Lexplug logoLexplug

Devin Copeland v. Justin Bieber

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
789 F.3d 484, 115 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1160, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 10257 (2015)
ELI5:

Rule of Law:

In a copyright infringement claim for a musical work, substantial similarity may be found if the choruses of the two songs are qualitatively significant and strikingly similar, even if other elements such as genre, mood, verses, and instrumentation differ.


Facts:

  • In 2008, musician Devin Copeland co-wrote and registered a copyright for his R&B song titled 'Somebody to Love' as part of his album 'My Story II'.
  • In late 2009, Copeland provided his album to Sangreel Media for promotion to record labels.
  • Sangreel Media presented Copeland's music to recording artist Usher Raymond IV.
  • Usher's mother and manager, Jonetta Patton, contacted Copeland, stating that she and Usher had listened to the album and were interested in having Copeland re-record it and tour with Usher.
  • After this conversation, all communication from Usher's team to Copeland ceased.
  • Several months later, Usher recorded and posted a demo song on YouTube also titled 'Somebody to Love'.
  • Usher subsequently brought the song to artist Justin Bieber, who recorded his own version for his 2010 album 'My World 2.0'.
  • Bieber later released a remix of 'Somebody to Love' featuring both himself and Usher.

Procedural Posture:

  • Devin Copeland filed a suit for copyright infringement against Justin Bieber, Usher Raymond IV, and associated defendants in the U.S. District Court.
  • The defendants filed a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), arguing that the songs were not substantially similar as a matter of law.
  • The district court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss, finding that no reasonable jury could conclude the songs were intrinsically similar due to differences in 'mood, tone, and subject matter'.
  • Copeland, as the appellant, appealed the district court's dismissal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

Locked

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Can a copyright infringement claim survive a motion to dismiss based on intrinsic similarity when the songs' choruses are strikingly similar, even if other elements like genre, mood, and verses differ significantly?


Opinions:

Majority - Judge Harris

Yes. A copyright infringement claim can survive a motion to dismiss where a reasonable jury could find the songs intrinsically similar based on a qualitatively important chorus, despite other differences. The court reasoned that in copyright analysis for popular music, a purely quantitative comparison of dissimilar elements is insufficient. Instead, the analysis must account for the qualitative significance of the shared elements. Here, the chorus, or 'hook,' is the heart of the composition and the most memorable and commercially important part of a popular song. The court found that the choruses of the Copeland and the Bieber/Usher songs shared strikingly similar lyrics, rhythm, and melody. This substantial similarity in the most critical part of the works creates a genuine issue of fact for a jury regarding intrinsic similarity, making dismissal at the pleading stage improper, even if the songs differ in genre (R&B vs. dance-pop) and have different verses.



Analysis:

This decision clarifies the application of the intrinsic similarity test for musical works in the Fourth Circuit, emphasizing a qualitative over a quantitative analysis. It establishes that similarity in a work's most crucial component, such as a song's chorus, can be sufficient to defeat a motion to dismiss, even in the face of numerous differences in less critical elements. This precedent makes it more difficult for defendants to obtain early dismissal of music copyright infringement cases where the 'hook' is alleged to be copied, reinforcing that the subjective question of 'total concept and feel' is often best left to a jury.

🤖 Gunnerbot:
Query Devin Copeland v. Justin Bieber (2015) directly. You can ask questions about any aspect of the case. If it's in the case, Gunnerbot will know.
Locked
Subscribe to Lexplug to chat with the Gunnerbot about this case.

Unlock the full brief for Devin Copeland v. Justin Bieber