The music industry is no stranger to legal battles, and recently, Sam Smith and Normani’s 2019 hit, “Dancing With A Stranger,” has found itself under scrutiny. A lawsuit has been filed by songwriter Jordan Vincent, along with Christopher Miranda and Rosco Banlaoi, claiming that “Dancing With A Stranger” bears striking similarities to their 2015 song, “Dancing With Strangers,” which prominently features the lyric “Dancing With Strangers.” This case joins a growing list of copyright infringement claims in the music world, with Ed Sheeran and Dua Lipa also facing similar legal challenges. This article delves into the specifics of the “Dancing With A Stranger” lawsuit, examining the claims and analyzing the musical elements at the heart of the dispute.
The Core Allegations: Same or Nearly Identical?
The lawsuit asserts that key elements of both songs are essentially the same or “nearly identical.” According to the complaint, this includes the title, hook, chorus, lyrics, and musical composition. However, a closer examination reveals a more nuanced reality. While the titles are undeniably similar, it’s crucial to remember that copyright law generally does not protect names, titles, slogans, and short phrases. This immediately casts doubt on the claim regarding title infringement.
One intriguing aspect of the plaintiff’s argument involves tempo manipulation. They suggest that slowing down their track from 122 beats per minute (bpm) to match Sam Smith’s 103 bpm would result in the songs being in the same key. While this might be an interesting coincidence, it’s hardly a smoking gun in a copyright infringement case. The key of a song is just one element, and manipulating tempo to force key similarity doesn’t automatically equate to plagiarism. Furthermore, the lawsuit also mentions similarities in music videos, but copyright infringement cases primarily focus on the songs themselves, not necessarily visual elements.
Access and Similarity: Key Elements of Copyright Infringement
To establish copyright infringement, two key elements must be proven: access and similarity. Access means demonstrating that the creators of “Dancing With A Stranger” had the opportunity to hear “Dancing With Strangers” before writing their song. The plaintiffs claim their song garnered 500,000 listens on SoundCloud and numerous YouTube views, suggesting potential avenues for access. However, plausibility of access isn’t definitive proof.
The more crucial aspect is similarity, and this is where the lawsuit faces significant challenges. The most apparent similarity lies in the repeated phrase “dancing with a stranger” in both songs. Let’s break down the musical components to assess the extent of this similarity.
Melody: Contour, Pitch, and Syllables
While both melodies revolve around the lyric “dancing with a stranger,” they are far from identical. While they might share a similar downward melodic contour at the beginning, meaning they start on a higher pitch and descend, this is a very general and common melodic shape. When analyzing the specific pitches, only half of the six syllables in the phrase are sung to the same pitches in both songs – just three out of six. This level of melodic overlap is not substantial enough to claim “same” or even “nearly identical.”
Rhythm: Timing and Duration of Notes
In terms of rhythm, the placement and duration of notes for the “dancing with a stranger” phrase are indeed similar in both songs. In Vincent’s song, the phrase appears as the second and fourth lines of a four-line stanza with the same rhythm, though with melodic variations. In Smith’s version, it appears only in the fourth line, but the rhythmic execution of the phrase is undeniably alike. This rhythmic similarity is a point of connection, but rhythm alone is often not enough to establish copyright infringement, especially when other elements diverge significantly.
Harmony: Chord Progressions and Context
Harmony, the sequence of chords supporting a melody, plays a vital role in shaping a song’s character and meaning. Here, the two songs diverge dramatically. Jordan Vincent’s chord progression is described as || vi | iii | IV | V ||, which translates to Gm, Dm, Eb, and F in the key of Bb. Sam Smith’s progression is || IV | IV V | vi | I ||, or Eb, F, Gm, Bb in Bb key. These chord progressions are entirely different, with no overlapping chords in the same sequence. This harmonic difference is significant because harmony provides crucial context and meaning to a melody. Dissimilar harmony makes the melodies sound even more distinct in their overall musical environment.
The “Dancing With A Stranger” Phrase: Commonplace or Novel?
The lyrical similarity centers around the phrase “dancing with a stranger.” The question becomes: how unique and protectable is this phrase? The article rightly argues that it’s not particularly novel. The phrase is a common trope, appearing in other songs like Cyndi Lauper’s “Dancing With a Stranger,” a movie title, and countless poems. It’s a familiar concept in popular culture, suggesting a level of commonality that weakens the claim of copyright infringement.
This leads to the concept of “thin protection” in copyright law. As popular music evolves to become simpler, more derivative, and loop-based, the legal protection afforded to certain musical elements might become “thinner.” Thin protection raises the bar, demanding a very high degree of similarity before inferring copyright infringement. In this context, the common phrase “dancing with a stranger,” combined with notable differences in melody and harmony, suggests that Sam Smith’s song likely falls under this “thin protection” umbrella.
Lyrical Context and Meaning
Finally, examining the lyrical context further differentiates the two songs. Sam Smith’s “Dancing With A Stranger” expresses a lament about seeking solace in a stranger’s arms after a failed relationship. The lyrics tell a coherent story of heartbreak and a desire to avoid loneliness. In contrast, Jordan Vincent’s lyrics depict a girl who is intensely passionate and proclaims she will “die dancing with a stranger.” While both songs use the key phrase, the surrounding lyrical narratives and emotional contexts differ significantly, further weakening the claim of substantial similarity in overall lyrical composition.
Conclusion: Coincidence or Copying?
After analyzing the musical components and lyrical context, the lawsuit against “Dancing With A Stranger” appears to be on shaky ground. While the rhythmic similarity and the shared phrase “dancing with a stranger” exist, the significant differences in melody and harmony, coupled with the commonality of the phrase itself, strongly suggest coincidence rather than copyright infringement. The lawsuit seems to be grasping at straws, attempting to build a case on superficial similarities while overlooking the substantial musical and lyrical distinctions between the two songs. Ultimately, the case highlights the complexities of music copyright law and the challenges of proving plagiarism in an industry where inspiration and coincidence can sometimes sound remarkably alike. For aspiring songwriters, the advice remains clear: continue creating, explore themes like “dancing with a stranger,” and contribute original voices to the ever-evolving landscape of music.
