Field Dispatch
Matt Connarton Unleashed: Bruno Mars vs. Miley Cyrus
Speaker 1: Something else I wanted to talk about. And this has
Speaker 1: been going on for I don't know, a couple of
Speaker 1: years now, I guess, but you know, we do like
Speaker 1: to talk about these things that are going on in
Speaker 1: the music industry. Sometimes there is controversy and lawsuits and
Speaker 1: things like that. We talk a lot about AI and
Speaker 1: the effects of AI on music. But here's but this
Speaker 1: also kind of relates to a subject that comes up
Speaker 1: not only on this program, this particular news item, but
Speaker 1: also that comes up on retro Spectrum Radio with Polly C.
Speaker 1: Of course, if you don't know, I'm also Paully C's
Speaker 1: co host on Friday nights on retro Spectrum Radio here
Speaker 1: at WM and H. And we've done a number of
Speaker 1: shows now that Paul is put together on that show
Speaker 1: where we talk about plagiarism and artists suing other artists
Speaker 1: for plagiarism. In fact, we've done a couple of episodes
Speaker 1: entirely dedicated to led Zeppelin, the most plagiaristic Don't get
Speaker 1: me wrong, I'm a fan, but the most plagiarism stick
Speaker 1: band and music history. They've they even stole a song.
Speaker 1: Not only did they steal from a lot of blues artists.
Speaker 1: They even stole a song from Joan Bias. Yeah, it's wild.
Speaker 1: So you know, you can go back and check those out.
Speaker 1: And by the way, so when we're on when we
Speaker 1: do these shows on Retrospectrum Radio, you know, we'll we'll
Speaker 1: all kind of put our two cents in. Okay, is
Speaker 1: this a plagiarism or or is this someone making a
Speaker 1: false accusation? Is this particular song not plagiarized?
Speaker 2: You know?
Speaker 1: And I'm I'm the most lenient when it comes to that.
Speaker 1: I'm usually the first one to say not guilty. I
Speaker 1: don't think this particular instance is an act of plagiarism
Speaker 1: because I just I look at it as there are
Speaker 1: certain certain chord progressions that are just very common throughout
Speaker 1: pop music, and certain lyrical themes of course, and lyrical
Speaker 1: themes is gonna that's gonna play a part in what
Speaker 1: we're about to talk about this particular lawsuit and controversy.
Speaker 1: Certain lyrical themes that are very common, and you know, so,
Speaker 1: so I'm the least likely to say guilty, I think
Speaker 1: that this person committed plagiarism. I mean, there's some instances
Speaker 1: that are just undeniable, like like when Led Zeppelin stole
Speaker 1: all that music from those old blues artists, which they
Speaker 1: have been sued for in some instances successfully, in some
Speaker 1: instances not so much. But h but this one, the
Speaker 1: particular one, and this one we have not talked about
Speaker 1: on Retrospectrum Radio because this is something recent and we
Speaker 1: wouldn't on that show. We wouldn't talk about something as
Speaker 1: recent as this. But some of you may have heard,
Speaker 1: of course about the Miley cyrus Her song Flowers being
Speaker 1: sued by not actually by Bruno Mars directly, but by
Speaker 1: people who own a stake in the Bruno Mars song
Speaker 1: When I Was Your Man. And this one, this particular
Speaker 1: instance of someone claiming copyright infringement, this particular one drives
Speaker 1: me nuts. This one is really a reach, in my opinion.
Speaker 1: What do you what do you think, Jenny, do do
Speaker 1: you think this one's Yeah, this one, this one's a stretch.
Speaker 1: So this is frivolous, now, Jenny, Jenny found something that
Speaker 1: will give us an update on what's going on with this.
Speaker 1: But for those who don't know about this, yeah, this
Speaker 1: is frivolous, all right. So this is I've got an
Speaker 1: article here from Forbes that I think is the best
Speaker 1: explainer of what the initial lawsuit is about. Miley Cyrus
Speaker 1: tries uh tries getting suit that claims Flowers copied a
Speaker 1: Bruno Mars song dismissed. So this article is from last year,
Speaker 1: but it uh, and there have been multiple attempts, by
Speaker 1: the way to get this lawsuit thrown out. And I
Speaker 1: think it should be thrown out because I think it's ridiculous.
Speaker 1: But uh, you know, and I'm not you know, I
Speaker 1: don't have any personal stake in this, by the way.
Speaker 1: I'm not particularly a fan of either artist. I I
Speaker 1: respect them both tremendously. Of course. Miley Cyrus is an
Speaker 1: incredible singer and I certainly and Bruno Mars, you know,
Speaker 1: I respect as a singer and a songwriter and whatnot.
