As reported by Lexology, Ed Sheeran was successful in a dispute over his massive hit record “Shape of You” (released in January 2017) against British artist Sami Switch, who had commenced the copyright infringement action in September 2017, claiming that the song infringed the copyright of his record “Oh Why” (released in March 2015).
Mr. Switch, a co-writer, and a social media company (the assignee of Mr. Switch’s copyright in the song) claimed that the eight-bar section of “Shape of You” – in which “Oh I” is sung three times to a particular tune – is copied from the eight-bar chorus of “Oh Why”, in which the phrase “Oh Why” is repeated to a similar tune.
Mr. Switch et al. had notified the Performing Rights Society Limited that they should be credited as songwriters of “Shape of You” and the Society suspended all payments to Ed Sheeran and other entities involved in writing and publishing “Shape of You” in respect of the public performance/broadcast of the song. Thus, Ed Sheeran et al. commenced proceedings seeking declarations that they had not infringed the copyright in “Oh Why”.
In granting declaratory relief to Ed Sheeran et al., the Court found that, while there are similarities between the two hooks, there are also significant differences, and was swayed by evidence that Sheeran’s hook originated from sources other than “Oh Why”.
Authors: Caitlin Woodford and Erik Axell, 2021/2022 Articling Student-at-law
Photo Credit: https://unsplash.com/@sickhews
Authors
Expertise
Insights
-
Intellectual Property Litigation
Trademarks Opposition Board Moves to Digital-Only Submission of Confidential Information
As of June 1, 2026, the Trademarks Opposition Board (TMOB) requires all confidential evidence and documentation in proceedings under sections 11.13, 38, or 45 of the Trademarks Act (the “Act”) to be… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Kansas City Chiefs Stars Sued for Trademark Infringement Over Steakhouse
The sneaker company, 1587 Sneakers, is reportedly suing Kansas City Chiefs players, Patrick Mahomes and Travis Kelce, along with their restaurant partners, for trademark infringement.1587 Sneakers… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
A Pecking Order Problem: Pudgy Penguins Faces Penguin Trademark Lawsuit
As reported by Bloomberg Law News, PEI Licensing (“PEI”), the owner of the Penguin apparel brand, has sued Pudgy Penguins NFT (“Pudgy Penguins”) for trademark infringement.Pudgy Penguins started as a… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Old Brand, New Problems? Nike’s Attempt to Revive “Total 90” Soccer Cleats
Nike is reportedly attempting to revive its classic “Total 90” soccer cleat line, but has encountered an unexpected setback. Total90, LLC has reportedly asserted that Nike is infringing its… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
A Swing and a Miss: The “All Rise” Trademark Attempt
As reported by Bloomberg, attempts to register marks covering the phrases “All Rise” and “Here Comes the Judge” were rejected by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Hershey’s Kisses Go to Court – Federal Court of Appeal Decision in PIM Brands Inc. v. Hershey Chocolate & Confectionery LLC
The Federal Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Promotion in Motion, Inc. (PIM Brands, Inc.) v. Hershey Chocolate & Confectionery LLC offers fresh guidance on how courts evaluate survey evidence…