Breaking stories and in‑depth analysis: up‑to‑the‑minute global news on politics, business, technology, culture, and more—24/7, all in one place.
GloRilla Faces Copyright Challenge Over ‘No BBL‘ Lyric
Table of Contents
- 1. GloRilla Faces Copyright Challenge Over ‘No BBL’ Lyric
- 2. The Lawsuit Explained
- 3. Defense Strategy: access and Distinctiveness
- 4. Key Differences Highlighted
- 5. Damages and Legal Precedent
- 6. Understanding copyright and Fair Use in Music
- 7. Frequently Asked Questions About copyright and Music
- 8. What legal arguments might TikTok users employ to defend against copyright claims when using the “No BBL” audio for non-commercial purposes?
- 9. GloRilla Challenges “No BBL” Copyright Claims: A Legal and Creative Perspective
- 10. The Rise of the “No BBL” Trend & Copyright Concerns
- 11. Understanding Copyright Law & Music Licensing
- 12. The “No BBL” Copyright Claim Controversy: What’s Happening?
- 13. Fair Use & The “No BBL” Trend: A Closer Look
- 14. Navigating Copyright Claims: Practical Tips for Creators
- 15. The Role of PROs & Direct Licensing
Louisiana – Rapper GloRilla and several major music industry players are currently maneuvering through a legal battle concerning copyright infringement. The dispute centers around the use of the phrase “no BBL” in her popular track, “Never Find.”
The Lawsuit Explained
Natalie Henderson, who performs as Slimdabodylast, initiated the lawsuit, alleging that GloRilla’s lyric – “Natural, no BBL, but I’m still gon’ give them hell” – infringes upon her own work. Henderson’s song, “All Natural,” prominently features the phrase “all naturale, no BBL.” She maintains that her song gained significant traction on social media platforms in early 2024 due to its celebration of natural bodies.
Henderson argues that the similarity between the phrases, coupled with the alleged financial gains made by GloRilla and her collaborators, constitutes copyright infringement.
Defense Strategy: access and Distinctiveness
GloRilla’s legal team,working alongside representatives from UMG recordings,Warner Chappell Music,and BMG Rights Management,has filed a motion to dismiss the case. A central argument revolves around the assertion that henderson cannot demonstrate GloRilla had access to her song. According to the defense,simply posting a song online does not satisfy the legal requirement for establishing access.
The defense further contends that there’s insufficient similarity between the two songs. While Henderson’s phrase is a recurring hook, GloRilla’s usage is a single line within a different lyrical context and possesses a unique rhyme scheme. Legal experts note that language like “give them hell” is commonplace in music and doesn’t inherently imply copying.
Key Differences Highlighted
The legal teams are focusing heavily on the context and repetition of the phrase. Here’s a breakdown:
| Feature | Henderson’s “All Natural” | GloRilla’s “Never Find” |
|---|---|---|
| Phrase Usage | Repeated as a central hook | Used once within a verse |
| Lyrical Context | celebration of natural bodies | Empowerment and confidence |
| Rhyme Scheme | Consistent with the song’s structure | Distinct and unique |
Did You Know? Copyright law protects original works of authorship, but it doesn’t protect short phrases or common expressions.
Pro Tip: Musicians should always conduct thorough research to ensure their lyrics don’t unintentionally infringe on existing copyrights.
Damages and Legal Precedent
GloRilla’s lawyers are also challenging Henderson’s ability to claim both statutory and actual damages. They argue that she has not adequately proven infringement to justify an injunction. Additionally, they suggest that expressions promoting natural bodies are prevalent in contemporary music, further diminishing the claim of originality needed for copyright protection.The motion emphasizes the belief that viral phrases, irrespective of popularity, cannot automatically be claimed as intellectual property.
This case arrives amid an increasing number of lawsuits concerning the use of viral phrases and expressions in music.in 2023, a similar dispute arose regarding a TikTok sound used in a chart-topping song, highlighting the evolving legal challenges within the music industry.
Understanding copyright and Fair Use in Music
Copyright law is designed to protect the rights of creators, granting them exclusive control over their original works.However, the concept of “fair use” allows for limited use of copyrighted material without permission for purposes such as criticism, commentary, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research. Determining whether a use constitutes fair use involves considering factors like the purpose and character of the use,the nature of the copyrighted work,the amount and substantiality of the portion used,and the effect of the use on the potential market for the copyrighted work. Learn more about fair use from the U.S. Copyright Office.
Frequently Asked Questions About copyright and Music
- What does copyright protect in a song? Copyright protects the musical composition (melody and lyrics) and the sound recording.
- Can I use a short phrase from another song in my own? It depends. Short, common phrases generally aren’t protectable, but longer, more original phrases may be.