Speaker 1: I'm just neither of them have really put out anything
Speaker 1: that I personally am that into, but I do. Uh,
Speaker 1: but I respect them, of course. But here's so this
Speaker 1: is the explainer from Forbes Okay. Attorneys representing singer Miley
Speaker 1: Cyrus filed the motion in LA federal court to dismiss
Speaker 1: a lawsuit claiming that her song Flowers lifts lyrics and
Speaker 1: melodies from the twenty thirteen Bruno Mars song When I
Speaker 1: Was Your Man, arguing the lawsuit should be tossed because
Speaker 1: it only represents one of the songs for writers and
Speaker 1: not Bruno Mars himself, So it's not Bruno Mars. Bruno
Speaker 1: Mars is not the one bringing the lawsuit himself, but
Speaker 1: it involves his song when I Was Your Man. When
Speaker 1: I Was Your Man? Is that what it's called? Anyway,
Speaker 1: I'm so not a fan of I don't like the
Speaker 1: song to begin with when.
Speaker 2: I Was Your Man.
Speaker 1: Yet, I don't like the song to begin with but anyway,
Speaker 1: So here are some key facts. Cyrus's attorneys argue the
Speaker 1: company that filed the lawsuit, Tempo Music Investments and Investment Group,
Speaker 1: that it has acquired the rights to various artists catalogs,
Speaker 1: does not have standing to sue because it only owns
Speaker 1: a portion of the rights to the song. Temple Music
Speaker 1: previously acquired the rights to songwriter Philip Lawrence's catalog, so
Speaker 1: he's one of the writers of the song. Cyrus's attorneys
Speaker 1: say the Copyright Act only permits quote a legal or
Speaker 1: beneficial owner of an exclusive copyright unquote to sue for infringement. So,
Speaker 1: in other words, they're saying that the people bringing the lawsuit,
Speaker 1: they have not been harmed in any way, this doesn't
Speaker 1: affect them, and so forth. I'm kind of skipping through
Speaker 1: this because I want to get to the part where
Speaker 1: it explains why the suit itself is silly. Okay, So,
Speaker 1: Cyrus's attorneys claim the two songs have quote striking differences
Speaker 1: in melody, chords, other musical elements and words unquote, stating
Speaker 1: the plaintiff's claim the songs share quote musical building blocks unquote,
Speaker 1: including some chords and pitches, would not be protected by
Speaker 1: copyright law. So, in other words, my ree, Cyrus's lawyers
Speaker 1: are saying the two songs are really different. So you know, again,
Speaker 1: it's a reach. To suggest that there's a claim here
Speaker 1: of any kind is really a stretch, and we'll get
Speaker 1: into a little bit more of that in a moment,
Speaker 1: but okay. Forbes has reached out to Cyrus's lawyers and
Speaker 1: Tempo Music Investments for comment. Tempo Music Investments sued Cyrus,
Speaker 1: as well as companies that says distributed the song Flowers,
Speaker 1: including Sony Music, Apple, Target, and Walmart, alleging copyright infringement.
Speaker 1: The lawsuit alleged the song Flowers would not exist without
Speaker 1: the exploitation of Mars's song. Quote. Any fan of Bruno
Speaker 1: Mars's song When I Was Your Man knows that my
Speaker 1: resse Virus's Flowers did not achieve all of that success
Speaker 1: on its own unquote. The lawsuit states alleging that Flowers
Speaker 1: lifts quote numerous melodic, harmonic and lyrical elements of When
Speaker 1: I Was Your Man unquote. So here's the heart of
Speaker 1: the matter. The chorus of Flowers does appear to lift
Speaker 1: some of these statements. In the chorus of When I
Speaker 1: Was Your Man. In Flowers and Ode to Independence, Cyrus sings, quote,
Speaker 1: I can buy myself flowers, write my name in the sand,
Speaker 1: talk to myself for hours, say things you don't understand.
Speaker 1: I can take myself dancing. I can hold my own
Speaker 1: hand unquote. In the Bruno Mars song about a man
Speaker 1: expressing regret for failing to treat his lover well, he sings, quote,
Speaker 1: I should have bought you flowers and held your hand,
Speaker 1: should have gave you all my hours when I had
Speaker 1: the chance, take you you to every party, because all
Speaker 1: you wanted to do was dance. Unquote. Now let me
Speaker 1: just stop here for a moment. Obviously, yes, the song,
Speaker 1: the lyrics of the song that I mean, you could
Speaker 1: make this argument. The lyrics of the song Flowers by
Speaker 1: Miley Cyrus do seem to be what I would say,
Speaker 1: And we talked about this in the car. It's a
Speaker 1: direct response to the Bruno Mars song. Yes, that's not
Speaker 1: copyright infringement. That is referencing somebody else's creative work, referring
Speaker 1: to it. That's not the same thing as lifting elements
Speaker 1: from it.
