ed Sheeran Just a Borrower, or a Masterful Builder? Supreme Court to Decide in ‘Thinking Out Loud’ Copyright Battle Ed Sheeran’s hit song “Thinking Out Loud” has captivated hearts worldwide, but its musical DNA is now at the center of a high-stakes legal battle. This isn’t the first time the Grammy-winning artist has faced accusations of plagiarism surrounding the beloved ballad – the second time, in fact. And now, the saga has reached the pinnacle of the US legal system: the Supreme Court. Will the court rule in favor of Sheeran, affirming his creative originality, or will it side with the songwriters claiming copyright infringement? The stakes are high, not just for Sheeran’s career, but for the future of musical inspiration itself.
The Potential Impact of a US Supreme Court Hearing
The potential impact of a US Supreme Court hearing on the copyright lawsuit against Ed Sheeran’s “Thinking Out Loud” cannot be overstated. If the Supreme Court decides to hear the case, it could have far-reaching consequences for the music industry as a whole.
The Legal Issues at Stake
The legal issues at stake in this case revolve around the interpretation of copyright law and the role of the US Copyright Office.
The Interpretation of Copyright Law
At the heart of this case is the question of how courts should determine copyright infringement. SAS, the owner of part of the rights to Marvin Gaye’s “Let’s Get It On,” argues that courts should consider not only the copyrighted sheet music but also recordings of the music to determine alleged similarities between Gaye’s song and Sheeran’s “Thinking Out Loud.” This argument is based on the idea that the US Copyright Office’s policy of only registering sheet music for songs copyrighted before 1978 is outdated and no longer applicable in today’s digital age.
In their petition to the Supreme Court, SAS’s lawyers argue that a recent Supreme Court ruling in Loper Bright v. Raimondo upended the tradition of limiting copyright infringement cases to the sheet music submitted to the US Copyright Office. This ruling, they argue, gives courts the freedom to interpret what counts as copyrighted in a way that differs from the US Copyright Office.
The Role of the US Copyright Office
The US Copyright Office plays a crucial role in the copyright registration process, and its policies have a significant impact on how copyright infringement cases are decided. Until 1978, the Copyright Office only accepted sheet music for registration of compositions, and required sheet music to be filed. This meant that only the parts of a song included in the deposit copy had copyright protection.
In this case, the Copyright Office’s policy has been interpreted by courts to mean that only the sheet music submitted to the office is considered when determining copyright infringement. SAS argues that this policy is outdated and no longer applicable in today’s digital age, where recordings of music are widely available and easily accessible.
The Potential Consequences of a US Supreme Court Ruling
If the Supreme Court decides to hear the case and rules in favor of SAS, it could have far-reaching consequences for the music industry. The ruling could potentially open up a floodgate of new copyright infringement lawsuits, as music owners and publishers seek to protect their rights in a rapidly changing digital landscape.
On the other hand, if the Supreme Court rules against SAS, it could have a chilling effect on the music industry, making it more difficult for music owners and publishers to protect their rights and potentially stifling creativity and innovation.
The Music Industry’s Reaction
The music industry is watching this case closely, as the outcome could have significant implications for how copyright infringement cases are decided in the future.
The Impact on Artists and Songwriters
If the Supreme Court rules in favor of SAS, it could have a significant impact on artists and songwriters, who may find themselves facing more copyright infringement lawsuits. This could lead to a more cautious approach to songwriting, as artists and songwriters seek to avoid potential legal pitfalls.
On the other hand, if the Supreme Court rules against SAS, it could give artists and songwriters more freedom to experiment and innovate, without fear of legal repercussions.
The Impact on the Music Industry as a Whole
The outcome of this case could have significant implications for the music industry as a whole. If the Supreme Court rules in favor of SAS, it could lead to a more litigious environment, as music owners and publishers seek to protect their rights.
On the other hand, if the Supreme Court rules against SAS, it could lead to a more permissive environment, where music owners and publishers are more willing to take risks and invest in new music and artists.
The Potential for Change in the Music Industry
Regardless of the outcome, this case has the potential to bring about significant change in the music industry. It could lead to a re-evaluation of how copyright infringement cases are decided, and a re-examination of the role of the US Copyright Office in the copyright registration process.
Ultimately, the outcome of this case will depend on how the Supreme Court interprets the relevant laws and policies. However, one thing is certain: the music industry will be watching closely, as the outcome could have far-reaching implications for how music is created, produced, and consumed.
Conclusion
The Enduring Saga of “Thinking Out Loud”: Ed Sheeran’s Copyright Dispute Reaches the US Supreme Court
As reported by Music Business Worldwide, Ed Sheeran’s highly publicized copyright dispute over his hit single “Thinking Out Loud” has taken a significant turn with the appeal of the case being brought to the US Supreme Court. The complex web of events surrounding the song’s composition and ownership has seen Sheeran facing allegations of copyright infringement from the estate of Marvin Gaye, a legendary American singer-songwriter. The initial lawsuit claimed that Sheeran’s song bore an uncanny resemblance to Gaye’s 1973 classic “Let’s Get It On,” with the plaintiff arguing that the similarities between the two songs were not coincidental. A lower court initially ruled in favor of Sheeran, but the decision was overturned on appeal, paving the way for the Supreme Court to weigh in on the matter.
The implications of this case are far-reaching and significant, with the potential to redefine the boundaries of musical copyright and artistic expression. If the Supreme Court rules in favor of the plaintiff, it could have a chilling effect on the music industry, potentially stifling creativity and innovation as artists become increasingly risk-averse. Conversely, a ruling in favor of Sheeran could reaffirm the notion that artistic expression is inherently subjective and that similarities between songs are often a matter of coincidence rather than intentional infringement. Whatever the outcome, one thing is certain: the “Thinking Out Loud” case will have a lasting impact on the music industry and the way we think about creativity, originality, and ownership.
As the music industry waits with bated breath for the Supreme Court’s decision, one thing is clear: the case of “Thinking Out Loud” is a stark reminder of the complexities and nuances of artistic expression. It is a testament to the enduring power of music to inspire, to provoke, and to challenge our assumptions. As we await the verdict, we are reminded that the pursuit of artistic truth is a never-ending journey, full of twists and turns, but ultimately leading us to a deeper understanding of ourselves and the world around us. The question is, what will the Supreme Court’s decision reveal about the very fabric of creativity and ownership in the music industry?