Understand Your Rights. Solve Your Legal Problems
Updated 8 November, 2025
When Ed Sheeran defended Shape of You in court in 2022, it was more than just another celebrity dust-up. It marked his second major copyright case in two years and underscored a question that has haunted the music industry for decades: where does creative inspiration end and infringement begin?
From Chuck Berry and The Beach Boys to George Harrison and Led Zeppelin, some of the biggest names in music have faced allegations of borrowing a little too much from their predecessors. These courtroom dramas didn’t just make headlines—they shaped the rules that still govern how artists can build on each other’s work.
Below, we revisit some of the most influential copyright battles in music history and explore how they continue to define intellectual-property law today.
Unlike patents or trademarks, which protect inventions or brands, copyright law applies to original expressions—tangible creations such as songs, lyrics, and recordings. That makes the music business particularly vulnerable to legal disputes. Artists build upon shared musical traditions, and melodies often echo across decades.
As technology has made it easier to copy, sample, or remix, courts have increasingly had to decide whether a riff, lyric, or rhythm is homage—or theft.
One of the earliest and most famous music copyright disputes arose when The Beach Boys released Surfin’ U.S.A. in 1963. Listeners quickly noticed that the melody was nearly identical to Chuck Berry’s 1958 hit Sweet Little Sixteen.
Brian Wilson called the song a tribute to Berry, but Berry’s publisher, Arc Music, saw it as plagiarism. Facing a lawsuit, The Beach Boys conceded and transferred the publishing rights to Arc Music, giving Berry official credit as the songwriter.
The case became a landmark moment in the history of pop music copyright. It highlighted the risks of direct musical borrowing and set the tone for how closely courts—and audiences—would scrutinize originality in songwriting.
Key takeaway: Even well-intentioned “tributes” can cross into infringement when substantial portions of a work are reproduced.
Nearly three decades later, a similar controversy shook the hip-hop world. Vanilla Ice’s breakout hit Ice Ice Baby borrowed its instantly recognizable bassline from Under Pressure—a 1981 collaboration between Queen and David Bowie.
Ice initially denied the similarity, claiming his riff added “one extra note.” His explanation became infamous and was later retracted. When Queen and Bowie’s representatives threatened legal action, the dispute was swiftly settled out of court. Both artists received songwriting credits and compensation.
While the case never reached trial, it ignited an industry-wide debate about sampling—the use of existing recordings in new works—and whether musical creativity could coexist with fair compensation for original creators.
Key takeaway: Sampling reshaped copyright law, pushing artists and labels to negotiate rights before releasing music that incorporates existing recordings.
Rock legends Led Zeppelin were no strangers to legal controversy, particularly over their heavy borrowing from American blues. In 1972, songwriter Willie Dixon accused the band of lifting elements from his 1962 Muddy Waters composition You Need Love for their track Whole Lotta Love.
Dixon also alleged that the group’s Bring It On Home copied the intro and outro of a 1966 Sonny Boy Williamson song he had written. Although Led Zeppelin claimed these were homages, Dixon disagreed—and eventually won a settlement that added him to the songwriting credits.
This lawsuit marked a turning point in rock music, forcing one of the world’s biggest bands to acknowledge the commercial and artistic debt owed to the blues artists who inspired them.
Key takeaway: Even transformative reinterpretations can be considered infringing if they appropriate distinctive musical elements without permission.
After The Beatles’ breakup, George Harrison became the first member to top the charts with a solo hit—My Sweet Lord. But the song’s resemblance to He’s So Fine by The Chiffons (written by Ronnie Mack) soon attracted legal scrutiny.
Bright Tunes Music, which owned Mack’s publishing rights, sued Harrison in 1971. The case dragged on for years, eventually going to trial in 1976. Harrison admitted he may have been subconsciously influenced by He’s So Fine, and the court agreed, coining the term “subconscious plagiarism.” He was ordered to pay nearly $1.6 million in damages—a decision that continued to reverberate through copyright law for decades.
The case remains a cautionary tale: even unintentional copying can lead to liability if the similarities are significant enough.
Key takeaway: “Subconscious plagiarism” established that intent is not required for infringement—only substantial similarity.
The echoes of these early cases can still be heard in today’s lawsuits. Ed Sheeran, Sam Smith, and Katy Perry have all faced similar claims of plagiarism in the streaming era, where millions of tracks can be compared instantly online.
Courts now grapple with whether certain chord progressions or melodic patterns—common throughout pop music—can truly be owned. Sheeran himself has argued that protecting such basic structures risks “killing creativity altogether.”
Meanwhile, modern tools such as AI-generated music have raised new questions about authorship and originality. As algorithms learn from thousands of existing works, the boundary between influence and imitation becomes even harder to draw.
Each of these disputes helped define how far artists can go in reinterpreting others’ work. They also remind us that copyright law is a living system, constantly adapting to new technologies and cultural norms.
For music creators, the lesson is clear: document your creative process, seek permission before sampling, and understand the rights attached to your work. For lawyers and policymakers, these cases continue to serve as precedents shaping the future of intellectual-property protection in the digital age.
1. What counts as plagiarism in music?
Plagiarism in music occurs when a song reproduces a substantial part of another copyrighted work without permission — this could include melodies, lyrics, chord progressions, or unique instrumental hooks. Courts assess whether the similarities are significant enough that an average listener would recognize one song as derived from another, regardless of whether the copying was intentional or subconscious.
2. Can you get sued for sampling another artist’s song?
Yes. Sampling — using a portion of another artist’s recording in a new track — typically requires permission or a licensing agreement from the copyright holder. Without authorization, even a short sample can result in a lawsuit for infringement, as seen in high-profile cases involving artists like Vanilla Ice, Kanye West, and The Verve.