Speaker 3: If this is allowed to if this case prevails, it
Speaker 3: changes everything. You can't talk about anybody anymore. You can't
Speaker 3: say anybody else's name.
Speaker 1: Maybe you can't write, Maybe you can't write songs about
Speaker 1: flowers because because Bruno Mars had a song that mentioned flowers.
Speaker 3: Artists mentioned each other in songs all the time, you know,
Speaker 3: and play off of each other, sometimes.
Speaker 4: Good, sometimes bad.
Speaker 1: Yeah, there's you know, like there's tons of other rappers.
Speaker 1: Well yeah, of course, so all.
Speaker 3: Rappers will get dude who listed another rapper in their song,
Speaker 3: because that happens a lot.
Speaker 1: There's tons of examples of this in pop history. You know,
Speaker 1: I don't think you know when when Leonard Skinnard mentions
Speaker 1: in Sweet Home, Alabama, you know, I hope Neil Neil
Speaker 1: Young will remember the Southern Man. Don't need him around anyhow,
Speaker 1: you know, A direct response to Neil Young song Southern Man,
Speaker 1: Neil Young didn't sue them, say, oh, they they referenced
Speaker 1: my song, I'm gonna sue them, you know, I mean.
Speaker 1: And that was a very direct response. That was that
Speaker 1: was clear and unambiguous. Granted it was a they had
Speaker 1: a rivalry, but it was a friendly rivalry that there
Speaker 1: was a lot of mutual respect. But but but but
Speaker 1: but that's or or when uh in Surrender, when uh
Speaker 1: a cheap trick? They actually mentioned and kiss my name,
Speaker 1: you know in the song surrender.
Speaker 3: Well, like we were talking in the car. Tori Amos
Speaker 3: and Trent Wesner have referenced each other in various ways
Speaker 3: in seeing each other's song lyrics and for topics. There's
Speaker 3: a one of Tory's songs mentions nine inch nails. But
Speaker 3: it's it's it's in, it's in reverence of one another.
Speaker 3: It's not even it's nothing bad. But one of the
Speaker 3: caveats about this case that I want to point out
Speaker 3: is that the person that is suing bought this half
Speaker 3: of the song as part of a catalog package. They
Speaker 3: weren't even in the picture when the song was created.
Speaker 3: They had nothing to do with it, zero to do it. Well,
Speaker 3: they're not a co writer, nobody.
Speaker 4: They bought the.
Speaker 3: Catalog, so now they own half the rights of this
Speaker 3: song and they're looking for a quick, get rich quick scheme.
Speaker 4: It's scammy use of the chords.
Speaker 3: It's totally frivolous, and it should be thrown out with prejudice.
Speaker 4: In my opinion, I thought that's not what happened.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it also says here. Cyrus released Flowers in January
Speaker 1: twenty twenty three, and it became one of the year's
Speaker 1: biggest hits. Flowers has been streamed more than two billion
Speaker 1: times on Spotify and won Cyrus two Grammy Awards for
Speaker 1: Record of the Year and Best Pop Solo Performance. When
Speaker 1: Cyrus released Flowers, fans noticed the similarities between the two songs,
Speaker 1: even causing When I Was Your Man to rise in streams.
Speaker 1: Billboard reported, so it made.
Speaker 4: The money made the song more.
Speaker 1: So that actually made the song more. It made the
Speaker 1: song it refers to more pop. And When I Was
Speaker 1: Your Man was already a huge hit. I just know
Speaker 1: that because I just remember hearing it a lot. But yeah,
Speaker 1: so it actually helped. It actually helped give When I
Speaker 1: Was Your Man a boost. So so again it's it's this,
Speaker 1: you know, this is all very silly. Let's see bill okay,
Speaker 1: Vanderbilt Law School again. This is from the Forbes article
Speaker 1: Vanderbilt Law School music law professor Joseph Fishman told Billboard
Speaker 1: Cyrus should not need to credit Mars and the other
Speaker 1: When I Was Your Man's songwriters, despite the similar lyrics.
Speaker 1: Even if the chorus of Flowers is deliberately a response
Speaker 1: to Mars's song because it does not appear to sample
Speaker 1: or interpolate the song's melodies. Quote, using one song to
Speaker 1: issue a retort to an earlier song is not, by
Speaker 1: itself infringement. John Mayer and Taylor Swift don't need to
Speaker 1: cross license everything when they write songs at each other.
