Skip to main content
European Commission logo
IP Helpdesk
  • News blog
  • 23 September 2024
  • European Innovation Council and SMEs Executive Agency
  • 3 min read

Miley Cyrus sued for copyright infringement over “Flowers” - EU trade mark disputes: Position of a combination of presentation elements

Miley Cyrus sued for copyright infringement over 'Flowers

On 16 September, a claim for copyright infringement was filed against Miley Cyrus in a Los Angeles court in relation to her 2023 hit song "Flowers". The lawsuit was filed by Tempo Music Investments, a company that acquired the right to some of singer Bruno Mars’s hits. The company claims Cyrus copied key elements of Mars' 2012 song "When I Was Your Man".

"Flowers" is one of the biggest hits of Cyrus' career, and was the lead single from her eighth studio album, Endless Summer Vacation. The song reached the top of the charts worldwide and won two Grammy Awards, including Record of the Year and Best Pop Solo Performance. Likewise, 'When I Was Your Man' was another success, reaching number one in the US and earning a Grammy nomination for Best Pop Solo Performance.

In 2022, Tempo Music Investments acquired some of the rights to Mars' work. Now, it claims that Cyrus' 'Flowers' contains chords and lyrics that reproduce elements of Mars' ballad, as well as notable similarities in melody, harmony and chorus such as the opening lines of the songs: “I should’ve bought you flowers” versus “I can buy myself flowers”.

The lawsuit seeks financial compensation and an order prohibiting Cyrus from distributing or performing her song. 

 

EU trade mark disputes: Position of a combination of presentation elements

On 11 September, the General Court of the European Union ruled on the nature of a position mark in cases T-361/23 to T-364/23.

In 2019, Väderstad Holding AB, a Swedish company specialising in the manufacture of agricultural machinery, applied to the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) to register the signs N. 018131019018131026018131034 and 018131030 as position marks. Each mark represents a different agricultural vehicles in the colours red (PMS 186), black (PMS Black) and yellow (PMS 7549). No exclusive rights were sought for the shape of the vehicles themselves, but only for the colours used. The marks sought protection of the use of these colours on designated goods in Classes 7 and 12 of the Nice Classification, which include agricultural, gardening and forestry machinery, agricultural tractors, trailers and their couplings.

EUIPO refused the application for lack of distinctiveness under Article 7(1)(b) of the EU Trade Mark Regulation, which provides that trade marks which are devoid of any distinctive character, that is, which do not serve to identify the commercial origin of the goods concerned, shall not be registered. The Board of Appeal agreed with the first decision, holding that the position trade mark was void of any distinctive character in respect of agricultural machinery and that the colours were commonly used in agricultural machinery for security purposes, meaning that allowing a trade mark registration related to the position of colour codes on agricultural machinery could prove problematic. 

The Swedish company appealed the EUIPO decision to the General Court of the European Union, which confirmed that the marks were not distinctive enough to be registered. In particular, the Court pointed out that the perception of the relevant public, in this case agricultural professionals, who would be more familiar with the characteristics and quality of the products, was not sufficient to overcome the inherent lack of distinctiveness of the marks applied for. Furthermore, the Court reiterated that the distinctiveness of a mark relates to its ability to identify the commercial origin of the goods and to distinguish them from those of other companies. In this sense, it stressed that a mark must be capable of fulfilling this function in order to be registrable. Therefore, the General Court upheld the decision of the EUIPO to refuse registration of the trade marks applied for as they lacked distinctive elements capable of clearly distinguishing Väderstad's products from those of other companies in the sector.

 

 

Details

Publication date
23 September 2024
Author
European Innovation Council and SMEs Executive Agency