Ed Sheeran's copyright lawsuit concerning Marvin Gaye's 'Let's Get It On’ is reportedly dismissed by the Supreme Court

On June 16, 2025, the US Supreme Court dismissed Structured Asset Sales' (SAS) effort to charge British singer-songwriter Ed Sheeran with copyright infringement. The first case was filed in 2018. Ed Sheeran's 2014 song "Thinking Out Loud" has been accused of copying the melody, harmony, and tempo from Marvin Gaye's 1973 classic "Let's Get It On".

One of the most well-known music copyright challenges in recent years came to an end when the Supreme Court declined to hear the case again. This shows that the District Court and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals made the right rulings.

Structured Asset Sales, an investment entity with a stake in "Let's Get It On" copyright, first took legal action against Sheeran in June 2018, claiming that he had plagiarized parts of Marvin Gaye's song into his own "Thinking Out Loud."

Details about Ed Sheeran's copyright lawsuit concerning Marvin Gaye's 'Let's Get It On’

Copyright law, according to SAS, protects musical works that have "substantially similar" chord progressions and rhythmic foundations. The heirs of Ed Townsend, who was Gaye's co-writer, also filed a lawsuit alleging plagiarism; in April 2023, the jury found in favor of Sheeran when the matter went to trial.

In February 2023, U.S. District Judge Louis Stanton dismissed the SAS complaint, ruling that the shared musical components were "common building blocks" that could not be protected by copyright. The court ruled that since the chord progressions and rhythms mentioned by SAS had been utilized in hundreds of songs, they do not constitute novel enough material to be protected by US law.

SAS filed an appeal, and the Second US Circuit Court of Appeals confirmed the decision in late 2023. The court ruled that SAS had not shown that Ed Sheeran had plagiarized anything other than musical standards, which could not be protected.

On June 16, 2025, the Supreme Court issued an unsigned ruling dismissing SAS's request for certiorari. By doing this, the justices didn't say anything further, which meant that the lower courts' rulings were upheld. According to Supreme Court precedent, a denial of certiorari means that fewer than four justices voted to grant review.

The main question for the courts was what makes music a protected creative expression and what makes it unprotectable "building blocks." Typical chord progressions and rhythms are not protected by U.S. copyright law, even though they are thought to be required for innovative musical expression.

As the District Court and the Second Circuit have already said, copyright protection is only available for parts that are unique and creative, such as a catchy melody or a poetic phrase.

Many people who follow the music industry saw the ruling as a triumph for creative freedom. Lisa Schneider, an intellectual property lawyer, said that "the floodgates to speculative lawsuits over basic musical elements" may have been opened during a Supreme Court session.

This would have had a big effect on the process of producing songs and working together. Ed Sheeran's lawyers also published a brief statement saying they were happy that the long-running dispute was now over. This meant that the musician could focus on his upcoming album without the continual danger of legal action.

Trending

The Supreme Court's refusal to hear SAS's appeal brought an end to Ed Sheeran's and the owners of the rights to "Let's Get It On" case after nearly seven years of battle. The Supreme Court upheld the lower courts' decisions that the supposed similarities between the two songs include musical characteristics that can't be defended.

Not only does this decision assure Ed Sheeran's victory, but it also sets a very significant precedent for copyright law. It also makes sure that artists may keep using basic musical elements when they make new works.

×

Was this article helpful?

Thank You for feedback