A copyright lawsuit against Taylor Swift has been dismissed.
Taylor Swift was being sued for $42 million for allegedly stealing the lyrics for her song Shake It Off.
R&B singer Jesse Braham claims Taylor Swift stole the words from a song he wrote in 2013 called Haters Gone Hate.
US district court judge Gail Standish disagreed.
In a written statement dismissing the suit, Judge Gail Standish lifted lyrics from We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together, Blank Space and Bad Blood.
“At present, the Court is not saying that Braham can never, ever, ever get his case back in court.
“But, for now, we have got problems, and the Court is not sure Braham can solve them,” Gail Standish wrote.
The judge ruled that Jesse Braham didn’t provide enough evidence and said, for now, the claims are just speculation.
Photo Instagram
“As currently drafted, the Complaint has a blank space – one that requires Braham to do more than write his name.
“And, upon consideration of the Court’s explanation in Part II, Braham may discover that mere pleading Band-Aids will not fix the bullet holes in his case,” Gail Standish wrote.
However, Jesse Braham will be able to file a new complaint if he can sort out some of the problems the judge had with this one.
“At least for the moment, Defendants have shaken off this lawsuit,” Gail Standish concluded.
Jesse Braham had previously told the New York Daily News he believed there was “no way” Taylor Swift could have penned the lyrics independently of his song.
“Her hook is the same hook as mine. If I didn’t write the song Haters Gone Hate, there wouldn’t be a song called Shake It Off,” he said.
Jesse Braham added he had spoken to Taylor Swift’s record label, Big Machine, four or five times about the issue.
The R&B singer originally asked to be named as a writer and requested a selfie with Taylor Swift but was repeatedly dismissed and told his claim had no merit.
Taylor Swift is being sued for $42 million for allegedly stealing the lyrics to her 2014 hit Shake It Off.
Jesse Braham has claimed in legal papers Taylor Swift stole the words from a song he wrote in 2013 called Haters Gone Hate.
As well as the monetary compensation, the R&B singer also wants his name added as a writer on the track.
Representatives for Taylor Swift have yet to officially comment on the legal case.
Shake It Off topped music charts around the world and reached No 2 in the UK. The video for the song has been watched more than 1.1 billion times on YouTube.
Jesse Braham – who goes by the stage name Jesse Graham – claims he has copyright ownership of the phrases “haters gone hate” and “playas gone play”, which appear in the chorus of Taylor Swift’s song.
In his song, the chorus comprises: “Haters gone hater, playas gone play/ Watch out for them fakers, they’ll fake you everyday.”
The chorus of Shake It Off features lyrics including: “Cause the players gonna play, play, play, play, play/ And the haters gonna hate, hate, hate, hate, hate.”
Taylor Swift sings another line: “And the fakers gonna fake, fake, fake, fake, fake.”
Apart from the lyrical similarity, the songs bear no resemblance musically.
Jesse Braham, 50, told the New York Daily News he believed there was “no way” Taylor Swift could have penned the lyrics independently of his song.
“Her hook is the same hook as mine. If I didn’t write the song Haters Gone Hate, there wouldn’t be a song called Shake It Off,” he said.
The singer added he had spoken to Taylor Swift’s record label, Big Machine, four or five times about the issue.
He originally asked to be named as a writer and requested a selfie with the pop star, but was repeatedly dismissed and told his claim had no merit.
“At first I was going to let it go, but this song is my song all the way,” Jesse Braham said.
Shakira’s hit song Loca was indirectly copied from another songwriter’s work, a federal judge in New York has found.
Judge Alvin Hellerstein said Shakira’s Spanish-language version of Loca in 2010 had infringed on a song by Dominican singer Ramon Arias Vazquez.
Shakira’s English language version of Loca – which featured Dizzee Rascal – was “not offered into evidence” at the trial.
However, the Spanish language version – a collaboration with Dominican rapper Eduard Edwin Bello Pou, better known as El Cata – was widely released as a single around the world. It went on to sell more than five million copies and topped Billboard Magazine‘s Latin charts.
Shakira’s Spanish-language version of Loca in 2010 had infringed on a song by Dominican singer Ramon Arias Vazquez (photo Wikipedia)
It was also included on her 2010 album Sale el Sol. For English language markets, the album was titled The Sun Comes Out and both versions of the song were included.
