In the high-stakes arena of music copyright law, a recent ruling from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has sent shockwaves through the industry. Singer-songwriter Sam Smith, known for his soulful voice and chart-topping hits, finds himself back in the legal hot seat as a copyright infringement claim against him has been revived. The case, which was initially dismissed by a lower court, has been given new life by the Ninth Circuit’s decision, placing Smith’s creative process under intense scrutiny. As the music industry holds its collective breath, this ruling raises important questions about artistic ownership, inspiration, and the fine line between homage and plagiarism. In this article, we’ll explore the intricacies of the case, the implications of the Ninth Circuit’s ruling, and what it means for the future of music creation.
The Revival of Copyright Claim Against Sam Smith
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has revived a copyright infringement claim filed by Sound and Color LLC against pop stars Sam Smith and Normani, finding that a District Court judge erred in granting summary judgment in favor of the singers. The lawsuit, which was filed in 2022, alleges that Smith and Normani copied Sound and Color’s song “Dancing with a Stranger” to create their own hit single by the same title, which was released in 2019 and achieved “platinum” status in the U.S. and other countries.
Background of the Case
The dispute arose after songwriters Jordan Vincent and Christopher Miranda co-wrote a song titled “Dancing with a Stranger” in 2015. The musical expression is owned by Sound and Color LLC, in which Vincent, Miranda, and Rosco Banlaoi are members. The song was shopped around the music industry before being posted to the online sharing platform SoundCloud in January 2016, where it garnered over 500,000 plays.
The District Court’s Ruling
In September 2023, Judge Wesley L. Hsu of the Central District of California granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment, saying that “there are objective differences in the shape of the melody in each song” and noting technical, musical differences between them. Hsu discounted the plaintiff’s expert testimony that the “feel and groove” of the two songs are the same, a conclusion reached by comparing them after altering the tempo, pitch, vocals, and drums of the Smith and Normani song to match the Sound and Color version.
The Ninth Circuit’s Reversal
In a memorandum opinion, the Ninth Circuit found that Judge Hsu improperly held that the plaintiffs could not satisfy the extrinsic test as a matter of law. The court looked to the similarities between the two songs rather than the technical distinguishing factors and found them sufficient to justify reversing the judgment in the defendants’ favor. The Ninth Circuit’s opinion states that under the plaintiff’s assertion of a selection-and-arrangement theory of infringement, they need only show that the two works share, in substantial amounts, the same combination of elements such that an ordinary observer would be disposed to overlook any differences.
The Music in Question
The lawsuit centers around the hook/chorus in both songs, which contains the lyrics “dancing with a stranger” being sung over a nearly identical melody and musical composition. In both songs, the title, hook, chorus, lyrics, and musical composition are all the same—and are repeated throughout the song, giving both songs their identities.
- The hook/chorus in both songs contains the lyrics “dancing with a stranger” being sung over a nearly identical melody and musical composition.
- In both songs, the title, hook, chorus, lyrics, and musical composition are all the same—and are repeated throughout the song, giving both songs their identities.
The 2015 Song “Dancing with a Stranger”
The dispute arose after songwriters Jordan Vincent and Christopher Miranda co-wrote a song titled “Dancing with a Stranger” in 2015. The musical expression is owned by Sound and Color LLC, in which Vincent, Miranda, and Rosco Banlaoi are members. Vincent, Miranda, and Banlaoi say that they shopped the song around the music industry before posting it to the online sharing platform SoundCloud in January 2016, where it garnered over 500,000 plays.
In 2022, Sound and Color filed a complaint against Smith and Normani Kordei Hamilton (who is professionally known only as “Normani”), among others, arguing that the duo copied the company’s song to create a hit by the same title, which was released in 2019 and achieved “platinum” status in the U.S. and other countries.
Alleged Infringement
The plaintiff alleges that the hook/chorus in both songs – the most significant part and artistic aspect of these works – contains the lyrics “dancing with a stranger” being sung over a nearly identical melody and musical composition. In both songs, the title, hook, chorus, lyrics, and musical composition are all the same – and are repeated throughout the song giving both songs their identities.
Musical Similarities
The Ninth Circuit looked to the similarities rather than the technical distinguishing factors and found them sufficient to justify reversing the judgment in the defendants’ favor. The court noted that the hook and melody in both songs are nearly identical, and that the lyrics “dancing with a stranger” are sung over a similar musical composition in both songs.
The court also noted that the “feel and groove” of the two songs are the same, a conclusion reached by comparing them after altering the tempo, pitch, vocals, and drums of the Smith and Normani song to match the Sound and Color version. The court found that the similarity between the two songs is not limited to the hook and melody, but extends to the overall composition and structure of the songs.
Implications of the Ninth Circuit’s Ruling
The Extrinsic Test
The Ninth Circuit’s ruling has implications for the application of the extrinsic test in determining copyright infringement. The extrinsic test is a two-part test that looks at the similarity between the two works and whether an ordinary observer would be disposed to overlook any differences. The court’s ruling suggests that the extrinsic test may be applied more broadly than previously thought, and that similarity may be found in more aspects of a work than just the hook and melody.
The Selection-and-Arrangement Theory
The selection-and-arrangement theory of infringement is a theory that holds that a copyright owner can only protect the selection and arrangement of the elements of a work, rather than the individual elements themselves. The Ninth Circuit’s ruling suggests that this theory may be more relevant than previously thought, and that a copyright owner may be able to protect the selection and arrangement of the elements of a work even if the individual elements themselves are not substantially similar.
Future of Music Copyright Cases
The Ninth Circuit’s ruling has significant implications for the future of music copyright cases. The ruling suggests that copyright owners may have more avenues for protecting their works, and that the similarity between two works may be found in more aspects of the work than just the hook and melody. The ruling also highlights the importance of the selection-and-arrangement theory of infringement, and may lead to more cases being brought under this theory.
The ruling may also have implications for the music industry as a whole, as it may lead to more lawsuits being brought over alleged copyright infringement. The ruling may also lead to more attention being paid to the selection-and-arrangement theory of infringement, and may lead to more cases being brought under this theory.
Conclusion
The Ninth Circuit’s decision to revive a copyright claim against Sam Smith marks a significant development in the ongoing debate over musical composition ownership. As discussed in the article, the plaintiff, Stairway-to-Haven LLC, initially claimed that Smith’s song “Too Good at Goodbyes” infringed on their copyright-protected composition. While the district court initially dismissed the claim, the Ninth Circuit’s reversal highlights the complexity and nuance of copyright law. By revisiting the case, the appellate court emphasizes the importance of carefully evaluating the similarities and differences between musical compositions.
The implications of this decision extend beyond the specific case at hand. It serves as a reminder that copyright law is a rapidly evolving field, with courts and lawmakers continually refining the rules and regulations governing creative works. The Ninth Circuit’s decision has significant implications for songwriters, musicians, and the music industry as a whole. It underscores the need for creators to understand and respect the intellectual property rights of others, while also highlighting the challenges of accurately determining copyright infringement.
As the music industry continues to evolve, this decision serves as a poignant reminder of the ongoing struggle to balance artistic expression with intellectual property rights. The complex interplay between creativity and ownership raises fundamental questions about the nature of art and the role of law in shaping our cultural landscape. Ultimately, this case highlights the need for a nuanced understanding of copyright law and its impact on the creative industries.