The internet is abuzz with whispers of a potential copyright infringement claim targeting Ariana Grande’s hit song “Side to Side.” Sensational headlines might lead you to believe that the pop sensation is embroiled in a serious legal battle over her chart-topping track. But before you jump to conclusions, let’s inject some much-needed reality into this narrative.
The situation echoes a familiar, and often frustrating, scenario in the music industry. A musician, likely operating outside the mainstream, believes their work has been unfairly copied by a major artist. In this instance, the focus is on “Side to Side,” a song that undeniably propelled Ariana Grande further into the global pop stratosphere. The claimant alleges that the infectious tune bears a resemblance to their own, lesser-known composition.
Now, let’s consider a plausible, albeit simplified, scenario. Imagine a budding songwriter in, say, Texas, crafts a melody. This melody, through the labyrinthine pathways of the music world, somehow reaches the ears of individuals connected to Ariana Grande. Perhaps unintentionally, this melody, or elements of it, find their way into what eventually becomes “Side to Side.” The Texas songwriter, upon hearing Grande’s track on the radio, experiences that gut-wrenching moment of believing their creative property has been pilfered. It’s a story, however improbable, that could, in theory, fuel a copyright claim.
However, the reality is frequently less dramatic and more indicative of the complexities of music creation and perception. Far more often, these situations originate from a place of what might be termed “musical delusion.” An inexperienced songwriter, perhaps experimenting with music production software and uploading tracks to platforms like SoundCloud, may create something they believe is groundbreaking. Lacking the critical ear honed by experience and professional feedback, they might fail to recognize common musical tropes or the vast ocean of existing music that shares superficial similarities with their own creations.
This is where musicologists, like myself, often enter the picture. Aspiring musicians, convinced of their creative victimization, seek expert opinions to validate their claims. In many cases, a careful musicological analysis gently reveals the absence of substantial grounds for a copyright lawsuit. We might employ various methods to illustrate the commonality of musical elements or the lack of originality in the claimant’s work, aiming to temper their disappointment and prevent unnecessary legal action. These interactions, while sometimes disheartening for the individual, generally remain private and avoid clogging up the legal system and the news cycle with frivolous claims.
Unfortunately, in the case surrounding “Side to Side,” a complaint has been filed, dragging this matter into the public domain. This is where responsible media coverage becomes crucial. We must resist the urge to sensationalize this as another “Blurred Lines” debacle, referencing the infamous case that muddied the waters of music copyright law and arguably emboldened opportunistic lawsuits. Attributing any legitimacy or weight to this claim based on the “Blurred Lines” precedent would be a disservice to both Ariana Grande and the principles of sound musicological understanding.
The question shouldn’t be, “Did Ariana Grande steal ‘Side to Side?'” Instead, the narrative should rightly focus on the nature of the lawsuit itself: “Look at what some lawyer bothered to sue over.” Reputable news outlets should prioritize obtaining quotes from musicologists to provide informed perspectives, rather than amplifying unsubstantiated accusations.
The individual who initiated this complaint, and perhaps more so, the legal representative who agreed to take on the case, should arguably reconsider their actions. Whether driven by financial gain or a misguided belief in the merits of the claim, this lawsuit appears, from an informed perspective, to be exceptionally weak.
Mirroring Taylor Swift’s recent stance against similar legal challenges, Ariana Grande should vigorously defend herself and, importantly, pursue the recovery of her legal expenses. This case serves as a stark reminder of the need for critical evaluation and expert analysis in navigating the often murky waters of music copyright disputes, and the media’s responsibility to report such matters with appropriate context and skepticism.