Speaker 1: When I Was Your Man peaked at number one on
Speaker 1: the Billboard Hot one hundred and twenty thirteen and earned
Speaker 1: Mars a Grammy nomination. So that's that's where we are with.
Speaker 1: So that's what the suit is over. And by the way,
Speaker 1: so the songs them said, E don't sound anything alike.
Speaker 1: I will just pull up you know what, I'll play
Speaker 1: each of these just like to the chorus so you
Speaker 1: can hear. Oh maybe I can even find well, sorry,
Speaker 1: let me turn your mic back on. What's that?
Speaker 3: They're not similar, No, they're not similar. The only similarity
Speaker 3: is the mutual reference.
Speaker 5: You know.
Speaker 3: He's singing, I'm gonna buy I should have bought you flowers.
Speaker 3: She's singing, I can buy myself flowers. It's just a
Speaker 3: woman's response. Yeah, and I think it's a great response.
Speaker 3: I think it's a great song. Yeah, in that regard,
Speaker 3: In that regard, right, does it matter? But this lawsuit
Speaker 3: is just somebody trying to get which quick oh yeah,
Speaker 3: off of other people's work.
Speaker 1: I found something here on YouTube that kind of compares
Speaker 1: that kind of compares them. Let's let me play this
Speaker 1: just for for anyone who uh, you know, if you
Speaker 1: don't know the songs, and then you can make your
Speaker 1: own judgment here. But this is this is short, but
Speaker 1: it's a short dot comparison.
Speaker 5: To your two time to realize we were good.
Speaker 2: We were god kind of dream that can't be.
Speaker 5: So we were right until we won't build a home
Speaker 5: and wash it burns. I should have brought your flowers.
Speaker 5: Lugging Bomas and flowers, run my name and sing dreams
Speaker 5: should a gig a armor hours with the head versha
Speaker 5: and I can hold money, I can love me better.
Speaker 5: You can't let me take care of everybody because all
Speaker 5: you I wanted to do us to.
Speaker 2: I can take myself Patsy again, but she's dear soon
Speaker 2: with another move. Why do you want to leave you?
Speaker 2: I didn't want to lie side God.
Speaker 5: Then remember I Yeah, I can love me bitter.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I can love me bitter you cat baby.
Speaker 1: Okay, So there you go. There's a comparison, a side
Speaker 1: by side, the comparison to some of the parts of
Speaker 1: each song. Yeah, completely different. I mean again, one is
Speaker 1: referencing the other, but they're they're very different. They're they're
Speaker 1: different in vibe and style.
Speaker 3: If you can sue from a reference like that, then
Speaker 3: everything about music changes in every genre.
Speaker 4: Well, it's like it's it's just too much.
Speaker 1: Well, it's like the the Well you have.
Speaker 3: A sentence like that's similar to my sentence, So now
Speaker 3: I can sue you.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, that's uh. And again you could say the melodies.
Speaker 1: The melodies are vaguely similar, but again there are certain
Speaker 1: there are just certain chord progressions and melodies as well
Speaker 1: as lyrical themes that are just they're really common. And
Speaker 1: you know a great example of that. And and Tom Petty,
Speaker 1: I think, had the right attitude about this. If you're
Speaker 1: you know the song Danny California by the Chili Peppers,
Speaker 1: not Chili Peppers, that's my favorite Chili Pepper song. I
Speaker 1: always love that song. But when that song came out,
Speaker 1: people notice something about it. The not in the verses,
Speaker 1: but the chorus is exactly the same as Last Dance
Speaker 1: with Mary Jane. Oh no, I'm sorry, not the chorus,
Speaker 1: the verses, I have it backward. The verses are the
Speaker 1: same as Last Dance with Mary Jane by Tom Petty. Yeah,
Speaker 1: see exact same chord progression. It's even the same tempo,
Speaker 1: Like you could graft one on to the other. It's
Speaker 1: exactly the same. And somebody asked Tom Petty in an
Speaker 1: interview some I think it was a radio DJ asked him,
Speaker 1: or might have been in Rolling Stone, But somebody asked
Speaker 1: him because people were noticing this. You know, are you
Speaker 1: are you upset with the Chili Peppers? I don't know
Speaker 1: you Are you gonna sue them for stealing your song
Speaker 1: or something like that? And he said his response, which
Speaker 1: I thought was perfect, he said, well, if they stole it,
Speaker 1: they didn't steal it from me, they stole it from
Speaker 1: who from whoever I stole it from, because that chord
Speaker 1: progression is just very common. It's it's not it's not
Speaker 1: an original chord, you know. He's like, I didn't write
Speaker 1: that chord progression. Somebody somebody did. I don't know who,
Speaker 1: but I it somewhere. Well, yeah, and he was right.
