The lawyers who filed the lawsuit against Carey were also sanctioned by the court, which stated that their “frivolous” and “unsupported” assertions were made in order “to cause unnecessary delay and needlessly increase the costs of litigation.”
All I Want For Christmas Is You, a 1989 song that “became a country music hit” after “extensive seasonal airplay in 1993,” was allegedly plagiarized by Carey’s 1994 classic Christmas song, according to a complaint filed in November 2023 by songwriter Andy Stone, who plays Vince Vance and the Valiants, and co-writer Troy Powers.
Carey’s song is accused of copying the “compositional structure of an extended comparison between a loved one and trappings of seasonal luxury,” according to the complaint, which also identified Sony Music Entertainment as a defendant.
Additionally, it asserted that “many of [Stone’s] lyrical phrases are included in Carey’s hit.”
Stone and Powers requested at least $20 million in damages from the court.
One of the most successful songs of the past few years is Carey’s “All I Want For Christmas Is You,” which consistently tops the charts around Christmas.
A law firm that focuses on the music industry, Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, estimated last year that the tune makes $3.4 million annually and has made around $103 million over the previous three decades.
The plaintiffs and defendants in the lawsuit decided last year to confine the legal dispute to “extrinsic tests” of the two songs, which entails a dispassionate examination of their similarities.
Judge Monica Ramirez Almadani of the US District Court for the Central District of California rejected the testimony of Stone and Powers’ experts and accepted that of Carey and the other defendants in her decision, which was released on Wednesday, March 19, and is available to read in full here.
A musicologist, music professor, and director emeritus of music studies at New York University, Dr. Lawrence Ferrara, was one of the defendants’ experts. He came to the conclusion that, even though the songs had the same title, their lyrical similarities were “fragmentary, used with different lyrical phrases, arranged differently, and… in common use.” Music components that are “in common use” are not protected by copyright.
READ MORE: Mariah Carey’s Mother And Sister Died On The Same Day, Singer Confirms: “My Heart Is Broken”
Ferrara also came to the conclusion that the two songs’ primary expressive idea—that the narrator wants for a particular “you” for Christmas instead of other presents—is “typically associated with Christmas.”
Judge Ramirez Almadani’s finding stated that “Ferrara found at least 19 songs predating [the Stone/Powers 1989 song] that incorporated the lyrical idea behind the title phrase All I Want for Christmas Is You.” “A number of them use the title phrase exactly or almost exactly.”
The expert reports submitted by Stone and Powers were dismissed by the judge on the grounds that they did not demonstrate that they had conducted a thorough analysis or the methodology they employed.
“This non-compliance is the fault of the plaintiffs’ counsel.”
Judge Monica Ramirez Almadani of the US District Court
The judge also granted Carey and the other defendants’ request to impose sanctions on the attorneys who filed the case, claiming that they had made other “irrelevant” arguments in their court filings and had disregarded the court’s order to confine the case to the “extrinsic” analysis of the songs’ similarities.
Judge Ramirez Almadani observed, “The court ordered the parties to conduct discovery and file motions for summary judgment as to the extrinsic test only.”
“The Plaintiffs, through their counsel, inexplicably moved for summary judgment on other elements of their copyright claim, i.e., ownership, copying, and access, despite the parties’ agreement and the court’s clear instructions.”
“The plaintiffs’ counsel… is at fault for this non-compliance,” the judge concluded. Rather than promptly correcting this misbehavior, plaintiffs’ counsel postponed and needlessly led defendants to raise unwarranted legal and factual objections that weren’t rightfully before the court.
In response to the plaintiffs’ move for summary judgment, Carey and the other defendants incurred legal fees, which the judge ordered Stone and Powers to pay “some or all.” She directed the attorneys for the defendants 14 days to provide a “reasonable” assessment of the associated expenses.
Step into the ultimate entertainment experience with Radiant TV! Movies, TV series, exclusive interviews, live events, music, and more—stream anytime, anywhere. Download now on various devices including iPhone, Android, smart TVs, Apple TV, Fire Stick, and more!
