Intellectual Property Insights from Fishman Stewart PLLC
Newsletter – Volume 23, Issue 10
Share on Social

No More Discord Over This Chord: Sheeran Sings His Way To Copyright Win
Ed Sheeran recently successfully defended against a copyright infringement lawsuit over his 2014 hit “Thinking Out Loud.” Songwriter Ed Townsend’s heirs brought the suit alleging Sheeran had infringed Townsend’s copyrights in the 1973 Motown classic, “Let’s Get It On” which Townsend co-authored with Marvin Gaye.
Sheeran had won many hearts with his hit song before the trial, but he may have also won the jury, and thus the case, with an in-court musical demo, audibly illustrating numerous hit songs’ musical similarities.
The case centered on what constitutes “copying”: in evaluating whether a song infringes the copyright in prior songs by other musicians, how much similarity between songs is enough to be considered impermissible “copying”? In other words, where is the line between similarity and infringement?
In this case, the two songs do not share any of the same lyrics, a common theme, or genre, and the songs, generally, do not sound very alike. So, you may ask, what exactly was the basis for the alleged infringement?
The registered copyright in “Let’s Get It On” consists of the song’s sheet music (chords, lyrics, and melody) which was deposited with the U.S. Copyright Office in the early 1970s. This is what the Townsend Estate believed was “copied” by Sheeran, pointing to a “smoking gun” video of Sheeran singing “Thinking Out Loud” at a concert where he seamlessly transitioned into a rendition of “Let’s Get it On.” The Townsend Estate argued that this mashup conclusively demonstrated the two songs were substantially similar.
Ultimately, the finding of whether there was infringement hinged on a comparison of just a few chords in the two songs. Sheeran did not dispute that the chords are similar. Rather he took to his more familiar stage, showing up himself in court, guitar in hand, to perform his music chord tutorial. He and his legal team showed that the chords at issue had been used in over 100 prior songs, including some that predate “Let’s Get It On.” Sheeran’s team argued that the chords are everyone’s to use and serve as the “building blocks” for many songs with no single owner.
After listening to Sheeran’s strumming, it took the jury less than three hours to decide there was no infringement, in favor of Sheeran.
Sheeran’s win is significant, both for him—who threatened to retire from music if he lost what he believed to be a frivolous lawsuit—as well as for other artists currently creating music in the industry who now possess an arsenal to defend themselves and their works against such claims of copyright infringement. A finding in favor of the Townsend Estate would surely have opened a floodgate of copyright lawsuits against many artists perhaps resulting in, what some believe to be, the stifling of the progression of music.
Linda is a Partner at Fishman Stewart, specializing in intellectual property law. Linda focuses mainly on trademark and copyright law, including foreign and domestic prosecution and litigation, as well as agreements and assignments. Check out her full bio here.
Related Content from Fishman Stewart
L.A.B. Golf aims to protect its innovations, and therefore its market position, owning three patents for its zero-torque design. The question now is whether L.A.B. Golf can withstand the wave of copycat designs.
One of his most famous songs, “Lose Yourself” was recently at the center of a lawsuit. In 2019, Eminem’s publishing company Eight Mile Style sued Spotify claiming that Spotify streamed a number of its musical compositions without proper licenses.
Our latest article tackles three common trademark questions: 1. Can I trademark my own name? 2. Can I trademark the name of a fictional character? 3. Can I trademark the name of a U.S. president or British royal?
One of the most common challenges is whether AI should be free to train on data that is protected by copyright and owned by third parties without first obtaining permission.
Like the titles of single creative works, character names do not generate trademark rights unless used for a series of creative works (meaning two or more). A year ago, Jane Wick, LLC filed a trademark application for the mark JANE WICK in logo format.
The U.S. Copyright Office (USCO) recently published its latest report on AI and “copyrightability.” In short, the USCO considers only some AI-generated works to be sufficiently creative as to deserve copyright protection, and thus, registration.
We know that as of June 4, 2024, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) had issued more than twelve million patents. We also know that more than 10,000 patents were in existence before the count began.
Back in the 1940’s assignments by independent contractors could be permanent and irrevocable. Things changed in 1976, when Congress overhauled the Copyright Act.
Generally, copyright protects the specific expression of ideas, such as the arrangement and presentation of visual elements, but it does not protect general concepts or styles.
In the age of the internet, memes are a universal language. A meme is a piece of content, typically an image, video, text, or a combination of these, that spreads rapidly across the internet, often with humorous, relatable, or satirical undertones.
IDENTIFYING, SECURING AND ADVANCING CREATIVITY®