In a ruling on Tuesday, Judge Alvin Hellerstein said that while the hit single had been based on an earlier version of a song recorded by Eduard Edwin Bello Pou [El Cata], that itself had been copied from Ramon Arias Vasquez’s original song.
“There is no dispute that Shakira’s version of the song was based on Bello’s version,” wrote the judge in his ruling.
“Accordingly, I find that, since Bello had copied Arias, whoever wrote Shakira’s version of the song also indirectly copied Arias,” he concluded.
Ramon Arias Vazquez penned his song Loca con su Tiguere in the 1990s, but El Cata has denied copying it.
The case has yet to determine damages for the plaintiff, Mayimba Music, which holds the rights to Ramon Arias Vazquez’s work.
Shakira’s song was distributed by Sony in both Spanish and English, but the copyright lawsuit mainly focused on the Spanish version.
Beatles rarities from 1963 have been released on iTunes.
Fifty-nine tracks – unreleased outtakes, demos – have been released on iTunes to stop them falling out of copyright and into the public domain.
EU copyright law covers recordings for 70 years if they have had an official release or 50 years if they have not.
The 2-disc set was apparently released, then removed, early on Tuesday, causing speculation it was only being published briefly to extend the copyright period.
Fans posted screenshots of the collection on the New Zealand iTunes store, along with links which later became invalid.
Online reports suggested the same thing had happened in Australia, Russia and Saudi Arabia – although the EU’s copyright laws would not apply in any of these territories.
Beatles rarities from 1963 have been released on iTunes
Gathering together live material and recording session offcuts, the compilation includes four alternate takes of She Loves You, two of From Me To You and several live versions of Roll Over Beethoven.
It also features three attempts at There’s A Place, as well as demos of two songs the group gave to other artists – Paul McCartney and John Lennon’s acoustic version of Bad to Me and Lennon’s piano demo of I’m in Love.
The tracks had been widely bootlegged, but never officially released until now.
After a recent change in the law, the master tape for The Beatles’ 1963 debut album Please Please Me is protected by copyright until 2033, but the unreleased session tapes for that album are not.
If the Beatles chose not to release the recordings before the end of the year, other record labels could theoretically put them out and profit from them next year.
The band’s 1962 debut single Love Me Do arguably slipped out of copyright last year before the EU’s copyright extension was signed into law.
At least one record company issued a “remastered” version of the song, although that has since been deleted.
The copyright law in question only covers the recordings – the composition of the songs remains the copyright of the songwriter for 70 years after his or her death.
Officially called The 50th Anniversary Collection, it carried a subtitle which explained its true purpose: The Copyright Extension Collection, Vol. 1.
Harper Lee, author of To Kill A Mockingbird, has sued literary agent Samuel Pinkus, who she says tricked her into assigning him the copyright on the Pulitzer Prize-winning book.
Harper Lee, 87, says Samuel Pinkus took advantage of her failing hearing and eyesight to transfer the rights and has failed to respond to license requests.
To Kill A Mockingbird was published in 1960 and is considered a classic. It has sold more than 30 million copies.
Harper Lee is rarely seen in public and declines almost all interview requests.
Harper Lee has sued literary agent Samuel Pinkus, who she says tricked her into assigning him the copyright on To Kill A Mockingbird
The novel is the only published book by the author, who lives in Monroeville, Alabama.
In the lawsuit, Harper Lee alleges that when her long-time literary agent, Eugene Winick, became ill in 2002, his son-in-law, Samuel Pinkus, switched several of Winick’s clients to his own company.
Samuel Pinkus is alleged to have transferred the rights to secure himself “irrevocable” interest in the income derived from Harper Lee’s book.
He also sought to avoid paying legal obligations he owed to his father-in-law’s company for royalties, according to the lawsuit.
It is further alleged that Samuel Pinkus failed to respond to offers on e-book rights and a request for assistance related to the book’s 50th anniversary.
The lawsuit bids the court to assign any rights in the book owned by Samuel Pinkus to Harper Lee and asks that she be returned any commission he took from 2007 onwards.
Samuel Pinkus did not immediately respond to an email from Reuters news agency seeking comment.
Set in Depression-era, small-town Alabama, To Kill A Mockingbird tells the story of a lawyer who defends a black man accused of raping a white woman.
[youtube 4gRz_XCRNHY]
This website has updated its privacy policy in compliance with EU GDPR 2016/679. Please read this to review the updates about which personal data we collect on our site. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our updated policy. AcceptRejectRead More
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