Speaker 1: He was right to say that it's a very common
Speaker 1: chord progression. So that so he had the right attitude
Speaker 1: about it. But what I'm also thinking about, too is
Speaker 1: who's the guy, oh, I forget his name now, British
Speaker 1: guy with red hair. He's got a bunch of hits
Speaker 1: ed Oh ed Sharon when they tried to sue ed
Speaker 1: Sharon claiming, what's the name of that song I'll Be
Speaker 1: Loving You? I don't know the actual name is there,
Speaker 1: I'll be Loving You when we're seventy or something, And
Speaker 1: I hate that song. But but they tried to sue
Speaker 1: him saying that because it had a similar vibe to
Speaker 1: Let's Get It On by Marvin Gay. Oh yeah, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: it was a you know, in terms of the production
Speaker 1: of the song. It sounded similar to let's get it
Speaker 1: on and but he's been sued a few times too,
Speaker 1: and he never backs down to his credit, you know,
Speaker 1: he never settles, because again that's a that's another example
Speaker 1: of a very frivolous lie. It's like, okay, you can
Speaker 1: sue somebody because the vibe of the production style of
Speaker 1: their song is similar. Wow, like that the can of
Speaker 1: worms that would open up. So it's not right they
Speaker 1: walk away with money. Yeah, So so it's not right.
Speaker 1: By the way, I think, while we're at it, I
Speaker 1: think it would be interesting. I want to see, just
Speaker 1: quickly example of examples of songs that reference other songs,
Speaker 1: because again, what we're talking about with the Bruno Mars
Speaker 1: Miley Cyrus thing is you know, we gave some examples before,
Speaker 1: like a Cheap Trick referencing Kiss or Leonard skinnerd referencing
Speaker 1: Neil Young. Let's see, I just did a quick search.
Speaker 1: So here's some more examples. Uh, It's My Life by
Speaker 1: bon Jovie references for Rank Sinatra is My Way, Yes, absolutely,
Speaker 1: thunder Road by Bruce Springsteen mentions Roy Orbison, Come Together
Speaker 1: by The Beatles uses lyrics from Chuck berrys you Can't
Speaker 1: Catch Me. There's some artists here who are more obscure,
Speaker 1: like Nick Lowe. I mean, you know people who are
Speaker 1: really into indie music. No, Nick Lowe. He has a
Speaker 1: song called All Men Are Liars, which apparently directly references
Speaker 1: Rick Astley's Never Going to Give You Up. That one's
Speaker 1: kind of interesting. That's fun Yeah, that is funny. That
Speaker 1: is funny. But yeah, so I hope. So the latest
Speaker 1: on that you had the story? The update, There was
Speaker 1: an update from just a few days ago. Let me
Speaker 1: see if I can.
Speaker 4: Yeah, the basic gist of it is.
Speaker 1: That they're still trying to get it thrown out.
Speaker 3: Well they had tried, Yes, they were trying to get
Speaker 3: it thrown out, but it was denied.
Speaker 4: Yeah, it was trying to get a toss. It was denied.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's from Fox Business. This judge denies Miley Cyrus's
Speaker 1: attempt to dismiss lawsuit comparing Flowers to Bruno Mars song.
Speaker 1: Temple Music and Miley Cyrus in September sued Miley Cyrus
Speaker 1: in September for similarities between the songs. Says here. A
Speaker 1: judge denied Cyrus's attempt to throw out copyright lawsuit against
Speaker 1: a pop star. Temple Music Investments lawsuit against Cyrus alleging
Speaker 1: similarities between her Grammy winning song Flowers and Bruno mars
Speaker 1: Is when I was her man will move forward after
Speaker 1: Judge Dan D. Pregeran Pregerson rather denied her requests. Tuesday,
Speaker 1: Fox Business can confirm Tempo Music acquired the rights to
Speaker 1: the song after buying the catalog of Philip Lawrence, a
Speaker 1: co author of the song. By the way, Yeah, and
Speaker 1: it just goes on. Basically this this dismissal failed, but
Speaker 1: we're in agreement. I think right that this this lawsuit
Speaker 1: is silly and schemes, so frivolous lawsuit should be dismissed.
Speaker 4: Should be totally dismissed with prejudice.
Speaker 1: We will keep an eye on it going forward.
Podbean