27th February 2023
Being able to write one’s own songs and create one’s own music is arguably one of the best ways to manage and express emotions, chronicle one’s journey, express latent creativity, creates new experiences, heal from within, and sometimes even confront or discuss critical issues of public interest including social ones as we often get with rap/hip-hop music.
There have been so many chart-topping songs written by unknown songwriters in the recent decades. However, oftentimes the art of songwriting can fail to pay what it’s really worth to its true originator, due to the existential possibility that the labour of an actual songwriter can literally go unnoticed, and unrewarded, particularly when their original composition(s) of music artistry are clandestinely taken by, or for an already established artist, becoming ‘their’ hit?
The struggle is all the more painful if the originator does not feel that they have within themselves what it takes to deliver their own song, whether it be the voice, stage presence, star appeal, or the wherewithal, in terms of management, production support, or industry backing.
So, this ‘creative’ (if you like) swindle slithers its way, and spreads its tentacles through the music industry, in a way that seems inescapable within the existing playing field as we see evidenced in the litigation on this subject popping out all over the industry more often.
A legal case that highlights the same problem was Spotify’s, Amazon’s, Pandora’s and Google’s appeal of a ruling by the Copyright Royalty Board in early 2019, who voted to increase the royalties made to songwriters from interactive streaming by more than 40 percent over five years.
Litigation has also been brought against stars like Ed Sheeran, Taylor Swift, Dua Lipa, Led Zeppelin, Robin Thicke, and Pharrell Williams, around this controversial issue.
One notable case was Christian rapper Flame’s case against US popstar Katy Perry, alleging that she had stolen production elements from his Grammy nominated song ‘Joyful Noise’ for her 2013 smash hit ‘Dark Horse.’ The jury trial had been decided in Flame’s favour in 2019 with the defendants ordered to pay $2.78 million in damages with Perry herself paying $550,000 of it. However, the ruling was appealed by Perry’s lawyers in 2020, using the precedent of the ruling in English band Led Zeppelin’s case with their song ‘Stairway to Heaven,’ and the judgement against Perry was overturned. The Ninth Circuit then upheld the 2020 ruling in Perry’s favour in March 2022.
So, the ‘true but green,’ artist does want to share their heartfelt, creativity or experience-birthed treasures with the world, through songs and music, and while they may personally appreciate hearing it through another artist’s interpretation and style, they certainly don’t appreciate not being credited and rewarded for it.
Although more social media and digital platforms such as SoundCloud, TikTok, Instagram and others are now available to ‘help’ budding songwriters introduce themselves, and thus work their way into the music industry, their desire to earn what they consider to be a fairer and worthier share for their creations has sometimes drawn them into a bitter tussle with major labels, and streaming platforms.
In the open playing field or blank canvas that is the music industry, the established and major players look to walk the tightrope of further boosting the success profiles of their current artists, while trying to promote their negligible percentage of new talent, leaving many budding, waiting-to-be-discovered DIY artists adrift.
It is widely said that ‘imitation is the best form of flattery’ and if someone samples or interpolates on, and releases another’s original song, it is assumed that they love and hopefully appreciate the fruit of the original artist’s work. However, at what point can an established artist be accused of theft, if an original song is already ‘in circulation,’ and all the artist needs to do is just ‘sample and mix’ without acknowledging the writer?
It gets even more complicated when one factors in the fact that no individual can claim copyright for the ‘building blocks’ that make up the actual music such as chord progressions, or variations on the major/minor scales, just because they utilized them in their song. This means that parts of songs may inevitably sound somewhat similar, though the overall musical progressions and patterns of the song may be different, a point that tends to be brought up in these litigations as a counterpoint, as was the case in Katy Perry’s.
Oftentimes, when these artists are caught out, they pay off the originator. That notwithstanding, the nagging questions that remain are these: Are indie artists just overreacting? Is it really okay, or even fair to only share credit by settlements or royalties, while one party remains faceless and nameless, or quiet in the face of potentially losing both?
Granted, the answer to this could depend on the originator’s personal choice to remain behind the stage, or them conceding that things will always remain this way due to the highly competitive nature of the industry.
One’s guess is that this question will never go away from the music industry, as long as music creation exists.