Arguments and Financial Implications in the Copyright Infringement Lawsuit

Country singer Andy Stone, A.K.A Vince Vance, has renewed his lawsuit against Mariah Carey, which claims that her holiday hit ‘All I Want for Christmas Is You’ infringes the copyright of his song with the same name. Scott Hervey and Tara Sattler discuss this case on this episode of The Briefing.

Watch this episode on the Weintraub YouTube channel here.

Show Notes:

Scott:
Andy Stone, known professionally as Vince Vance, is suing Mariah Carey and Sony Music Entertainment for copyright infringement. Vance claims that the decades-old Christmas hit ‘All I Want for Christmas is You’ infringes his 1989 song ‘All I Want for Christmas is You.’

I’m Scott Hervey with Weintraub Tobin, and I’m joined today on this holiday edition of The Briefing by my partner Tara Sattler to discuss this Christmas-themed copyright infringement dispute on this next installment of The Briefing by Weintraub Tobin.

So, Tara, I think nothing rings in the holiday like a good copyright infringement lawsuit.

Tara:
Yeah, who doesn’t want to spend the holidays with their lawyers in court?

Scott:
I know I certainly do. So, Tara, according to the complaint, Stone and his co-writer Troy Powers claim that in 1989, they co-wrote a country music hit also titled ‘All I Want for Christmas is You.’ That song was recorded by Stone’s band Vince Vance and the Valiants, and apparently, it went to number 23 on Billboard’s Hot 100 airplay list. He claims that he has performed this song over 8000 times in concerts across 20 countries. He also claims that this song was licensed by Kelly Clarkson, who recorded her version of it in 2021.

Tara:
In the complaint, Stone alleges the unique linguistic structure of his song was copied and that his song is about a person disillusioned with expensive gifts and seasonal comforts, wants to be with their loved ones at Christmas, expresses that wish to Santa, and that the loved one and unnamed you standing under the Christmas tree would be a dream come true. Stone also identifies the phrase ‘All I want for Christmas is You’ as an element that was infringed. Lastly, the plaintiff claims that similarities in the melody support its claim.

Scott:
So, let’s take a look at these claims and see how Carey and her team may respond and also how a court, right here in the Central District of California, may analyze the plaintiff’s claims. So, as we know, a court will analyze the complaint by applying the extrinsic test, which, as we’ve discussed before, is used in the determination of substantial similarity. After the plaintiff has identified specific criteria that it alleges to have been copied, the court separates the unprotectable elements, such as facts or ideas, from those elements that are protectable. And then it sorts out whether there is enough similarities between the works as to the elements that are protectable, such that a reasonable jury could find that the defendant’s work is substantially similar to the plaintiff’s work. So, let’s look at two of the elements the plaintiff identifies as being infringed: the linguistic structure and the phrase ‘All I want for Christmas is You.’

Tara:
Sure? There are many songs that express the sentiment of wanting to be with a loved one during the Christmas season, and I can think of a few songs that draw on the theme of expressing wishes to Santa, such as Ariana Grande’s ‘Santa, Tell Me,’ ‘My Grown-Up Christmas List’ by Amy Grant, and even ‘Santa Baby’ by Earth A. Kitt.

Scott:
That’s right, and I suspect that Carrie’s team will argue that the theme of expressing the desire to be with a loved one for Christmas is too common of a theme for Christmas songs to be protectable. They will argue that the concepts of love, longing to be with a loved one at Christmas, and expressing desires to Santa are frequently present in Christmas songs, and that places them outside of the protection of copyright law.

Tara:
Similarly, I think that Carrie’s team will argue that ‘All I want for Christmas’ is you is a short phrase. And as we have discussed before, short phrases lack copyright protection.

Scott:
Yeah, that’s right. According to the copyright office circular, short phrases are unprotectable because they contain an insufficient amount of authorship.

Tara:
Vance seems ready to argue this point, though. In his complaint, he states that the phrase ‘All I want for Christmas is You’ may seem like a common phrase today, but in 1988, it was, in context, distinctive. What about the claim alleging melodic similarities? Vance alleges that the combination of the specific chord progression in the melody paired with the verbatim Hook was a greater than 50% clone of Vance’s original work in both lyric choice and chord expression.

Scott:
The determination of melodic similarities are really for the musical experts, and this is probably why the case won’t be dismissed on an early motion. However, I will note here that chords and standard chord progressions are not copyrightable, and pairing two unpredictable elements together does not transform that combination into something protectable.

Tara:
That’s right, Scott, so I anticipate a strong and aggressive response from Perry’s defense team. This song is a huge money maker for Mariah Carey and Sony. One article estimated royalty earnings of about 3 million each year just from this song, which is in addition to the 60 million in royalties that Mariah Carey earned when the song was first released in 1994.

Scott:
Agreed. However, Vance’s lawyer, Gerald Fox, is no slouch. He’s the same attorney that represented the two songwriters who accused Taylor Swift of stealing the lyrics to shake it off. As you may remember, that case went on for five years and ended in a confidential settlement in 2022.

Tara:
This certainly will be a good case to watch as it goes forward, and I’m interested to see what happens as a fan of this song; I agree.

Scott:
But one thing is for sure, this lawsuit certainly was not on Mariah Carey his Christmas list.

Tara:
Thank you for listening to this episode of the Briefing. We hope you enjoyed the episode. If you did, please remember to subscribe, leave us a review, and share this episode with your friends and colleagues. And if you have any questions about the topics we covered today, please leave us a comment.