Beyonce In Court?
- Chris B.
- Nov 14, 2020
- 3 min read
Updated: Jan 18, 2022
Yup, you read the title right. Beyonce was in court. But why you may ask? Because she and her team were accused of Copyright Infringement. Unfortunately in the music industry , and especially amongst big artists such as Beyonce, there will be times when others will question the originality of someone's work. In the grand scheme of things, it's natural but can also cause unnecessary drama for the sake of money and ownership. In this case that I'll be discussing today, the accusations came from an upcoming singer in 2007 by the name of Jennifer Armour. In 2003 Jennifer Armour had created a demo of a song called "Got a Little Bit of Love for You". This was around the same time Beyonce's debut album as a solo artist Dangerously in Love came out. The song in question was "Baby Boy".
The people involved in this case on Beyonce's side included collaborators Robert Waller, Scott Stortch, Sean Paul, her manager Matthew Knowles, Jim Vellutato who was Beyonce's record publisher at Sony Music, and Andrew Feigenbaum who served as the executive of Atlantic Records.
The main person who was involved on Armour's side was Marc McKinney who had served as her manager and was the person to distribute her demo to advance her career. This same demo was what led Armour to believe that Beyonce had stolen parts of her song. However, in the court, the judge believed that lyrically, the songs were not similar, and sonically, the similarity was very miniscule. Here below are the two samples that can be used to trace these conclusions.
This is the link to Armour's song titled "Got a Little Bit of Love for You"
This is the link to Beyonce's song titled "Baby Boy"
In the court hearing process it was clear that the only way Beyonce could have copied off of the song was to hear the demo first. However, chronologically since she started recording the specific part infringed in Feb. 2003, she wouldn't have been able to listen to the demo recorded in January of 2003 because it was sent to her and her associated in late Feb. early March. Specifically after she recorded that part of her song.
However, there were talks about a person named T-bone who was supposedly Beyonce's friend who could have leaked the demo to her. But that was turned town since it would be illogical due to the fact that he wasn't involved with the song let alone the case.
In the end, the court awarded the costs to Beyonce and ruled in her favor. This means that the appeal was dismissed and the motion to strike was denied. However, there is talk about the courts abusing their power since in the beginning they were in Beyonce's favor. However, the evidence was lacking and the two songs were not similar enough to be considered infringement.
My thoughts about all of this are very conflicting. As much as I want Beyonce to win because of my own personal biases, I can't help but feel for Armour because I am in the same position of an aspiring artist myself. From an outside view, listening to the two songs, it seems to me that Armour may have used this case to gain publicity because the two songs did not sound striking similar to each other. The whole situation seems a bit fishy I'm not gonna lie, but in the end it seemed fair. Seeing what Beyonce had to do to keep this song alive, I wonder if that's one of the reasons she performs this song so much?
Comments