Musicians' Census highlights career barriers

Help Musicians and the Musicians' Union have published the initial findings of their first Musicians’ Census, confirming that 53% of UK music-makers have to supplement their music earnings with other income

  LEGAL  

Song theft claim against Sam Smith and Normani dismissed

A US court last week dismissed a lawsuit that accused Sam Smith and Normani of ripping off an earlier song when they wrote their 2020 hit 'Dancing With A Stranger'.

The judge hearing the case concluded that Smith and Normani's song was not "substantially similar" to the one that they were accused of infringing, despite what experts hired by the plaintiffs might have concluded.

The earlier song was ‘Dancing With Strangers’, created by artist Jordan Vincent and producer Christopher Miranda and released in 2015. In the lawsuit they filed last year, they argued that - so clear were the similarities between the two songs - “it is beyond any real doubt that Smith, Normani and the other defendants copied plaintiff’s work”.

Legal reps for Smith and Normani were pretty scathing of the claims made in the lawsuit from the off. In an initial motion to dismiss, they said that Vincent and Miranda's lawsuit was “rambling” and “repetitive”. When the plaintiffs subsequently submitted an amended complaint, the Smith and Normani side declared it was "self-contradictory” and “nonsensical”.

It was Smith and Normani's motion for dismissal that judge Wesley L Hsu ruled on last week. In a lengthy judgement, he considered whether any of the elements shared by 'Dancing With A Stranger' and ‘Dancing With Strangers’ enjoyed copyright protection in isolation.

Concluding that they did not, he then scrutinised the argument put forward by Vincent and Miranda that - while each shared element may not in itself be protected by copyright - the way those elements were selected and arranged in ‘Dancing With Strangers’ was sufficiently original to enjoy copyright protection. And, they alleged, it was that selection and arrangement that Smith and Normani had copied.

Hsu noted that a "selection and arrangement copyright" is available under US law if -within any one “melodic phrase” - the otherwise unprotectable elements are “numerous enough and their selection and arrangement original enough that their combination constitutes an original work of authorship".

However, while 'Dancing With A Stranger' and ‘Dancing With Strangers’ might share the various standalone elements identified by Vincent and Miranda, did Smith and Normani arrange them in the same way, so that any possible 'selection and arrangement copyright' had been infringed?

No, ruled Hsu. "The ['Dancing With A Stranger'] melodic phrase is not substantially similar to the [‘Dancing With Strangers’] melodic phrase as a matter of law, despite plaintiff’s experts’ conclusory statements to the contrary", the judge declared.

So, while there might be grounds for saying that the key melodic phrase in ‘Dancing With Strangers’ identified by Vincent and Miranda is protected by copyright, it wasn't infringed on 'Dancing With A Stranger'.

The judge concluded: "Regardless of whether the [‘Dancing With Strangers’] melodic phrase is original and protectable ... the ['Dancing With A Stranger'] melodic phrase does not unlawfully appropriate it".

And with that in mind, Hsu granted Smith and Normani's motion for dismissal.

Read Online

  DEALS  

Exceleration buys Redeye

The increasingly acquisitive Exceleration Music - which has been busy buying labels and catalogues - has moved into music distribution and label services by buying itself the US-based digital and physical music distributor Redeye.

The deal will result in the creation of a new services division within Exceleration Music which will use the Redeye brand and will be headed up by the distributor’s founders Glenn Dicker and Tor Hansen, who also become shareholders in the Exceleration Music company.

Redeye's clients including Beggars Group, Domino, New West, Saddle Creek, Mom+Pop, Warp, !K7 and Thrill Jockey. The deal also covers Redeye's in-house labels Yep Roc and Sundazed, and its music publishing company Riff City Sounds.

Confirming the acquisition, Exceleration Music partner Glen Barros says: “The addition of Redeye, Yep Roc, Sundazed and Riff City Sounds represents an important expansion of Exceleration’s overall strategy to strengthen the independent community".

“Redeye already provides a great service to an impressive set of first-rate indie labels looking for a distributor that can service both physical and digital channels on a global basis", he adds. "Together with Glenn, Tor and the Redeye team, we plan to expand Redeye’s already impressive network and to collectively help our current and future label partners to truly thrive".

Dicker adds: “Working with the Exceleration team feels like expanding the family. Sharing strong ideals and a strategic vision, it feels like the next natural step on our journey towards providing our world class distribution service to an expanded independent community".

Read Online

  LIVE BUSINESS  

Save The Leadmill campaign offering people £40 to join its protest

The Save The Leadmill campaign has offered to pay people to join a protest due to take place outside Sheffield Town Hall later this month, according to the BBC.

Anyone who shows up in support of the team currently running the Sheffield venue - who want to stop their landlord the Electric Group from putting its own management team in place - will be paid £40.

As well as pursuing legal action to formally evict the current Leadmill team, which is headed up by Phil Mills, the Electric Group is also seeking its own licence to run the venue.

Mills and his team have been urging their supporters to call on Sheffield City Council to block that licence application, even though there are only very specific grounds on which it could legally do so, none of which probably apply.

As part of that, the Save The Leadmill campaign recently announced it would stage an in-person protest outside Sheffield Town Hall on 18 Sep, as the council’s licensing committee considers the Electric Group’s application.

According to the BBC, last week it emerged that people who commit to join the protest and post about it on social media have been promised a £40 payment for their time and trouble. Which isn’t necessarily a good look, given that the protest is meant to demonstrate how passionate local music fans are in wanting Mills’ team to stay in place.

Asked about the payments for protestors, the current Leadmill team told the BBC that they are being offered so that it - and a company it has partnered with to run the protest - know how many people are likely to attend, so that they can plan accordingly.

