Taylor Swift, The three-judge panel reinstated the previously dismissed complaint, alleging that Swift had raised the lyrics of the 2001 song “Playas Gon ‘Play”.
The success of Taylor Swift in 2014 “Shake It Off” is again at the center of a legal battle. On Monday, a federal appeals court reinstated a lawsuit for copyright infringement by composers Sean Hall and Nathan Butler, who argue that the single echoes the lyrics of his 2001 composition “Gon ‘Play Beaches”.
— billboard (@billboard) October 29, 2019
While both songs contain variations on the phrases “Beaches I’m going to play” and “Those who hate,” a US District Court Judge rejected the trial in February 2018. Judge Michael Fitzgerald concluded at this moment: “In 2001, the American popular culture was very imbued with the concepts of players, enemies, and enemies … The concept of actors who act according to their essential nature is not creative at all, it is commonplace. ”
At present, a panel of three judges of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal has reinstated the lawsuit in 2017, citing a 1903 ruling by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes of the Supreme Court. “It would be a dangerous task for those trained only in right to become the ultimate judges of the value of illustrated illustrations, outside the narrowest and most obvious boundaries,” Holmes wrote at the time. “In the end, some great works would surely lose all appreciation. Even their novelty would make them disgusting until the public learns the new language in which the author speaks. ”
In turn, Judges John Owens, Andrew Hurwitz, and Kenneth Lee wrote that “originality, as we have known for a long time, is normally a fact … Holmes J.’s centennial warning remains valid. To conclude, “For these short sentences to be protected by copyright law, they must be more creative than the letters in question here,” said the district court as the final judge of the value of copyright. originality is not established either in the face of the complaint or as a result of the facts notified by the court, we revoke the dismissal of the district court. ”
The case is now back to the US District Court. UU. For more procedures.
A Swift representative did not immediately respond to a request for comment.