X Factor winner Matt Cardle has distanced himself from a multi-million-pound lawsuit between his songwriters and Ed Sheeran.
Ed is being sued for more than £13 million by songwriters Martin Harrington and Thomas Leonard.
They allege that his 2014 summer hit Photograph copies Matt’s 2012 single Amazing, which they wrote, and that the songs’ similarities “reach the very essence of the work”.
Matt tweeted his respect for Ed and reminded fans that “this is not my lawsuit”.
Please read news articles closely. This is not my lawsuit. I think @edsheeran is a genius & 100% deserves all his success 🙏🏽❤️ X
— Matt Cardle (@mattcardle) June 9, 2016
Lawyer Richard Busch, who recently triumphed on behalf of Marvin Gaye’s family in a copyright case over the Robin Thicke hit Blurred Lines, is representing the songwriters.
According to court papers posted online, the lawsuit alleges that the choruses of Amazing and Photograph share 39 identical notes.
Matt Cardle, pictured with Mel C, has distanced himself from a lawsuit against Ed Sheeran (Dominic Lipinski/PA)
It reads: “The similarities go beyond substantial, which is itself sufficient to establish copyright infringement, and are in fact striking.
“The similarity of words, vocal style, vocal melody, melody and rhythm are clear indicators, among other things, that Photograph copies Amazing.”
The songwriters are seeking all the profits from Ed’s song, which could amount to £20 million (Rich Fury/Invision)
The parallels are also said to be “instantly recognisable to the ordinary observer”, with the songwriters saying the alleged copying makes up “nearly one half” of Ed’s single.
Ed will have to answer the charges alongside his Photograph co-writer, Snow Patrol’s Johnny McDaid, as well as other co-defendants including Sony/ATV Songs, Warner Music and Polar Patrol Music Publishing.
The plaintiffs claim that the team behind Photograph, which was nominated for a Brit award and is also featured on the soundtrack for new movie Me Before You, were aware of Matt’s single.
The lawsuit states: “Given the striking similarity between the chorus of Amazing and Photograph, (the) defendants knew when writing, publishing, recording, releasing, and distributing Photograph that they were infringing on a pre-existing musical composition.
“The conduct of (the) defendants has been wilful from the inception of the creation of Photograph.”
Here are the two songs to compare:
The lawsuit states that the defendants had already been given notice of the complaint, but it had not been resolved before papers were filed at court.
The songwriters have asked to be awarded the profits on the song, which are believed to be more than 20 million dollars.
A permanent injunction is also sought on Photograph, which could prohibit Sheeran from performing the song in future or selling recordings. If this is not possible, the plaintiffs are seeking royalties.
Last year, a jury determined that Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams had copied Marvin Gaye’s 1977 hit Got To Give It Up.
Gaye’s children were awarded nearly £4.9 million, after a trial which had focused on detailed analyses of chords and notes in Blurred Lines and Gaye’s song.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here