Tempo Music files a lawsuit claiming Miley Cyrus’ smash hit “Flowers” borrows extensively from Bruno Mars’ 2013 song When I Was Your Man.

Tempo Music has launched a lawsuit against Miley Cyrus, accusing the pop star of copying Bruno Mars’ 2013 hit “When I Was Your Man” to create her 2023 chart-topping song “Flowers.” The lawsuit, filed with the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, also names Sony Music Entertainment, the co-writers of “Flowers,” and several music publishers and streaming platforms.

The plaintiffs, led by Tempo Music, allege that “Flowers” mirrors several key elements of Mars’ song, including melodic, harmonic, and lyrical structures. The lawsuit points out the melodic sequence of the verse, the bass line, certain bars in the chorus, and specific chord progressions that appear in both songs. The legal complaint claims that “Flowers” “duplicates numerous elements” of “When I Was Your Man,” suggesting that Miley Cyrus’ global success with “Flowers” was, in part, due to these similarities.

The lawsuit also highlights the lyrical parallels, such as Mars’ line “I should have bought you flowers” being echoed in Cyrus’ song with “I can buy myself flowers.” Additionally, the complaint focuses on similarities in the chord progression, particularly the E-D-C-E-F sequence that both songs reportedly share.

Tempo Music acquired a percentage of the copyright for “When I Was Your Man” in 2020 from one of its co-writers, Philip Lawrence. With “Flowers” dominating charts in 2023—spending eight weeks at number one on the Billboard Hot 100 and racking up billions of streams—Tempo Music’s legal action aims to secure damages for alleged copyright infringement. The lawsuit demands either a trial-determined sum or the statutory maximum of $150,000 per infringement, which could lead to a substantial payout given the song’s massive commercial success.

In an unusual twist, the lawsuit names not only the primary creators but also music streaming platforms and retailers that sold or streamed “Flowers.” Platforms like Apple Music, Amazon Music, and Deezer are listed as defendants, while Spotify, despite hosting the song, is notably absent. Major retailers like Walmart, Target, and Barnes & Noble are also included, alongside concert promoters Live Nation and Disney, which aired a Miley Cyrus concert series featuring a performance of the song.

The lawsuit taps into long-standing fan theories about Cyrus’ “Flowers” being a response to Mars’ ballad, with some suggesting the song is a lyrical reversal aimed at Cyrus’ ex-husband, Liam Hemsworth, who is said to be a fan of “When I Was Your Man.” The complaint implies that these similarities were deliberate, arguing that “Flowers” is an unauthorized derivative work.

Analysis:

Political:

This lawsuit brings up significant issues regarding intellectual property rights in the music industry. High-profile cases like this can influence broader conversations about copyright protections and the consequences for artists and platforms that may unknowingly distribute allegedly infringing material. The lawsuit might also reignite debates around copyright reform, particularly as streaming platforms and major corporations like Disney and Amazon are involved. The outcome could influence how digital music is regulated and sold.

Social:

Socially, the case delves into the blurred lines between inspiration and imitation in creative industries. Miley Cyrus has often positioned herself as an artist who transforms personal experiences into her music. The idea that “Flowers” could be a reversal of Mars’ “When I Was Your Man” plays into a broader narrative of empowering break-up anthems, a common theme in pop music. Many fans see “Flowers” as a feminist response to traditional love songs, with Cyrus reclaiming agency post-breakup. However, if the lawsuit proves that the song copies Bruno Mars’ work, it could shift public perception from an empowering anthem to a controversial piece of creative borrowing.

Racial:

Although race is not a central theme in the lawsuit, the fact that Bruno Mars, a Hawaiian-born artist of Puerto Rican and Filipino descent, and Miley Cyrus, a white American pop icon, are at the centre of this dispute may draw attention to the ways different artists are treated in copyright cases. Historically, artists of colour have faced harsher judgments and penalties for alleged copyright infringements, which could become a point of discussion if the lawsuit gains traction in public discourse.

Gender:

The gender dynamics of this case are fascinating given the themes of the songs. “When I Was Your Man” is a classic romantic apology from a man lamenting his mistakes in a past relationship, whereas “Flowers” is widely viewed as a self-empowerment anthem for women, celebrating independence post-breakup. If Cyrus is found guilty of copying Mars’ work, it may complicate this narrative of female empowerment, casting a shadow over what many fans viewed as a feminist anthem.

Economic:

The economic stakes in this lawsuit are significant. “Flowers” was one of the biggest songs globally in 2023, and if Tempo Music succeeds in proving that Cyrus and her collaborators infringed on the copyright of “When I Was Your Man,” the financial implications could be enormous. Beyond damages, the lawsuit could open the door to royalty claims on future sales and streams of “Flowers.” The case also raises questions about how music platforms and retailers like Amazon, Walmart, and Apple Music might need to adjust their practices when it comes to copyright compliance. If the lawsuit succeeds, it could encourage other rights holders to take similar actions against streaming platforms.