“The differences between the notes used in both compositions are evident and the melodic line is remarkably different”, specifies the ruling of the Provincial Court of Madrid
Shakira and Carlos Vives did not plagiarize their song “La bicicleta” to the Cuban musician Liván Rafael Castellanos Valdés and his spouse, editor Maryla Dianik Romeu Bethencourt. This is how a sentence of the Provincial Court of Madrid establishes, which confirmed the decision that the head of the Commercial Court number 12 of Madrid had previously made in 2019 not to fine Colombian singers: “The differences between the notes used in both compositions they are evident and the melodic line is remarkably different & rdquor ;, the ruling conclusively specifies, to which El Periódico de España, from the Prensa Ibérica group, has had access.
The resolution dismissed the plaintiff’s claim to pocket “no less than seven and a half million euros tax-free& rdquor;specifies the aforementioned resolution, which allows singers and the person responsible for musical arrangements, Andres Eduardo Castro, who invoice normally for their musical super-success. The ruling also warns that the comparison made in the trial “does not allow us to affirm that ‘La Bicicleta’ reproduces the small analyzed fragment of the song ‘Yo te quiero tanto& rdquor;.
The musician Castellanos Valdés, who extended his demand to the companies that published ‘La bicicleta’, -a best-selling song composed in 2006 that currently has 1,552 million views on Youtube-, considered that EMI Music, the company that had the rights to his song, provided Sony, -which bought EMI Music-, the work “I love you so much”, -composed in 1995 and released in 1997-, to one of the defendants so that he could copy it.
“A Small Fragment”
However, the magistrates that make up Section 28 of the Madrid Court supported Shakira and Vives, and in their ruling they highlighted that the parts of the songs compared by the Cuban musician, which according to him demonstrated plagiarism, only “is limited to a small fragment that in relation to the letter is limited to three words:” I love you so much “.
Judges Ángel Galgo Peco, Gregorio Plaza González and Enrique García García emphasize that these only three words are actually “a common expression & rdquor;, which is used “in many songs & rdquor;, so this single phrase “lacks originality & rdquor;.
With respect to music, the sentence disavows in the same sense the claim of the Cuban musician, who is accused of contributing a supposedly ‘copied’ fraction that was not relevant. “As the fragment that is considered infringing is smaller, the possibilities of similarity are greater, but this would lead to considering a multitude of works plagiarism, so that, in these cases, the existence of non-insignificant differences is enough to exclude the infringement. There may even be notable similarities in minimal fragments (one word), without this implying plagiarism & rdquor ;, complete the judges, who endorse the expert reports provided by ShakiraVives and the record companies, which ruled out “absolutely, as the appealed ruling appreciates, the existence of plagiarism & rdquor ;.
“Not the Chorus”
“The fragment of ‘La bicicleta’ used in the comparison is very small, it is not the main chorus and it is only repeated six times,” reiterated the magistrates, who recall that an expert explained in the trial that the part that was the subject of the lawsuit was ten eighth notes, “a musical material of two measures in length, the repetitions of which […] occupy 32.6% of the song and in ‘La bicicleta’ 7.14%”.
In relation to the tonality, all the experts who intervened in the trial, both those proposed by the Cuban musician and those of the defendants, agreed that the same is used: C Major/ A Minor. “However, the experts of the plaintiff [Liván Rafael Castellanos Valdés] they omit that it is the most common tonality& rdquor ;, reproaches the court.
Vallenato
Precisely at this point the sentence alludes to the fact that another of the experts highlighted that despite the fact that both works were written with the same key signature (C Major/A Minor), their structure was different, with differences in terms of the fluidity of the musical discourse, the formal design and the quality and extension of the letter. The initial ruling, which was categorical in considering that there was “in no way plagiarism”he had also considered it proven that both songs had no coincidences in terms of rhythm, except for the basic ones of any type of musical composition of ‘vallenato‘.
In the trial, which was held in Madrid on March 27, 2019, Shakira and Carlos Vives assured that they only knew of the existence of the song by the Cuban musician when he filed his claim with the General Society of Authors (SGAE), whose Board of Directors, in view of the controversy, agreed to freeze the distribution of rights to this musical super-success on November 10, 2016. There is no record that the judgment of the Provincial Court of Madrid, of June 2021 but whose meaning and literalness were unknown, has been appealed before the Supreme Court, so that the Colombian singers have a free hand to re-invoice for ‘La bicicleta’ .