They said in a statement: "We are encouraging The Leadmill's supporters to attend a rally outside on that morning. We don't know how many people will turn up and as The Leadmill staff will likely be in the hearing itself, we have teamed up with Gosh to ensure the rally is professionally and safely managed by some of their team outside".

"Gosh are a company that we use regularly and we have a strong relationship with", they added. "They are obviously being paid for their time to do so".

The Electric Group and its CEO Dominic Madden have already called the Save The Leadmill campaign "toxic", arguing that Mills is implying that the venue is facing closure, when the plan is simply to put a new management team in place.

Madden is similarly scathing about the protest and the plan to pay the protesters. He told CMU: “Save The Leadmill’s decision to resort to renting a crowd outside Sheffield Town Hall on the day of the licensing hearing is a clear indication that public interest in their campaign is waning”.

“Paying people £40 to stand outside of the hall is a move that reeks of cynicism, as it attempts to manipulate the licensing process and unduly influence Sheffield Council”, he added. “We’ve consistently maintained that we will invest in The Leadmill to ensure it remains an inclusive, vibrant music and arts venue, of which Sheffield can be rightly proud for years to come”.

Read Online

  MANAGEMENT  

New boss of disgraced J-pop management agency Johnny & Associates quizzed over his own abuse allegations

The new boss of disgraced Japanese talent management agency Johnny & Associates, Noriyuki Higashiyama, gave less than compelling responses last week when challenged about allegations of abuse that have been made against him personally.

Higashiyama has been given the job of “dismantling and restarting” the business after it finally admitted, after decades of denial, that its late founder Johnny Kitagawa prolifically abused boys that worked with the company.

That admission followed an independent investigation into the numerous claims of sexual abuse that had been made against Kitagawa over the years, which was in turn prompted by a BBC documentary earlier this year.

That programme put the spotlight back on all the allegations, well known within but extensively ignored by the Japanese music industry.

The investigation concluded that the firm’s leadership should accept that the abuse took place, apologise to the victims and offer them financial relief. It also advised that Kitagawa’s niece Julie Fujishima, who was President of the company, should step down.

She confirmed she was doing just that last week, with Higashiyama - who, for 35 years until 2020, was a member of the Johnnys-managed group Shonentai - being announced as the new boss of the company.

However, at a press conference to formally announce those changes, journalists asked Higashiyama about allegations that have been made against him personally.

Those include that, in the past, he bullied younger performers allied with Johnny & Associates, and that he had massaged the crotches of boys, exposed his genitals and told them to "eat my sausage".

According to the BBC, he replied: "I don't remember clearly. Maybe it happened, maybe it didn't. I have trouble remembering". He did admit, however, that he may have done things as a teenager and in his 20s that he would not do now.

He also confirmed that he was aware of the many allegations of abuse made against Kitagawa during his time working with the management firm, adding that he "couldn't, and didn't, do anything about it". On the task ahead of him, he added: "It will take time to win back trust, and I am putting my life on the line for this effort".

It remains to be seen if a company which facilitated, hid and denied the rampant sexual abuse undertaken by its founder for so long can do anything to rebuild its reputation, especially while it is still being run by people who knew about Kitagawa's conduct for decades, had personal involvement in the business, but chose to do nothing about it.

Read Online

  SETLIST PODCAST  

Is Deezer’s new streaming model really artist-centric?

On this week’s edition of the Setlist podcast, CMU’s Andy Malt and Chris Cooke review key events in music and the music business from the last week, including Deezer’s announcement that it is making changes to the way it allocates revenues to tracks later this year, and claims that organised criminals are using streaming services to launder money.

LISTEN TO THIS WEEK'S EPISODE OF SETLIST HERE

AND FINALLY...

Controversial Ghostwriter track NOT eligible for Grammy consideration

For a brief moment last week it looked like next year's Grammy Awards could be interesting after it emerged that Ghostwriter's controversial AI-assisted track 'Heart On My Sleeve' had been put forward for consideration for two prizes. However, it has now been confirmed that the track is not eligible for consideration.

Given that the track featured AI-generated vocals designed to sound like Drake and The Weeknd - who are both already critics of the Grammys - had the Ghostwriter song got shortlisted, well, that would have been fun.

The boss of Grammys owner the Recording Academy, Harvey Mason Jr, had already said that - while entirely AI-generated works would not be eligible for a prize at the US industry's big awards bash - tracks and songs where AI tools had played a role, but alongside human creativity, could be put forward.

That said, there was speculation that 'Heart On My Sleeve' - despite involving human creativity alongside the AI - might fail to meet another entry criteria, which is that a work must have been made generally available.

Although the Ghostwriter track did appear on the streaming services after going viral on TikTok, it was quickly removed, seemingly because of a takedown request from Universal Music.

Mason has now confirmed that that lack of general availability is a problem. But so is Ghostwriter choosing to release his track without getting the necessary approvals from Drake, The Weeknd or their label Universal.

“This version of ‘Heart On My Sleeve’, using the AI voice modelling that sounds like Drake and The Weeknd, it’s not eligible for Grammy consideration", he confirmed in an update on Instagram.

“Let me be extra, extra clear, even though it was written by a human creator, the vocals were not legally obtained, the vocals were not cleared by the label or the artists, and the song is not commercially available and, because of that, it’s not eligible".

On the use of AI in music-making more generally, he went on: “I take this stuff very seriously. It’s all complicated, and it’s moving, really, really quickly. I’m sure things are going to continue to have to evolve and change. But please, please, do not be confused. The Academy is here to support and advocate and protect and represent human artists, and human creators, period".

So that's that confirmed. Next year's Grammy Awards will not be interesting.

Read Online