Every musician and non-musician alike knows that there is a limited number and combination of keys and chords that compile what we know and cherish as songs. Throughout the years, there has been no shortage of copyright issues with some of our favourite songs. Recently, Led Zeppelin won a case challenging their famous song “Stairway to Heaven” as a copyright infringement. A few years ago, Lana del Rey was sued by Radiohead because her song “Get Free” was said to be greatly similar to their song “Creep”; probably one of the most famous songs Radiohead has released.
What is interesting is what kind of analysis goes into determining copyright infringement in music. As a musician, I have published covers of songs in which some money goes to the original artist. This suggests that we are working with the economic model of copyright in the realm of music, because what matters is that I do not unduly profit from their creativity. But copyright cases in music also seem to have a moral element as well, because the analyses I’ve been observing appeal to issues such as whether the artist intended to do it or whether it was a coincidence and not just the unevenness of profit at hand.
Recently, hit singer Dua Lipa was sued by a reggae band named Artikal Sound System for ripping off their song “Live Your Life.” Are the arguments at hand looking at copyright from an economic or moral model? On one hand, Dua Lipa’s song was incredibly successful and topped the charts for a sustained period of time. Artikal Sound System is a lesser-known group, and – if their allegations are true – are missing out on a high degree of financial success. But on the other hand, musicians have deep connections to their creative endeavors and as do their fans, making this lawsuit a subject of heated online discourse. Dua Lipa’s fans don’t want to view her work simply as a vehicle of economic success, but something that is a creative good entitling her to admiration and praise.
The second thing to look at is what about a song makes it a copyright infringement? There are plenty of songs that are in the same key as each other or even have the same chord progression that doesn’t necessarily fit this model. As such, these cases become complex, and I was fascinated to see the role of musical expertise come into play.
Rolling Stone just did a fascinating interview with three musicologists to break down the similarities and differences between Dua Lipa’s song and that of Artikal Sound System. They look at keys, tempo, and chord progressions, and the second musicologist notes that what really matters is melody: chord progressions are pretty much up for grabs.
What is important in the analysis is whether the similarities are a mere coincidence. This goes beyond musical expertise: not only are we looking at musical similarities but probability. The first musicologist, for instance, concludes his musical analysis by citing a theory of probability to argue that all in all, the similarities are coincidental.
The “coincidental” argument seems to have a moral element to me. The underlying notion is that Dua Lipa created her song earnestly and possesses artistic integrity. If the coincidental argument is accepted and absolves Dua Lipa, then the economic model does not seem to be the only one in the game. That is because the moral consideration we are talking about would not concern Dua Lipa making more profits for a similar tune, but whether she meant to, which is an appeal to artistic integrity.
That is my perspective, though perhaps I have too romantic a view of music and am more inclined to see it as a moral good rather than a vehicle for profit! The question is: what song do you like better?
Copyright & Social Media
Communications Law