- What is the difference between copyright infringement and fair use? Copyright infringement involves unauthorized use of copyrighted material, while fair use permits limited use under specific circumstances.
- How can I avoid copyright issues when creating music? Conduct thorough research, seek legal advice, and consider obtaining licenses for any materials you use.
- What is a ‘BBL’? A Brazilian Butt Lift is a type of cosmetic surgery.
What are your thoughts on the role of viral phrases in music copyright? Do you think short phrases should be protectable?
What legal arguments might TikTok users employ to defend against copyright claims when using the “No BBL” audio for non-commercial purposes?
GloRilla Challenges “No BBL” Copyright Claims: A Legal and Creative Perspective
The Rise of the “No BBL” Trend & Copyright Concerns
GloRillaS hit song “No BBL” sparked a viral trend on platforms like TikTok, with users creating dances and content inspired by the track. This surge in popularity, however, has brought with it a wave of copyright claims, especially concerning the audio used in user-generated content. The core issue revolves around fair use, licensing, and the rights of artists to control their intellectual property. Understanding these nuances is crucial for both content creators and rights holders. The song’s success, and the subsequent challenges, highlight a growing tension between artistic expression and copyright law in the digital age.
Understanding Copyright Law & Music Licensing
Copyright protects original works of authorship, including musical compositions and sound recordings. This protection grants the copyright holder exclusive rights to:
Reproduce: Copy the work.
Distribute: Share copies of the work.
Display: Show the work publicly.
Perform: Play the work publicly.
Create Derivative Works: adapt or modify the work.
Using copyrighted music without permission generally infringes these rights. However, several exceptions exist, including:
Fair use: Allows limited use of copyrighted material without permission for purposes such as criticism, commentary, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research.
Licensing: Obtaining permission from the copyright holder to use the music, typically through performance rights organizations (PROs) like ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC, or directly from the record label.
Compulsory Licence: In certain circumstances, allows anyone to record a cover song without permission, provided they pay a statutory royalty.
The “No BBL” Copyright Claim Controversy: What’s Happening?
Manny TikTok users reported their videos using the “No BBL” audio were flagged for copyright infringement, even when used for non-commercial purposes.This led to videos being muted, removed, or accounts receiving strikes. Several factors contribute to this:
Automated Content ID Systems: Platforms like TikTok utilize automated systems (like Content ID) to detect copyrighted material. These systems aren’t always accurate and can sometimes issue false positives.
Aggressive Copyright Enforcement: record labels and publishers are increasingly proactive in protecting their copyrights online, leading to more frequent and stringent enforcement.
Ambiguity of Fair Use: Determining whether a particular use of the song falls under fair use can be subjective and complex. Short clips used in transformative ways may qualify, but the line is often blurry.
Lack of Clear Licensing options: Initially, obtaining a license specifically for TikTok use of “No BBL” was difficult, leaving creators vulnerable to claims.
Fair Use & The “No BBL” Trend: A Closer Look
The fair use doctrine is a key defense against copyright infringement claims.To determine if a use is fair, courts consider four factors:
- Purpose and Character of the Use: Is the use transformative? Is it commercial or non-profit?
- Nature of the Copyrighted Work: Is the original work factual or creative?
- Amount and Substantiality of the Portion Used: how much of the original work was used?
- effect of the Use on the Potential Market: Does the use harm the market for the original work?
For the “No BBL” trend, the argument for fair use often hinges on the transformative nature of the content. If a user creates a new dance or comedic skit using the song, rather than simply re-posting the song itself, it’s more likely to be considered fair use. However, simply lip-syncing to the song without adding significant creative input is less likely to qualify.
Here’s how content creators can minimize the risk of copyright claims when using popular songs like “No BBL”:
Utilize Licensed Music Libraries: Platforms like Epidemic Sound and Artlist offer royalty-free music for creators.
Seek Permission: Contact the copyright holder directly to request a license. This can be time-consuming but provides the most legal certainty.
Transformative Content: Focus on creating original content that uses the song in a transformative way, adding significant creative input.
Keep it Short: Use only the necessary portion of the song.
Dispute Claims Carefully: if you believe a claim is incorrect, you can dispute it, providing evidence to support yoru fair use argument.Be prepared to explain why your use is transformative.
Monitor Trends: Stay informed about copyright policies and best practices on the platforms you use.
The Role of PROs & Direct Licensing
Performance Rights Organizations (PROs) like ASCAP,BMI,and SESAC collect royalties on behalf of songwriters and publishers. While they primarily deal with public performances (radio,concerts,etc.), they are increasingly involved in digital licensing. Direct licensing,negotiating directly with the copyright holder,is another option,but often more complex and expensive. GloRilla’s team may eventually offer specific licensing
