A singer attempting to sue Tiësto and Karol G for $50,000,000 for copying their song has been slammed by the judge who dismissed the case.
Don’t Be Shy was a breakout dance hit from the Columbian singer in 2021, marking the first time she sang in English on a track.
The collaboration with Dutch DJ Tiësto charted globally, peaking at number four in the US electronic charts and number one in Mexico.
However, songwriter Rene Lorente claimed it infringed upon his song Algo Diferente, released in 2000.
A federal judge in Florida has now thrown out the case after ruling he failed to meet basic requirements to proceed with the claim, according to Rolling Stone.
For copyright claims, there must be evidence that the defendant directly copied the work, or had access to the material, and there is ‘substantial similarity’ between the two.
Part of the scathing 17-page ruling said Lorente made ‘no attempt to offer proof of direct copying’, challenging his claims that being on streaming meant they had access.
‘Plaintiff points only to [his song’s] presence on digital platforms and inclusion in niche albums as proof that Tiësto and Karol G heard his song. No reasonable jury could find access on such a record,’ Chief U.S. District Judge Cecilia M. Altonaga wrote.
According to the ruling, the song had been played 670 times on YouTube and streamed 2,718 times on Spotify, as of June 2022.
The inability to meet this proof qualifier meant much of the case fell on the testimony of his designated musicologist, former Capitol Records A&R executive Richie Viera.
The judge claimed Viera ‘declined’ to define music terms in the deposition and couldn’t say if the song changed from major to minor key.
Viera also allegedly declined to explain principles like the ‘circle of fifths’, which was used in both songs.
She added that the report ‘misidentifies the chords and keys of each song’ and failed to take into account songs released before Lorente’s that had similar elements.
‘These lapses only reinforce the conclusion that Viera lacks the expertise to perform the kind of comparative analysis his report purports to offer,’ she stated.
Viera’s opinion was said to lack the ‘intellectual rigor’ to be considered reliable in a court of law.
Lorente’s lawyer, Patrick Frank, told Rolling Stone he ‘respected’ the ruling but an appeal is planned for a later date.
He added it is ‘illustrative of the significantly high barriers to entry’ faced by musicians when ‘in the unenviable position of having to face off against an industry that has unlimited resources and has no reservation as to dispatching those self-same resources to prevent composers of modest means from asserting their rights.’
Karol G and Tiësto’s lead lawyer said the lawsuit had ‘no merit’ and there was ‘no evidence of access’.
‘One of the frustrating things that we heard throughout this case from the plaintiff was that [our clients] stole his life legacy, his defining work, but there was no evidence of access,’ he shared.
‘This was an obscure song that didn’t have any traction. There was no commercial success. It was on self-distributed albums. And more importantly, there was existing prior art.
‘The alleged similarities were based on a very common music building block, which is the circle of fifths, which has been around literally since Mozart.’
Got a story?
If you’ve got a celebrity story, video or pictures get in touch with the Metro.co.uk entertainment team by emailing us celebtips@metro.co.uk, calling 020 3615 2145 or by visiting our Submit Stuff page – we’d love to hear from you.
