Braham v. Sony/ATV Music Publishing et al., 15-cv-8422 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 10, 2015).
A magistrate judge denied the pro se plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis on the basis that he failed to state a claim against Taylor Swift and her label/publisher for alleged copyright infringement. According to the Complaint, defendants used a 22 word phrase from Plaintiff's song "Haters gone hate". Without ident ifying the specific phrase, Plaintiff alleges that “92% of the lyrics” of “Shake It Off” come from his song, that his “song phrase string is used over 70+ times,” and that Taylor Swift would not have written “Shake It Off” had he not written “Haters gone hate.” The Court found that the plaintiff failed to adequately allege copying under Rule 8. The Court further noted that if the plaintiff chose to refile an amended complaint, it had significant concerns that he lacked a claim based solely on the lyrics. Moreover, the plaintiff would need to allege that his lyrics are original.
Showing posts with label Originality. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Originality. Show all posts
November 19, 2013
Madonna's "Vogue" Does Not Infringe Horn-Hit
VMG Salsoul, LLC v. Madonna Louise Ciccone, et al., No. 12-cv-05967 (C.D. Cal. filed 11/18/2013) [Doc. 116].
Plaintiff alleges copyright infringement for the appropriation of a single horn stab (“Horn Hit”) from Plaintiff’s work, Love Break. The Horn Hit is a single chord that is played eleven times in Defendants’ work, Vogue. The Court found that neither the chord nor the Horn Hit sound sufficiently original to merit copyright protection. Even if the alleged appropriation was subject to copyright protection, the Court found that any copying was de minimis. Accordingly, defendants were granted summary judgment.
The Court recognized that while a valid certificate of registration with the copyright office entitles Plaintiff to
a presumption of originality, Defendants may overcome this presumption by demonstrating that the Horn Hit is not original. The Court then concluded that, as a matter of law, the Horn Hit is not sufficiently original to merit copyright protection. "The Horn Hit is not a component of the 'hook' in Plaintiff’s Love Break nor is it accompanied by a lyric. As a result, the Court finds that this single chord is not sufficiently original to merit copyright protection".
The Court further found that even if the alleged appropriation was subject to copyright protection, Defendants’ use was de minimis. "Having listened to the sound recordings of Chicago Bus Stop, Love Break, and Vogue, the Court finds that no reasonable audience would find the sampled portions qualitatively or quantitatively significant in relation to the infringing work, nor would they recognize the appropriation. The Court finds that any sampling of the Horn Hit was de minimis or trivial." Lastly, there was also evidence of independent creation.
Plaintiff alleges copyright infringement for the appropriation of a single horn stab (“Horn Hit”) from Plaintiff’s work, Love Break. The Horn Hit is a single chord that is played eleven times in Defendants’ work, Vogue. The Court found that neither the chord nor the Horn Hit sound sufficiently original to merit copyright protection. Even if the alleged appropriation was subject to copyright protection, the Court found that any copying was de minimis. Accordingly, defendants were granted summary judgment.
The Court recognized that while a valid certificate of registration with the copyright office entitles Plaintiff to
a presumption of originality, Defendants may overcome this presumption by demonstrating that the Horn Hit is not original. The Court then concluded that, as a matter of law, the Horn Hit is not sufficiently original to merit copyright protection. "The Horn Hit is not a component of the 'hook' in Plaintiff’s Love Break nor is it accompanied by a lyric. As a result, the Court finds that this single chord is not sufficiently original to merit copyright protection".
The Court further found that even if the alleged appropriation was subject to copyright protection, Defendants’ use was de minimis. "Having listened to the sound recordings of Chicago Bus Stop, Love Break, and Vogue, the Court finds that no reasonable audience would find the sampled portions qualitatively or quantitatively significant in relation to the infringing work, nor would they recognize the appropriation. The Court finds that any sampling of the Horn Hit was de minimis or trivial." Lastly, there was also evidence of independent creation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
