A copyright lawsuit against Taylor Swift is reportedly set to be revived following an appeals court ruling on Monday.
The singer, 29, was first sued by songwriters Sean Hall and Nathan Butler in September 2017, who claimed her 2014 single Shake It Off ripped off girl group 3LW’s Playas Gon’ Play, which was released in 2001.
After District Court Judge Michael W Fitzgerald rejected the lawsuit in February 2018, a three-judge panel of Ninth Circuit judges at the federal appellate court has now ruled Michael’s conclusion as premature.
Legal issues: A copyright lawsuit against Taylor Swift is reportedly set to be revived following an appeals court ruling on Monday (pictured in August)
Musicians Sean and Nathan insisted the chorus for Shake It Off, which featured the lyrics, ‘Players gonna play, play, play, play, play, and haters gonna hate, hate, hate, hate, hate’ took inspiration from Playas Gon’ Play, which featured the phrase, ‘Playas, they gonna play, and haters, they gonna hate.’
A year after the pair filed for copyright against award-winning hitmaker Taylor, judge Michael argued the lyrics were ‘too brief, unoriginal and uncreative’ to receive protection, and the case was dismissed.
However, according to The Hollywood Reporter, the lawsuit has been revived. The new ruling read: ‘Originality, as we have long recognised, is normally a question of fact.’
The judges later quoted late Supreme Court justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., who said in a ruling back in 1903: ‘It would be a dangerous undertaking for persons trained only to the law to constitute themselves final judges of the worth of pictorial illustrations, outside of the narrowest and most obvious limits.’
Hit track: The singer, 29, released her chart-topping single Shake It Off in 2014 (pictured), which has sold 5.4 million copies as of July 2019
Inspiration? Taylor was first sued by songwriters Sean Hall and Nathan Butler in 2017, who claimed her single ripped off 3LW’s Playas Gon’ Play, which was released in 2001 (pictured)
Details: A year after the pair filed for copyright against award-winning hitmaker Taylor, judge Michael argued the lyrics were ‘too brief, unoriginal and uncreative’ (pictured in August)
‘Justice Holmes’ century-old warning remains valid… Because the absence of originality is not established either on the face of the complaint or through the judicially noticed matters, we reverse the district court’s dismissal’, the ruling added.
The case against the Our Song songstress has reportedly been remanded back to a district court for further proceedings.
The songwriters are said to seek 20% of the profits from the song, which sold 5.4 million copies in the US alone as of July 2019, according to Billboard.
Taylor’s defence lawyers previously asked for the case, writing in a statement: ‘There can be no copyright protection in “playas, they gonna play and haters, they gonna hate,” because it would impermissibly monopolise the idea that players will play and haters will hate.
Ongoing: A three-judge panel of Ninth Circuit judges has now ruled Michael’s conclusion as premature (pictured in the music video)
‘Plaintiffs’ claim to being the only ones in the world who can refer to players playing and haters hating is frivolous… Providing a copyright monopoly in the phrase would prevent others from sharing the idea that players play and haters hate.’
The lawyers went on to argue the concepts were ‘public domain cliches’ and insisted courts have consistently held that short phrases cannot be copyrighted.
They also cited other references to ‘players’ and ‘haters’ in pop culture, including Fleetwood Mac’s 1977 single Dreams and Playa Hater – a 1997 track by Notorious B.I.G.
Next steps: The case against the Our Song songstress has been remanded back to a district court for further proceedings (pictured in August)
Taylor’s spokesperson has since backed up that claim, telling MailOnline: ‘Mr. Hall is incorrect, the court did not unanimously side in their favor, the court sent the case back to the lower court for further determination.
‘These men are not the originators, or creators, of the common phrases “Players” or “Haters” or combinations of them.
‘They did not invent these common phrases nor are they the first to use them in a song. We are confident the true writers of “Shake It Off” will prevail again. Their claim is not a crusade for all creatives, it is a crusade for Mr. Hall’s bank account.’
A spokesperson for the Gorgeous belter previously slammed the lawsuit as ‘ridiculous’ and a ‘money grab’.
They told PEOPLE back in September 2017: ‘This is a ridiculous claim and nothing more than a money grab. The law is simple and clear. They do not have a case.’
Hitting out: A spokesperson for the Gorgeous belter previously slammed the lawsuit as ‘ridiculous’ and a ‘money grab’ (pictured in August)