A lawsuit alleging that Sam Smith and Normani’s acclaimed dance track “Dancing With A Stranger” infringed on a 2015 song of the same title will proceed to trial. This decision follows U.S. District Judge Wesley L. Hsu’s recent ruling in Los Angeles, where he denied the musical duo’s latest attempt to dismiss the case.
Judge Rules Against Dismissal
In a comprehensive 27-page ruling released Wednesday and obtained by Rolling Stone, Judge Hsu stated that the plaintiffs had presented sufficient evidence to suggest “striking similarity” between the two songs, precluding the possibility of a summary judgment in favor of the defendants. The judge noted that this conclusion aligns with his preliminary thoughts expressed during oral arguments on September 11.
The lawsuit, which originated four years ago and was initially dismissed, was revived following an appeal. In July, attorneys representing Smith and Normani sought to have the case thrown out again, claiming that the plaintiffs, songwriters Jordan Vincent, Christopher Miranda, and Rosco Banlao, had failed to demonstrate the required “striking similarity” to sustain their claims. Judge Hsu rejected this argument, asserting that performing a piecemeal comparison of musical elements would ultimately distort the essence of the two works.
Musical Analysis a Key Issue
Judge Hsu emphasized that there is no universally accepted standard for determining when similarities in musical elements cross into the territory of being “striking.” Referring to established precedents in the Ninth Circuit, he underscored that analyzing each musical component in isolation is not an appropriate methodology.
The ruling also addressed a critical point of contention: whether the plaintiffs’ 2015 song incorporated unauthorized samples from two other copyrighted works, which would affect its copyright protection. The judge found that the defendants had not satisfactorily proven that the plaintiffs’ song was derived from those alleged unauthorized samples.
Jury to Decide Key Issues
The defendants’ assertions of independent creation were deemed irrelevant at this phase of the litigation. Judge Hsu articulated that evidence of independent creation cannot alone justify a summary judgment, as it must be considered alongside the plaintiffs’ initial evidence of copying. “The court finds the question of independent creation should be left for the jury to decide,” he noted.
Alfred J. Fluehr, representing the plaintiffs, expressed satisfaction with the court’s decision to allow a jury to evaluate the musicological aspects of the case, which could determine if Smith and Normani unlawfully borrowed from the plaintiffs’ track—a significant hit in 2019. The defendants’ lead attorney did not respond immediately to requests for comment.
Sampling Issues Add Complexity
During a hearing, attorneys highlighted the complexity stemming from the plaintiffs’ song allegedly containing unauthorized samples from “The Ha Dance” by Masters at Work and “Think (About It)” by Lyn Collins. Peter Anderson, representing the defendants, argued that since those samples are interwoven throughout the plaintiffs’ work, any similarities claimed by the plaintiffs are rendered moot. However, Fluehr countered that the debate should ultimately be resolved through a jury trial, a sentiment that Judge Hsu reinforced.
Judge Hsu remarked during the hearing that the core dispute lies in whether the hook in question is, in itself, a sample. This case has raised questions regarding earlier musical works, including Cyndi Lauper’s 1989 “Dancing With A Stranger” and Regina’s 1997 “Dancing With an Angel,” which share musical similarities that could impact the proceedings ahead.
